Reclamation Disctrict 2034 Final MSR

RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE STUDY PREPARED BY MILANI & ASSOCTIATES IN COLLABORATION WITH CRAFT CONSULTING GROUP AND MMS DESIGN FOR SOLANO LAFCO 675 TEXAS STREET, SUITE 6700 FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 707-439-3898 December 10, 2018 Reclamation District 2034 Final 1 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SOLANO LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION Commission Members Harry Price, Chair, Mayor of Fairfield James Spering, Vice-Chair, Solano County Supervisor Nancy Shopay, Public Member Pete Sanchez, Mayor of Suisun City John Vasquez, Solano County Supervisor Len Augustine, Mayor of Vacaville (Alternate) Shawn Smith, Public Member (Alternate) Skip Thomson, Solano County Supervisor (Alternate) Staff Rich Seithel, Executive Officer Michelle McIntyre, Analyst CONSULTANT TEAM Mike Milani, Milani & Associates, Civil Engineers & Surveyors Gary W. Craft, Craft Consulting Group, Economics & Planning Kevin Stichter, Craft Consulting Group, Economics & Planning Mike McGill, MMS Design, Civil Engineering & Land Planning Reclamation District 2034 Final 2 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 District Profile Reclamation District No. 2034 District Office: Reclamation District No. 2034 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 San Ramon, CA 94583 Phone: (925) 866-2111 Governing Body: Elected Board of Trustees Board of Trustees: Governing Board includes President, Secretary, and Treasurer President: Art Anderson Secretary: Currently Vacant (Mark Dawson serves as Acting Secretary) Treasurer: Mark Dawson Staff: No District Staff Date of Formation: April 7, 1919 Enabling Act: California Water Code Section 50000 et. seq. (Originally formed under Article II of the California Political Code which was replaced by the addition of Division 15 of the Water Code in 1951) Purpose: Formed under general reclamation law for the purpose of constructing and maintaining levees and drainage system for land reclamation purposes Type of District: Land Owner District Sphere of Influence: Coterminous with District boundaries. Area (APN acreage): 1,476 acres in unincorporated Solano County Primary Land Use: Agricultural, Range Land, Duck Hunting Clubs, Marsh Land District Services: Drainage, flood control, levee maintenance Facilities/Assets: Easements Latent Powers: The District has the right to construct, improve, maintain and operate levee and drainage systems and other reclamation works within the affected territory per 1912 Agreement and 1950 easement grants. Operating Budget: Indeterminate. Although requested, the District did not respond to several requests for annual operating budget. Primary Revenue Source: Cost sharing by District property owners Fiscal Health: Indeterminate. Although requested, the District did not submit any financial documents (i.e. financial statements or audits), and does not file annual reports with the State Controller’s Office. District Status: Active Shared Facilities: None Population: Uninhabited territory with no current expectation for growth Disadvantaged Communities: None _____________ Information Sources: Site visit; review of District documents; meetings with district landowners and/or representatives; Solano County Assessors Office; Solano County Boards, Committees and Commissions website with list of Boards, Commissions and Committees including information on various organizations throughout the County of Solano found at: http://bccweb.solanocounty.com/Open/Reports/boardDetail.asp; Solano County Register of Voters; U.S. Census Bureau; Solano County LAFCO; Solano County Planning website; and other sources. Reclamation District 2034 Final 3 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 ACRONYMNS APN – Assessor Parcel Number CDP – Census Designated Place CEQA – California Environmental Quality Act CKH - Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act) DUC – Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community GC – California Government Code LAFCO – Local Agency Formation Commission MHI – Median Household Income MSR – Municipal Service Review SB – California Senate Bill SCO – California State Controller’s Office SOI – Sphere of Influence Reclamation District 2034 Final 4 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................1 SECTION 2: LAFCO ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................................2 2.1 Purpose & Use of this Municipal Service Review ..................................................2 2.2 Municipal Service Review Requirements – Seven Factors ....................................3 2.3 Sphere of Influence Requirements – Five Factors ..................................................3 2.4 Suisun Marsh Local Protection Program ................................................................4 2.5 CEQA Requirements ...............................................................................................4 SECTION 3: RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 ANALYSIS ............................................5 3.1 District Description and Formation .........................................................................5 3.2 District Purpose, Powers, & Responsibilities..........................................................5 3.3 District Sphere of Influence ....................................................................................6 3.6 District Facilities/Services .......................................................................................9 3.7 District Assets/Liabilities ........................................................................................9 SECTION 4: MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS ..........11 4.1 Growth and Population of the District ..................................................................11 4.2 Location and Characteristics of Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities ...11 4.3 Present and Planned Capacity of Services ............................................................11 4.4 Financial Ability to Provide Services....................................................................12 4.5 Status and Opportunity for Shared Facilities ........................................................13 4.6 Goverance Structure & Accountability for Community Service Needs ...............13 4.7 Other Matters Affecting Efficient Service Delivery .............................................15 SECTION 5::SPHERE OF INFLUENCE ...........................................................................16 5.1: Present and Planned Land Uses ............................................................................16 5.2: Present and Probable Need for Public Facilities and Services ..............................17 5.3: Present Capacity of Public Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services ...............17 5.4: Existence of Social or Economic Communities of Interest ...................................17 5.5: Need for Public Facilities and Services for DUCs ................................................17 SECTION 6: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS ...........................18 6.1: Required Findings and Determinations for MSR. .................................................18 6.2: Required Findings and Determinations for SOI Update .......................................20 Reclamation District 2034 Final 5 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 7: OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO LAFCO ..........................................................21 SECTION 8: Detachment from Reclamation District 2034 ................................................22 8.1 Detachment Requirements and Procedures ...........................................................22 8.2 Conducting Authority Proceeding (Protest Hearing) for Uninhabited Territory ..23 SECTION 9: Options for Dissolution of Reclamation District 2034 ..................................24 9.1 LAFCO Initiated Dissolution ................................................................................24 9.2 District Landowner Petition for Dissolution .........................................................24 9.3 LAFCO Responsibility for Dissolution of Inactive Special Districts ...................25 9.4 Recommended Dissolution Option .......................................................................26 References ............................................................................................................................27 Appendices A thru P ............................................................................................................28 List of Tables Table 1: Parcels Proposed for Detachment ........................................................................1 Table 2: Property Ownership .............................................................................................6 Table 3: Zoning and Land Use Classification ..................................................................16 Table 4: Municipal Service Review Findings and Determinations .................................18 Table 5: Sphere of Influence Findings and Determinations ............................................19 Table 6: Assessed Value by Parcel ..................................................................................20 Table A1: RD 2034 Property Ownership.........................................................................29 List of Figures Figure 1: District Lands, Boundaries, & SOI ....................................................................7 Figure 2: Aerial Photo Showing District Boundaries ........................................................8 Figure 3: District Levee System ......................................................................................10 Figure A1: Suisun Marsh Reclamation Districts .............................................................31 Figure A2: Suisun Marsh Protection Area .......................................................................32 Figure A3: FEMA Levee Map .........................................................................................33 Figure A4: Location of West Pump .................................................................................34 Reclamation District 2034 Final 6 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION The Solano Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) has received a petition of application from the majority landowner for a detachment of their lands from Reclamation District 2034 (RD 2034). See Attachment A: Detachment Application in the Appendix. For a landowner-voter district, pursuant to California Government Code Section (GC§) 56864(b), a petition for detachment may be initiated by a landowner (or owners) who own not less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the district. The applicant landowner meets this criterion. (See Table A1 in the Appendix) RD 2034 is located approximately two miles southwesterly of the city of Suisun City (Township 4 North, Range 2 West, Mt. Diablo Base and Meridian). It is northwesterly of Grizzly Bay and north of the Sacramento River. Information obtained from the Solano County Assessor’s Office shows District lands consist of fourteen parcels totaling approximately 1,476 acres, owned by four landowner groups (see Table 1 for property ownership and acreage). Seven (7) parcels, as noted on Table 1 below, are proposed for detachment on approximately 808.37 acres of land. Boundaries plotted from the District’s formation geographical description are substantially in agreement with the Assessor’s parcel information (see Figure 1 for map of the District’s boundaries and parcels). Table 1: Parcels Proposed for Detachment Detachment Property APN Acreage Owner* Request 1 0046-050-080 80.00 Grizzly No 2 0046-010-160 103.85 Seecon Yes 3 0046-060-030 158.49 Seecon Yes 4 0046-060-040 78.92 Seecon Yes 5 0046-010-120 171.30 Seecon Yes 6 0046-060-180 193.10 Grizzly No 7 0046-060-190 9.10 Seecon Yes 8 0046-060-200 238.80 Seecon Yes 9 0046-060-210 179.70 Grizzly No 10 0046-320-060 29.00 Dunnigan No 11 0046-320-080 29.00 Dunnigan No 12 0046-320-090 47.91 Seecon Yes 13 0046-320-190 57.42 Chadbourne No 14 0046-320-200 99.50 Dunnigan No Total 1,476.09 Source: Solano County Assessor’s Office Online Property Information and SEECON Application for Detachment. * See Table A1 in Appendix for more detailed ownership information. Reclamation District 2034 Final 1 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 In conducting the following MSR and SOI study, the consultant team requisitioned and reviewed available district documents, met with district landowners and/or their representatives, held a site visit, and researched and analyzed relevant information regarding the District and LAFCO statutory required determinations. In the course of the consultant’s team research, it became apparent that RD 2034 may not be operating in accordance with the California Water Code and/or LAFCO statutes. Accordingly, the consultant team evaluated whether the District is eligible for dissolution based on criteria set forth in the State law. This MSR and SOI study includes an evaluation of RD 2034 with consideration for either the detachment of property or the dissolution of the District. The consultant team’s assessment and supporting documentation is laid out in the following sections: 1) Introduction 2) LAFCO’s role and responsibilities, 3) Analysis of RD 2034, 4) Municipal Service Review requirements 5) Sphere of Influence study requirements, 6) Summary of key findings and determinations, 7) Options available to LAFCO 8) Analysis of Option #3 Detachment from RD 2034, and 9) Analysis of Option #4 Dissolution of RD 2034. SECTION 2: LAFCO ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES Prior to considering the detachment petition, Solano LAFCO has the responsibility under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act) to review and update the District’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). However, in order to prepare and update the District’s SOI, LAFCO must first conduct a Municipal Service Review (MSR) and make determinations prescribed by the CKH Act to support any LAFCO actions including a SOI update, and any subsequent boundary and/or governance changes. A MSR is defined by GC §56430 as “a means of identifying and evaluating public services.” A SOI is defined as “a plan for the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency or municipality.” (GC§ 56076) 2.1 Purpose & Use of this Municipal Service Review Under the CKH Act, LAFCO has a responsibility to conduct an analysis regarding the impact of the proposed detachment of land from RD 2034.The purpose of this MSR is to provide Solano LAFCO with an informational document and analysis of service provisions by RD 2034 and make determinations prescribed by the CKH Act to support LAFCO actions, including a SOI update and any potential boundary and/or governance changes. This MSR and SOI study includes: 1. Determinations on each of the seven MSR and five SOI factors as provided in and required by the CKH Act, and identified below; 2. An identification of required governance and operational functions of the District in accordance with the Reclamation District’s Principal Act or Enabling Legislation; 3. Identification of opportunities for collaboration with alternative service providers; 4. Implications of possible boundary changes including: detachment and dissolution of the district; and 5. Analysis and recommendations for governance structure, enhancing services, efficiencies, and affordability. Reclamation District 2034 Final 2 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 2.2 Municipal Service Review Requirements – Seven Factors In order to prepare and update a SOI, LAFCOs shall conduct a MSR in accordance with GC §56430 prior to, or in conjunction with, the update of a SOI and shall prepare a written statement of its determinations with respect to each of the following seven factors1: (1) Growth and population projections for the affected area; (2) The location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence; (3) Present and planned capacity of public facilities, adequacy of public services, and infrastructure needs or deficiencies including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any disadvantaged, unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence; (4) The financial ability of agencies to provide services; (5) Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities; (6) Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies; and (7) Any other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery, as required by commission policy. The MSR process does not require the LAFCO to initiate changes of organization based on service review conclusions; it only requires that LAFCO make determinations regarding the provision of public services per the provisions of GC §56430. However, LAFCO, local agencies, and the public may subsequently use the determinations and related analysis to consider whether to pursue changes to service delivery, government organization, or the SOI. No SOI can be updated unless the LAFCO first conducts a MSR. 2.3 Sphere of Influence Requirements – Five Factors In accordance with GC §56425, when adopting, amending or updating a SOI, LAFCOs “shall consider and prepare a written statement of its determinations with respect to each of the following five factors:” (1) The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands; (2) The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area; (3) The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides, or is authorized to provide; (4) The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the Commission determines that they are relevant to the agency; and (5) The present and probable need for public facilities and services of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within the existing sphere of influence. In determining or updating a SOI, the commission may assess the feasibility of governmental reorganization and recommend reorganization when it is found to be feasible and if it will further the goals of orderly development and the efficient and affordable delivery of service. When adopting, amending, or updating a SOI for a special district, the commission shall establish the nature, location, and extent of any functions or classes of services provided by existing districts and may require existing districts to file written statements with the commission specifying the functions or classes of services provided by those districts. 1 Guide to the Cortese–Knox–Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, December 2017 Reclamation District 2034 Final 3 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 In fulfilling its legislative mandate, Solano LAFCO policy is “to either: approve, approve with conditions or deny proposals for changes of organization or reorganization after considering a number of factors. Among the issues to be considered are: The Legislature’s policies and priorities for LAFCO, the proposal’s relationship to the affected agency’s Sphere of Influence; the application’s compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and the submitted responses to Solano LAFCO’s Standards.”2 2.4 Suisun Marsh Local Protection Program The land and property within the District are part of, and subject to the policies of, the Suisun Marsh Local Protection Program adopted by Solano LAFCO on February 4, 1980. This was in response to, and meets the requirements of, the California Suisun Marsh Preservation Act of 1977. This Act designates two implementation areas where the Solano LAFCO has responsibility to “encourage continued long term agriculture and wildlife use of lands within the Marsh and to limit urban assessments against lands within the Marsh” (see Figure A2 in the Appendix for Suisun Marsh Local Protection Program areas). Solano LAFCO’s policies related to the Marsh are to “reclaim and maintain land that is at risk of flooding for a variety of purposes.” 2.5 CEQA Requirements The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is contained in Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. Under this law, public agencies are required to evaluate the potential environmental effects of their actions. Specifically, LAFCO is required to comply with CEQA (Bozung v. LAFCO (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263). Generally, LAFCO’s action to make findings and determinations relevant to a MSR is exempt from CEQA under a Class 6 categorical exemption. CEQA Guidelines §15306 state 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.” However, in this case, LAFCO may act to update the District’s SOI. As the Lead Agency, pursuant to CEQA, Solano LAFCO finds the SOI study is exempt from further environmental review under §15061 (b)(3) which states, “The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.” Furthermore, §15320 states that “Class 20 actions consist of changes in the organization or reorganization of local governmental agencies where the changes do not change the geographical area in which previously existing powers are exercised.” Updating the District’s SOI, does not grant the District new or additional powers beyond what it has already been authorized at the time of formation, namely constructing and maintaining levees and drainage system for land reclamation purposes. Updating the District’s SOI does not allow landowners to apply for changes in land-use or land subdivision beyond what is already allowed for under Solano County’s General Plan. Therefore, LAFCO finds this study exempt from further CEQA review. 2 Solano LAFCO Standards and Procedures guidelines, adopted March 1, 1999 as amended Reclamation District 2034 Final 4 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 3: RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 ANALYSIS Reclamation districts are special districts that are responsible for managing and maintaining the levees, fresh water channels, sloughs, canals, pumps, and other flood protection structures within district boundaries. Each reclamation district is run autonomously by an elected board and funded by property owners in the district. Historically, a reclamation district represents wetlands that were "reclaimed" by the introduction of levee systems along with other flood control mechanisms to prevent flooding in wetland areas to allow land to be used for agricultural purposes. 3.1 District Description and Formation RD 2034 is an Independent Special District within the unincorporated area of Solano County. The District was formed under the general reclamation district laws of the State of California with the petition for formation being approved by the Solano County Board of Supervisors on April 7, 1919 (see Attachment A in the Appendix) The District consists of marsh and overflow lands that are diked to a sufficient height, with drainage channels to prevent flooding of the lands within district boundaries during a normal rainy season. 3 Tidal action permits the entry of fresh water to the land during the spring and early summer. The levees were constructed under a 1912 cost-sharing agreement between the property owners for a levee system described as “at least 30 feet wide on the bottom, five feet wide on the top, and five feet in height” including floodgates and other works as may be necessary for the purpose of land reclamation. Maintenance and repair of the levee system was the responsibility of individual property owners with the cost of repairs and operation of the pumps to be shared in proportion to the acreage owned. In 1950, meeting minutes show that the District Board of Trustees took formal action to acquire and record grant deeds from the respective property owners for the “rights-of-way for the construction, development, maintenance, operation and use of levees, drainage ditches, canals and other water ways and borrow pits and any other reclamation works and roads upon, along and over those parcels of lands.”4 3.2 District Purpose, Powers, & Responsibilities RD 2034 was formed in 1919 under Article II of the California Political Code which was replaced by the addition of Division 15 of the Water Code in 1951. Reclamation districts in California now operate under the state’s Water Code Section 50000 et seq. RD 2034 was formed for general reclamation purposes and operates as an Independent Special District as defined by Government Code §56044, which “includes any special district having a legislative body all of whose members are elected by registered voters or landowners within the district, or whose members are appointed to fixed terms.” A District has the right to improve and maintain levee and drainage systems for flood control purposes and other reclamation works within the affected territory. Under California law, a reclamation district may do all things necessary or convenient for accomplishing the purposes for which it was formed. While responsibility for maintenance of the levees has been delegated to the individual property owners, the District as a whole retains the right to repair, maintain, and operate the levee and drainage system that is adequate for its original intended purpose. 3 See FEMA requirements regarding eligibility for federal funding of levee repairs caused major storm events and levee standards for federal flood insurance in the Appendix. 4 Minutes of Meeting of Board of Trustees of Reclamation District No. 2034, January 18, 1950 Reclamation District 2034 Final 5 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 A Board of Trustees comprised of three eligible members, serve as the District’s governing board. According to California Water Code §50602, Reclamation Governing Board members are elected for four-year terms and serve until their successors are elected and qualified. An eligible person is defined in Water Code Section 50014 as a district landowner or the appointed legal representative of a landowner. A vacancy on the governing board of a special district shall be filled pursuant to GC §1780. The governing board may waive an election to fill a vacancy and have the County Board of Supervisors appoint an eligible person to the Board. The Solano County Board of Supervisors appointed RD 2034’s current board in 2014. 5 Since then one board member has stepped down leaving a vacancy on the district governing board. Under Water Code §50630, the governing board of a reclamation district is responsible for electing its own officers, which must include a President and Secretary. RD 2034 has three officers who were elected in January 2014 (see Attachment B in the Appendix). The position of President and Treasurer are currently filled. The position of Secretary is currently vacant with the Treasurer acting as Secretary for the District. The Secretary is responsible for maintaining all minutes and correspondence records. The District has no employees. 3.3 District Sphere of Influence The District’s existing SOI adopted by Solano LAFCO in 1983 is coterminous with its boundary (see Figure 1 below for District/SOI Boundary Map and Attachment C in the Appendix for LAFCO Resolution adopting RD 2034 sphere of influence). All land area within the District is located in an unincorporated area of Solano County. Table 2: Property Ownership Property APN Acreage Property Owner of Record * 1 0046-050-080 80.00 Grizzly Bay LLC 2 0046-010-160 103.85 Seecon Finan & Const Co Inc 3 0046-060-030 158.49 Seecon Finan & Const Co Inc 4 0046-060-040 78.92 Jacksnipe Duck Club LLC 5 0046-010-120 171.30 Seecon Finan & Const Co Inc 6 0046-060-180 193.10 Grizzly Bay LLC 7 0046-060-190 9.10 West Coast Home Builders Inc 8 0046-060-200 238.80 West Coast Home Builders Inc 9 0046-060-210 179.70 Grizzly Bay LLC 10 0046-320-060 29.00 Dunnigan Hills Farming Co Inc 11 0046-320-080 29.00 Anderson Arthur L 12 0046-320-090 47.91 Discovery Builders Inc. 13 0046-320-190 57.42 Chadbourne Robert J & W R TR 14 0046-320-200 99.50 Dunnigan Hills Farming Co Inc Total 1,476.09 Source: Solano County Assessor’s Office Online Property Information, August 17, 2018 * See Table A1 in the Appendix for ownership groups 5 Secretary’s Certification of Resolutions Adopted by Reclamation District No. 2034 (see Attachment A2 in the Appendix) Reclamation District 2034 Final 6 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure 1: District Lands, Boundaries, & SOI Reclamation District 2034 Final 7 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure 2: Aerial Photo Showing District Boundaries Reclamation District 2034 Final 8 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 3.6 District Facilities/Services RD 2034 includes a levee system encircling the District (see Figure 3), originally constructed and paid for under a 1912 Agreement between the property owners. The levees were originally constructed to a height of five feet. No engineering surveys were conducted as part of the MSR to measure the current top of levee elevation. FEMA maps show lands lying below the 10-11 foot elevation mark are potentially subject to flooding. The 100-year flood event would be higher than the crown of the levees. In addition to the levees, there are drainage channels and a pumping system to help manage flood waters. The drainage system collects storm water and channels it to a pumping station, which discharges the water into adjacent sloughs for ultimate disposal into Grizzly Bay and the Sacramento River. The pumping station, known as the "West Pump” is located along the southern boundary of the district on APN 0046-060-200. Regular inspection and ongoing maintenance is required to ensure the integrity of the levees and the operational capacity of the pump. Individual property owners are responsible for maintaining the levees and drainage system located on their respective properties. Inspection schedules and maintenance standards varies among the property owners. The levee system is monitored during periods of high water events for failures. The West Pump also requires regular inspection, maintenance and repair to remain in good working order and functional. The West Pump is strategically located within the low point of the district to remove flood waters from district lands and discharge the water into the adjacent slough. District documents refer to a pump (or pumps) as being an integral part of the overall levee and drainage system. However, the research team was unable to secure written documentation on the ownership of the West Pump. Consequently, the consultant team is unable to determine whether or not the West Pump is a District asset. 3.7 District Assets/Liabilities Easements: RD 2034 owns title to easements over the levees, which it acquired from district landowners in 1950. Grant Deeds from the respective landowners were executed and recorded in favor of RD 2034 for “rights-of-way for the construction, development, maintenance, operation and use of levees, drainage ditches, canals, water ways and borrow pits, and any other reclamation works and roads upon, along and over those parcels of land.” Grant Deeds identified in District Board resolutions were recorded in January 1950 (see Appendix for Grant Deeds).6 6 Minutes of Meeting of Board of Trustees of Reclamation District 2034 dated January 18, 1950 Reclamation District 2034 Final 9 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure 3: District Levee System General area of RD 2034 showing exterior and interior levees Source: Pacific Institute, San Francisco Bay Levees, https://databasin.org/maps/new#datasets=ed05b99c85e94df5befb6e619847e378 Reclamation District 2034 Final 10 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 4: MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS As outlined in Section 2.2 of this document, in considering the request for detachment, Solano LAFCO is required to conduct a MSR in accordance with Government Code Section 56430 and prepare a written statement of its determinations with respect to each of the following seven factors: 4.1 Growth and Population of the District According to the Solano County Planning Department there are no current development proposals or zoning changes for any of the parcels within the District and no expectations for growth.7 The Solano County General Plan shows the current land use designation for all property within the District to be agricultural and marshland and zoned A-SM 80 (Suisun Marsh Agricultural District) under the County’s Zoning Ordinance (see Section 4.1 below). Any plan for development would require a change in land use and development approval from the County. Census block data (which is the smallest geographic area defined by the U.S. Census Bureau for purposes of enumeration) from the most recent American Community Survey (2016), shows no population residing in the District. Review of aerial photos and a site visit also found the District to be uninhabited except for living quarters of ranch hands and caretakers on the property. Finding: 4.1.1 – There are no current development proposals or expectations for growth within the boundary of Reclamation District 2034. 4.2 Location and Characteristics of Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities GC §56033.5 defines a disadvantaged unincorporated community (DUC) as an inhabited community (containing 12 or more registered voters) where the annual median household income (MHI) is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI. Based on information from the Solano County Registrar of Voters, there is only one registered voter residing within the district. Therefore RD 2034 is not a DUC as defined. Finding: 4.2.1 – There are no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or adjacent to the boundary of Reclamation District 2034. 4.3 Present and Planned Capacity of Services The District does not have an adopted plan for the ongoing maintenance, repair, operation or construction of supplemental works. While the District has the right to provide for the construction, development, maintenance, operation and use of levees, drainage ditches, canals and other waterways and borrow pits and any other reclamation works and roads upon, along and over district lands, property owners are responsible for maintaining the levees and drainage system on their respective properties under a 1912 Agreement, which serves as a binding covenant that runs with the land. The 1912 Agreement was recorded in the Solano County Book 7 of Agreements Page 466). Exterior levees, 7 Conversation with Solano County Planning Department staff, Travis Kroger, Planning Technician on September 12, 2018 Reclamation District 2034 Final 11 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 drainage canals, and a pump located within the low point of the district removes flood waters from district lands and discharges the water into the adjacent slough sufficient for habitat management. A road over the top of the levees provides access for inspection and maintenance of the levees. Individual property owners have historically been responsible for levees on their own individual properties. Findings: 4.3.1 – Per a 1912 agreement, individual property owners are responsible for maintenance of the levees on their properties. 4.3.2 – All fourteen parcels are subject to the 1912 agreement regardless of whether they are within the boundaries of RD 2034. 4.4 Financial Ability to Provide Services Requests for financial information including financial statements (showing revenues/expenditures, assets/liabilities), budgets, and audit reports were made by Solano LAFCO staff or the consultant team on six different occasions beginning September 22, 2017 through October 29, 2018 (see Appendix). To date, District Officers have not provided any financial reports with annual financial statements of revenues and expenditures, operating budget, or audits. The Solano County Auditor has not audited RD 2034 nor received any audit reports from them (see Attachment D correspondence with the County Auditor’s Office in the Appendix).8 A review of the State Controller’s Office website also did not find any financial statements for RD 2034. GC §53891 and §53893 require local government agencies to submit specific financial transaction reports to the State Controller’s Office within seven months of the close of each fiscal year. Furthermore, special districts are required to either post the financial report on their website or cause copies of the report to be prepared and the clerk of the legislative body to furnish a copy to any person requesting it. There are no records indicating RD 2034 has submitted financial transaction reports as required by State law. Nor have District officers responded to requests for financial information as required by State law. Through the interview process it was identified that the only recurring monthly expense for the District property owner’s is a monthly PG&E bill for electrical power to operate the West Pump. Landowners reportedly share the cost of operating and maintaining the pump based on their prorated share. West Pump expenses are typically submitted for periodic payment to district landowners (who are charged their prorated share on a per acre basis). Due to missed payments in the past PG&E invoices are now being billed directly to Discovery Builders, who is the owner of record for the parcel (APN 0046-060- 200) on which the West Pump is located, and not sent to the District. A breakdown of PG&E expenses for the period 2008-2015 is attached (see Attachment E in the Appendix for a summary of PG&E expenses). The District does not levy an annual assessment for operations and maintenance. 9 8 While the financing of small reclamation district is challenging, state law does grant reclamation districts the authority to levy and collect assessments on property within the district (through the county treasurer-tax collector’s office), issue bonds and receive funds from state and federal agencies. Assessments can be levied to pay for operation and maintenance expenses or issue bonds to pay for capital improvements. All assessments are subject to Proposition 218 which requires a vote by the property owners benefiting from the activities paid by the assessment before it can be levied. 9 A search of the Solano County Treasurer/Tax Collector/County Clerks office online tax bill assessment did not find any assessment for RD 2034 parcels. Reclamation District 2034 Final 12 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Findings: 4.4.1 – District officers have not provided financial records upon multiple requests. 4.4.2 - There is no evidence to demonstrate the District’s financial conditions and activities. 4.4.3 – The District is not in compliance with CA Government Code Sections 53891 and 53893 requiring local government agencies to submit specific financial transaction report to the State Controller’s Office within seven months of the close of each fiscal year. 4.4.4 - RD 2034 may be subject to fines from SCO as outlined in GC §53895. 4.5 Status and Opportunity for Shared Facilities The consultant team considered neighboring reclamation districts that could share facilities and/or services with RD 2034. RD 2135 (Sunrise Island) is contiguous to the southern boundary of RD 2034. Formed in 2006, RD 2135 consists of approximately 325 acres and has only one landowner, the Sunrise Island Duck Club. The District provides irrigation and drainage for habitat maintenance and enhancement. RD 2135 maintains the road and levee associated with the needs for water control, drainage, and irrigation to provide upkeep of the habitat within the district. RD 2135 is governed by a five-member board appointed to 4-year terms. There are no residents other than a caretaker and his family. RD 2034 is not connected to the levee system of the neighboring district and does not share facilities, nor is there any need to share facilities given that the levee and drainage systems are unique to each district. It does not appear there would be an advantage to a consolidation of the two districts (unless the governance structure or record keeping of RD 2034 would be improved). There is no overlap in service delivery with other reclamation districts or any other agencies that provide similar services. Finding: 4.5.1 – There is not a current opportunity for RD 2034 to share facilities with a neighboring Reclamation District. 4.6 Government Structure & Accountability for Community Service Needs The governing board for RD 2034 is a three member Board of Trustees who are elected for four year terms and serve until their successors are elected and qualified. To be eligible to serve on the Board trustees must be property owners in the district or their designated representatives. Vacancies in the board shall be filled pursuant to Section 1780 of the Government Code. When no election is held pursuant to Water Code Section 50740 then the county board of supervisors appoint those nominated for the positions of trustee, and if no person has been nominated, the board of supervisors shall appoint any qualified person or persons. The Solano County Board of Supervisors appointed RD Reclamation District 2034 Final 13 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 2034’s current board in 2014 with terms expiring in 2019 and 2021. 10 Since then one board member has stepped down leaving a vacancy on the district governing board. Board members receive no compensation for their services, but are allowed reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in attendance at meetings of the Board or when otherwise engaged in the work of the district at the direction of the Board of Trustees. Under Water Code Section 50630, the governing board of a reclamation district is responsible for electing its officers, which must include a President and Secretary. RD 2034 has three officers who were appointed in January 2014 (see Attachment B in the Appendix). 11 The position of President and Treasurer are currently filled. The position of Secretary is currently vacant with the Treasurer acting as Secretary for the District. The Board of Trustees does not meet on a regular basis nor does it appear to maintain an annual operating budget and financial statements. The District has no paid staff and labor requirements are met by individual landowners or contracted services. It is important to note that all special districts in California are subject to the following: 1. The Brown Act – Requires agencies to post agendas containing a brief general description of each item to be discussed at the meeting in a location that is accessible to members of the public at least 72 hours before a regular meeting. 2. The Public Records Act – Requires inspection or disclosure of governmental records to the public upon request, unless exempted by law (GC §6250 through 6270.5). Also requires agencies to create a catalog of “enterprise systems” and post the list on their website or make it publicly available upon request. (SB 272) 3. Compensation Report Filing – Requires special districts to submit to the State Controller’s Office by April 30 each year, the annual compensation of its elected officials, officers, and employees. 4. Financial Transaction Report Filing - Requires local agencies to submit a specific financial transaction report the State Controller’s Office within seven months after the close of each fiscal year. Special districts are required to either post the financial report on its website or provide copies of the report upon request. Agencies who do not submit financial transaction reports are subject to financial penalties pursuant to GC §53895. 10 Secretary’s Certification of Resolutions Adopted by Reclamation District No. 2034 (see Attachment A2 in the Appendix) 11 Secretary’s Certification of Resolutions Adopted by Reclamation District No. 2034 (see Attachment A2 in the Appendix) Reclamation District 2034 Final 14 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Findings: 4.6.1 – The position of Secretary on the District’s Board, which is a statutory requirement, is currently vacant with the Vice President/Treasurer serving as acting secretary. 4.6.2 – The District is not in compliance with the Brown Act. There is no evidence that the District post agendas at least 72 hours before regular meetings as required by State law. 4.6.3 – The District is not in compliance with the Public Records Act as it did not or could not provide district records. 4.6.4 – The District is not in compliance with the State law requirement to submit annual compensation information to the State Controller’s Office. The District could note on the submittal that it does not have paid elected officials, officers, or employees. 4.6.5 – The District in not in compliance with the State law requirement to submit financial transaction report to the State Controller’s Office. 4.7 Other Matters Affecting Efficient Service Delivery Finding: 4.7.1 - There are no Commission policies affecting efficient service delivery. Reclamation District 2034 Final 15 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 5: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE 5.1: Present and Planned Land Uses Most of the land in RD 2034 is within a Williamson Act Contract and is currently used for farming, cattle grazing, privately owned duck hunting clubs, and wetlands mitigation purposes. The Solano County General Plan shows the current land use designation as agricultural and marshland (see Table 4). Some of the property in the District is included in the Resource Conservation Overlay district (see Figure A2 in the Appendix), which is used to identify and protect areas with special resource management needs. All of the property within the District is presently zoned A-SM 80 (Suisun Marsh Agricultural District) under the County’s Zoning Ordinance. The purpose and intent of the A-SM district is to preserve lands best suited for permanent agricultural use while limiting certain intensive agricultural practices, which may conflict with adjoining sensitive lands. A primary intent is to assure the retention of upland and lowland grasslands adjacent to the Suisun Marsh in uses compatible with its protection. Development within the Suisun Marsh is subject to obtaining a Marsh Development Permit. Based on existing land use and zoning designations, there are no current expectations for growth or development of land within the District. Conversations with the Solano County Planning Department indicated that there is no planned or proposed change in land use or zoning. Table 3: Zoning and Land Use Classification Ag Preserve & Property APN Acreage Zoning Use Code Marsh Protection 1 0046-050-080 80.00 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6463 - Range Land 2 0046-010-160 103.85 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6400 - Range & Watershed Land 3 0046-060-030 158.49 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6401 - Range & Watershed Land 4 0046-060-040 78.92 AP/MP 6100 - Marsh Land 5 0046-010-120 171.30 A-SM 80 AP/MP 5000 - Agricultural Property 6 0046-060-180 193.10 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6463 - Range Land 7 0046-060-190 9.10 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6400 - Range & Watershed Land 8 0046-060-200 238.80 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6464 - Range Land 9 0046-060-210 179.70 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6465 - Range Land 10 0046-320-060 29.00 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6100 - Marsh Land 11 0046-320-080 29.00 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6100 - Marsh Land 12 0046-320-090 47.91 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6463 - Range Land 13 0046-320-190 57.42 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6100 - Marsh Land 14 0046-320-200 99.50 A-SM 80 AP/MP 6100 - Marsh Land Total 1,476.09 Source: Solano County Assessor’s Office Online Property Information AP - Williamson Act Contract MP - Marsh Protection District A-SM 80 Suisun Marsh Agricultural District Reclamation District 2034 Final 16 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Finding: 5.1.1 - The Solano County General Plan shows the current land use designation as agricultural and marshland, there are no planned or proposed changes to land use. 5.1.2 – The request for detachment would not change the current use of the property. 5.2: Present and Probable Need for Public Facilities and Services A system of levees, drainage channels, and pumping system are used to move floodwater off district lands and into the surrounding sloughs in order to maintain the habitat and current farming and ranching activities. The present system is sufficient to maintain the habitat and ongoing commercial activities and there is no need for public facilities and services in the area. Finding: 5.2.1 – The present system of levees, drainage channels, and pumping system appear to be sufficient to maintain the habitat and ongoing commercial activities of the landowners. 5.3: Present Capacity of Public Facilities and Adequacy of Public Services Finding: 5.3.1 - The present levee and drainage system is adequate to meet the original intended purpose for which the District was established. Regular ongoing inspections and maintenance is required to ensure the integrity of the levees and pump. 5.4: Existence of Social or Economic Communities of Interest The District has one registered voter and there are no known social or economic communities of interest within or contiguous to its boundaries or SOI. Finding: 5.4.1 – There are no social or economic communities of interest within or adjacent to the boundary of RD 2034. 5.5: Need for Public Facilities and Services for DUCs RD 2034 is uninhabited and there is no present or probable need for public facilities or services related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, or structural fire protection. There are also no disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to existing District boundaries or SOI. Finding: 5.5.1 – There are no DUCs within or adjacent to the boundary of RD 2034. Reclamation District 2034 Final 17 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 6: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS 6.1: Required Findings and Determinations for MSR. Based on our review and analysis of RD 2034 information, the following findings and determinations are made as required by the CKH Act for a MSR and SOI study. Table 4: Municipal Service Review Findings and Determinations Factors Findings and Determinations 1 Growth and population projections for the 4.1.1 – There are no current development proposals o affected area expectations for growth within the boundary of Reclamation District 2034. 2 The location and characteristics of any 4.2.1 – There are no disadvantaged unincorporated disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or adjacent to the boundary of communities within or contiguous to the Reclamation District 2034. sphere of influence 3 Present and planned capacity of public 4.3.1 – Per a 1912 agreement, individual property facilities, adequacy of public services, and owners are responsible for maintenance of the levees infrastructure needs or deficiencies in any on their properties. disadvantaged, unincorporated 4.3.2 – All fourteen parcels are subject to the 1912 communities within or contiguous to the agreement regardless of whether they are within the sphere of influence boundaries of RD 2034. 4 The financial ability of agencies to 4.4.1 – District officers have not provided financial provide services records upon multiple requests. 4.4.2 - There is no evidence to demonstrate the District’s financial conditions and activities. 4.4.3 – The District is not in compliance with CA Government Code Sections 53891 and 53893 requiring local government agencies to submit specific financial transaction report to the State Controller’s Office within seven months of the close of each fiscal year. 4.4.4 - RD 2034 may be subject to fines from SCO as outlined in GC §53895. Reclamation District 2034 Final 18 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 5 Status of, and opportunities for, shared 4.5.1 – There is not a current opportunity for RD 203 facilities to share facilities with a neighboring Reclamation District. 6 Accountability for community service 4.6.1 – The position of Secretary on the District’s needs, including governmental structure Board is currently vacant; the District Officers should and operational efficiencies request that the Board of Supervisors appoint a District Secretary. 4.6.2 – The District is not in compliance with the Brown Act. There is no evidence that the District post agendas at least 72 hours before regular meeting as required by State law. 4.6.3 – The District is not in compliance with the Public Records Act as it did not or could not provide district records. 4.6.4 – The District is not in compliance with the State law requirement to submit annual compensation information to the State Controller’s Office. The District could note on the submittal that it does not have paid elected officials, officers, or employees. 4.6.5 – The District in not in compliance with the State law requirement to submit financial transaction report to the State Controller’s Office. 7 Any other matter related to effective or 4.7.1 - There are no Commission policies affecting efficient service delivery, as required by efficient service delivery commission policy Reclamation District 2034 Final 19 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 6.2: Required Findings and Determinations for SOI Update As required by State law, Solano LAFCO is required to make written determinations related to the sphere of influence. Table 5: Sphere of Influence Findings and Determinations Factors Findings and Determinations 1 The present and planned land uses in the 5.1.1 - The Solano County General Plan area, including agricultural and open space shows the current land use designation as lands agricultural and marshland, there are no planned or proposed changes to land use. 2 The present and probable need for public 5.2.1 – The present system of levees, facilities and services in the area drainage channels, and pumping system appear to be sufficient to maintain the habitat and ongoing commercial activities of the landowners. 3 The present capacity of public facilities 5.3.1 - The present levee and drainage system and adequacy of public services that the is adequate to meet the original intended agency provides, or is authorized to purpose for which the District was provide established. Regular ongoing inspections and maintenance is required to ensure the integrity of the levees and pump. 4 The existence of any social or economic Finding 5.4.1 – There are no social or communities of interest in the area economic communities of interest within or adjacent to the boundary of RD 2034. 5 The present and probable need for public Finding 5.5.1 – There are no DUCs within or facilities and services of any disadvantaged adjacent to the boundary of RD 2034. unincorporated communities within the existing sphere of influence Reclamation District 2034 Final 20 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 7: OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO LAFCO The consultant team analyzed various options available to LAFCO and concluded there are four options for the Commission’s consideration. These include: Option #1: No Change – Deny Detachment Request Option #1 would result in the denial of the request for detachment and allow the District to continue operating within its current boundaries as is. Option #2: No Boundary Change - Deny Detachment Request with Conditions for the District to Improve Governance. Option #2 would result in the denial of the request for detachment and allow the District to continue operating within its current boundaries, but with conditions to improve governance. The Commission would impose conditions for RD 2034 to comply with State law. These include compliance with: 1. The Brown Act 2. The Public Records Act 3. Provide Compensation Report to the State Controller’s Office. 4. Provide regular Financial Transaction Reports to the State Controller’s Office. 5. Request current appointment for Secretary from the County Board of Supervisors. 6. Consider adoption of an assessment to pay District costs. 7. Consider creating a District website to promote transparency and to assist the District to comply with the above noted applicable State law. Option #2 would allow RD 2034 to continue operating to serve its intended purpose of land reclamation and would improve its overall governance, accountability, and service delivery of the District. It is recommended the Commission allow the District one year to comply with the above requirements. Option #3: Approve Detachment of Property and Improve Governance Structure The Commission could approve the request for detachment and require the District to improve its governance structure should the District wish to remain a public agency. If this option were approved the District would still continue to function as originally intended with conditions imposed by LAFCO to require governance improvements as outlined above. The detached property is still bound by the 1912 obligations. This option is explored further in Section 8. Option #4: Dissolution of the District Dissolution should be considered given that this District is not in full compliance with current State laws governing special district including not having filed annual financial reports with the State Controller’s Office, no annual operating budget, does not hold regular noticed meetings with agenda and minutes that are publicly available, and has no adopted plan for the ongoing maintenance, repair, operation or construction of supplemental works. . Should the District wish to remain a public agency, the District must be in compliance with applicable State laws. If the District is found not to be in compliance, the Commission should consider dissolution of the District. All properties would remain bound by the 1912 agreement. This option is further explored in Section 9. Reclamation District 2034 Final 21 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 8: DETACHMENT FROM RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 8.1 Detachment Requirements and Procedures (1) Petition Requirements – Reclamation District 2034 is a landowner-voter district, which is defined as a district whose principal act provides that owners of land within the district are entitled to vote. Landowners are able to petition LAFCO for detachment if the petition is signed by not less than 25% of the number of landowners who own not less than 25% of the assessed value of land within the affected territory (GC §56864). As one of four property owners, the applicant meets the “not less than 25% number of landowners” requirement. Additionally, the applicant owns 56.26% of the total assessed value of land (see Table 6), and therefore meets the requirement of “own not less than 25% of the assessed value of land within the affected territory”. Table 6: Assessed Value by Parcel Detachment Land Percent of Land Property APN Acreage Owner* Request Value Value 1 0046-050-080 80.00 Grizzly No $11,440 2.81% 2 0046-010-160 103.85 Seecon Yes $26,585 6.53% 3 0046-060-030 158.49 Seecon Yes $40,573 9.96% 4 0046-060-040 78.92 Seecon Yes $78,821 19.36% 5 0046-010-120 171.30 Seecon Yes $24,495 6.02% 6 0046-060-180 193.10 Grizzly No $44,799 11.00% 7 0046-060-190 9.10 Seecon Yes $3,880 0.95% 8 0046-060-200 238.80 Seecon Yes $34,148 8.39% 9 0046-060-210 179.70 Grizzly No $41,690 10.24% 10 0046-320-060 29.00 Dunnigan No $7,424 1.82% 11 0046-320-080 29.00 Dunnigan No $7,424 1.82% 12 0046-320-090 47.91 Seecon Yes $20,601 5.06% 13 0046-320-190 57.42 Chadbourne No $39,836 9.78% 14 0046-320-200 99.50 Dunnigan No $25,472 6.26% Total 1,476.09 $407,188 56.26%** Source: Solano County Assessor’s Office Online Property Information and SEECON Application for Detachment. * See Table A1 in Appendix for more detailed ownership information. **Represents percentage of the total assessed value of land proposed for detachment. (2) Other LAFCO Requirements for a Change of Organization – Prior to LAFCO considering a petition for a change of organization, it must first update the District’s sphere of influence which is preceded by a current municipal service review. This MSR/SOI study complies with this requirement. Other petition requirements include, but are not limited to: • Plan for providing services pursuant to GC §56653 • State the reason or reasons for the proposal • Environmental documents required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) • Map of the proposed area for detachment • Geographic Description of the proposed detachment area Reclamation District 2034 Final 22 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 8.2 Conducting Authority Proceeding (Protest Hearing) for Uninhabited Territory Should the Commission approve the petition for detachment, the Commission is the Conducting Authority and must hold a noticed protest hearing within 35 days following adoption of the resolution approving the change of organization (GC §57002). (The Commission may waive the protest proceeding under specified circumstances pursuant to GC §56662 and §56663.) The possible outcome of the protest hearing is as follows: 1) The Commission shall terminate the proceeding if a majority protest exists. Majority is defined as, “50 percent or more of the voting power of the voters entitled to vote as a result of owning land within the district.” (GC §57075 and §57078) 2) The Commission shall order the change of organization if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by owners of land who own less than 50% of the total assessed value of land within the affected territory. (GC §57075) Reclamation District 2034 Final 23 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 SECTION 9: OPTIONS FOR DISSOLUTION OF RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 The consultant team evaluated options for Dissolution of Reclamation District 2034 available to the Commission including: 1) LAFCO initiated, 2) district landowner petition, and 3) inactive special district provisions. 9.1 LAFCO Initiated Dissolution LAFCO’s are given the legislative authority to dissolve special districts under specified circumstances (GC §56375). The Commission may initiate a proposal by resolution of application for dissolution of a special district if the dissolution is consistent with the recommendation(s) or conclusion of a study prepared under the following circumstances: 1. Existing governmental agency study. Pursuant to GC §56378 the Commission may initiate and make studies of existing governmental agencies including: special districts, counties, cities, school districts, community college districts, joint power authorities, joint power agencies, regional agencies, and state agencies and departments; 2. Sphere of influence study (GC §56425); 3. Municipal service review study (GC §56430). LAFCO must make a determination pertaining to public service costs and the promotion of public access and accountability (GC §56881). In addition, the Commission is charged with conducting an authority proceeding (protest hearing) for LAFCO initiated dissolutions GC §57077.1. 9.2 District Landowner Petition for Dissolution LAFCO can also dissolve a landowner special district if three or more landowners within the landowner district signs a petition for dissolution (GC §56871) and by not less than 10 percent of the number of landowner-voters within the district who also own not less than 10 percent of the assessed value of land within the district (GC §86870). The Commission may dissolve a landowner special district if, in addition to the three signatures by landowners who own not less than 10 percent of the assessed value of land, all of the following conditions are met: 1. The district has been in existence for three years. 2. The corporate powers of the district have not been used. 3. One or more of the following conditions have existed or now exists: a. There has not been a duly selected and acting quorum of the board of directors of the district. b. The board of directors has not furnished or provided services or facilities of substantial benefit to residents, landowners, or property within the district. c. The board of directors has not levied or fixed and collected any taxes, assessments, service charges, rentals, or rates or expended the proceeds of those levies or collections for district purposes. d. That during the one-year preceding the date of the first signature upon the petition of the duly selected and acting board of directors has not met for the purpose of transacting district business. e. That, upon the date of the first signature upon the petition, the district had no assets, other than money in the form of cash, investment or deposits. Reclamation District 2034 Final 24 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 As noted above, the petition of application that the Commission received to date is a detachment signed by one of the four land owners within the district who also owns the majority of the assessed value of the land. Given that GC §56871 specifically calls out the requirement of a petition for dissolution signed by three or more landowners within a landowner district, this option may not be presently available. In addition to the signature requirement, this process also requires the holding of a protest hearing. 9.3 LAFCO Responsibility for Dissolution of Inactive Special Districts Senate Bill (SB) 448 (Weickowski) was passed in 2017 and became effective September 27, 2017 for the purpose of evaluating special districts and creating a streamlined process for LAFCOs to dissolve special districts whose audits show they are no longer performing. The new law specifies that November 1, 2018, and every year thereafter, SCO is required to create a list of inactive districts and shall notify the commission. The commission is then required to initiate dissolution of inactive districts by resolution within 90 days of receiving the notification from SCO unless the commission determines the special district(s) does not meet the criteria set forth in the inactive district definition. Applying this method the commission can dissolve special districts with one public hearing following the adoption of the resolution initiating dissolution (GC §56879). In effect this allows LAFCO to forgo initiating a study which can be costly and allows LAFCO to forgo the conducting authority proceeding, which can also be costly if an election is required. A review of the District’s status was conducted by the consultant team including an online search of the SCO’s website. RD 2034 was not included on the list of inactive special districts for 2018 and there has been no notice given to Solano LAFCO regarding RD 2034’s status. In 2017 SCO sent a letter to Solano LAFCO identifying special districts that may be inactive. The 2017 letter only identified special districts that provided financial reports in the past, but have not reported financial reports since 2012. RD 2034 was not included in SCO’s 2017 letter, but as noted in the report, there is no documentation RD 2034 provided financial reports to SCO in the past. Therefore, the streamlined process to dissolve RD2034 is not yet available to LAFCO, however; the consultant team evaluated RD 2034 against the criteria set forth in the district active/inactive definition. In accordance with SB 448, an inactive district means a special district that meets all of the following criteria set forth in Section 56042: 1) The district is a special district as defined in Section 56036; Special District is defined as, “an agency of the state, formed for general law or special act, for the performance of governmental or proprietary functions within limited boundaries and in areas outside the boundaries when authorized by LAFCO pursuant to GC 56133.” RD 2034 was formed under the general reclamation district laws of the State of California with the petition for formation being approved by the Solano County Board of Supervisors on April 7, 1919. 2) The special district has had no financial transactions in the previous fiscal year; The consultant team found no financial transactions in the previous fiscal year. A review of bills for the electrical power required to operate the West Pump from the last few years’ show that the invoices are sent to the owner of the parcel with which the pump sits on, the bills are not sent to the District. Reclamation District 2034 Final 25 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 3) The special district has no assets and liabilities; The consultant team found that the District owns various easements throughout the Reclamation District’s boundary. 4) The special district has no outstanding debts, judgments, litigation, contracts, liens, or claims. The consultant team found no outstanding debts, judgments, litigation, contracts, liens, or claims. In 1967 RD 2034 entered into an agreement with Solano Irrigation District for the installation and maintenance of a ditch at the intersection of the Reclamation District’s drain, Suisun Creek, and the tide gates located east of Chadbourne Road. However, Solano Irrigation District staff does not currently believe this agreement is currently in place. 9.4 Recommended Dissolution Option Upon analysis of the options available to the Commission to dissolve RD 2034, the consultant team recommends the Commission use the option available to them pursuant to the Sphere of Influence Section (G.C. §56425) and the Municipal Service Review Section (GC §56430), within LAFCO’s Legislative Powers and Duties pursuant to GC §56375(a)(2)(B). Reclamation District 2034 Final 26 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 References 1. Solano LAFCO Standards and Procedures guidelines, adopted March 1, 1999 as amended 2. Guide to the Cortese–Knox–Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, December 2017 3. LAFCO Procedures Guide, San Diego LAFCO, 2013 4. Minutes of Meeting of Board of Trustees of Reclamation District No. 2034, January 18, 1950 5. Secretary’s Certification of Resolutions Adopted by Reclamation District No. 2034. 6. 1912 Agreement 7. Telephone conference call with Skip Chadbourne, September 4, 2018 8. Email from Mark Dawson dated April 6, 2017 re: Solano LAFCO Project #2016-02 Seecon Properties Detachment from RD 2034 9. Letter from Art Anderson dated January 18, 2017 10. Pacific Institute, San Francisco Bay Levees, https://databasin.org/maps/new#datasets=ed05b99c85e94df5befb6e619847e378 11. Solano County Assessor’s Office Online Property Information Reclamation District 2034 Final 27 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Appendices Table A1 Figures A1 thru A4 Attachments A thru P Reclamation District 2034 Final 28 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Table A1: RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 Property Ownership Suisun Marsh Properties, Solano County, California Date Total Acreage Ownership Parcel(s) Owner Information APNs Acreage Acquired Per Owner Percentages Chadbourne Skip & Wendy Chadbourne 0046-320-190 Unknown; 57.42 57.42 3.89% Post Office Box 698 Family Fairfield, California 94553 Succession Home: (707) 428-1362 Cell: (707) 287-5916 Email: wchadbourne@aol.com Anderson/Matthew Art Anderson/Matthew Archer/ 0046-320-060 10/10/2012 29.00 157.50 10.67% Archer/Dunningan Dunningan Hills Farming Co., Inc. 0046-320-080 10/10/2012 29.00 Hills Farming Co., 34 Alamo Square, Suite 200 0046-320-200 10/10/2012 99.50 Inc. Alamo, California 94507 Cell: (925) 979-2599 Email: art@stonevalleyfarm.com Grizzly Bay, LLC Mark Dawson 0046-050-080 04/09/2013 80.00 452.80 30.68% Water Hole Land Company 0046-060-180 04/09/2013 193.10 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 0046-060-210 04/09/2013 179.70 San Ramon, California 94583 Cell: (925) 202-9277 Email: mdawson@waterholeland.com Jeff Olberding Olberding Environmental, Inc. 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 San Ramon, California 94583 Cell: (408) 472-4343 Email: jeff@olberdingenv.com Reclamation District 2034 Final 29 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Table A1: RECLAMATION DISTRICT 2034 Property Ownership Suisun Marsh Properties, Solano County, California Date Total Acreage Ownership Parcel(s) Owner Information APNs Acreage Acquired Per Owner Percentages Seeno Seecon Financial & Construction Co., 0046-010-120 11/21/2006 171.30 808.37 54.76% Inc. 0046-010-160 04/01/2008 103.85 West Coast Home Builders, Inc. 0046-060-030 04/01/2008 158.49 (“WCHB”) 0046-060-040 11/21/2006 78.92 Discovery Builders, Inc. (“DBI”) 0046-060-200 04/01/2008 238.80 Attention: Kathi Blackard 0046-320-090 11/21/2006 47.91 4021 Port Chicago Highway 0046-060-190 04/01/2008 9.10 Concord, California 94520 Office: (925) 602-7284 Email: kblackard@seenohomes.com Seecon Financial/DBI Seecon Financial Seecon Financial Seecon Financial/DBI WCHB/DBI Seecon Financial/DBI Seecon Financial GRAND TOTALS: 1,476.09 100% Source: Solano LAFCO Reclamation District 2034 Final 30 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure A1: Suisun Marsh Reclamation Districts Reclamation District 2034 Final 31 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure A2: Suisun Marsh Protection Area Reclamation District 2034 Final 32 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure A3: FEMA Levee Map Reclamation District 2034 Final 33 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Figure A4: Location of West Pump Reclamation District 2034 Final 34 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment A Board of Supervisors Approval of Petition for Formation of RD 2034 Reclamation District 2034 Final 35 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment A (continued) Reclamation District 2034 Final 36 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment B 2014 Appointment of District Board of Trustees & Officers Reclamation District 2034 Final 37 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment C LAFCO Resolution Establishing RD 2034 SOI Reclamation District 2034 Final 38 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment C (continued) Reclamation District 2034 Final 39 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment D Correspondence with County Auditor’s Office From: Starkey, Kirk [mailto:KStarkey@SolanoCounty.com] Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 2:28 PM To: LAFCO 2 (external) Subject: RE: Audit for RD2034 Hi Michelle – We have not audited this entity and we have not received any audit reports from them either. If they happen to submit an audit report as part of their application could you please have them forward another copy to our office. Thank you, Kirk Kirk Starkey | Deputy Auditor-Controller, Internal Audits Solano County 675 Texas St., Suite #2800 | Fairfield, CA 94533 707.784.3057 kstarkey@solanocounty.com From: M McIntyre [mailto:mmcintyre@solanolafco.com] Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 11:35 AM To: Starkey, Kirk <KStarkey@SolanoCounty.com> Subject: Audit for RD2034 Hi Kirk, Do you know if your office has audited Reclamation District #2034? If yes, may I have a copy? I’m working on an application from one of the property owners. Thank you, Michelle Reclamation District 2034 Final 40 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment E Notice of Detachment Application & Request for Information Reclamation District 2034 Final 41 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment F LAFCO Information Request & Detachment Status Solano Local Agency Formation Commission 675 Texas St. Ste. 6700 • Fairfield, California 94533 (707) 439-3897 • FAX: (707) 438-1788 December 1, 2017 Reclamation District 2034 c/o Arthur Anderson, District President 34 Alamo Square Ste. 200 Alamo CA 94507 RE: Information Request and SEECON Detachment Application from Reclamation District 2034 Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter is to advise you that we received your e-mail and attachments regarding our information request and to update the status of the detachment application. Our November 7 letter requested: meeting agendas and minutes; budgets, financial reports, or audits; a list of expenses related to the District, and; assets owned by the District. We received copies of PG&E invoices addressed to West Coast Home Builders from SEECON, Inc. We note that there were no documents addressing the issues outlined and information requested in our November 7 letter regarding RD 2034. Concerning the detachment application outlined in our November 7 letter, in order to process changes of organizations and reorganizations, LAFCOs are required to have a current municipal service review (MSR) study and sphere of influence. In 2008, LAFCO hired a firm to conduct a MSR study for the District. The 2008 MSR must now be updated for LAFCO to process the application we received from SEECON. In the next few weeks, LAFCO will be issuing a request for proposal for a MSR study for RD 2034. We will advise the District when a firm has been hired and is ready to commence the MSR process. Mr. Anderson, please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rich Seithel Executive Officer cc: RD 2034 Landowners Reclamation District 2034 Final 42 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment G Request for Information Regarding District Financial Information Re: Follow Up Information for RD 2034 From: Gary Craft craft@craftconsulting.net To: Art Anderson art@stonevalleyfarm.com Sent: September 5, 2018 A rt Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to meet with Mike Milani and myself in early August. In following up on our research we still have a need for additional information. It would be extremely helpful if you could take a few minutes to respond to the following questions: 1. Location and address of RD 2034 office 2. Copy of bank account statements for past year 3. Outstanding debts/liabilities 4. Annual revenue & expenses for past 3 years 5. Copy of District bylaws 6. Number & date of Board meetings held during past 3 years 7. Facilities/assets owned by District 8. Is the West Pump owned by the District, if so, is there any documentation Sincerely Gary Craft Reclamation District 2034 Final 43 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment H Dawson Letter Regarding Detachment From: Mark Dawson [mailto:mdawson@waterholeland.com] Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 3:01 PM To: mmcintyre@solanolafco.com Subject: Solano LAFCO Project #2016-02 Seecon Properties Detachment from RD 2034 Hi Michelle, Sorry for the delayed response, but you mentioned the application was deemed incomplete, so I figured I had some time. As I mentioned on the phone, I am the managing member of Grizzly Bay, LLC, one of the property owners within RD 2034. We don’t necessarily have any issue with the proposed detachment from the district in principal, but have some concerns/questions on how physically this will be implemented and that there be no resultant cost to us or impacts to our property: 1. Will the applicant construct a new levee between the detachment area and the remainder DR2034 properties at their own expense? If so, will this be wholly on the applicant’s property and the applicant’s responsibility at applicant’s own cost to maintain it, with an easement to the district for maintenance in the event the applicant fails to maintain it? 2. The RD 2034 pump is currently located on the applicant’s property, so how will the district continue to pump water out of the district after the detachment? Will the pump remain in place and the district maintains an access easement to the pump for maintenance and repair and operation – and if so, how will the district’s water vs. the detachments water be accounted for, being pumped from the same pump? Or will the pump be relocated at applicant’s cost into the RD 2034 upon the detachment – and if so will any grading and permitting to realign the district’s drainage to the new location and any power line relocation/meter resetting etc. be paid for by the applicant? Or will the district obtain a separate pump within the district at applicant’s expense (including all the expenses noted in the last sentence)? These are a few preliminary questions of logistics if this is to move forward. The main concerns are that we should not be out of pocket on any costs associated with or resulting from the detachment, and that there should not be any impacts to our property as a result of the detachment. Thanks. Mark Dawson Water Hole Land Company 3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260 San Ramon, CA 94583 (925) 202-9277 (925) 866-2126 fax mdawson@waterholeland.com http://waterholeland.com Reclamation District 2034 Final 44 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attchment I Anderson Letter Regarding Detachment Reclamation District 2034 Final 45 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment J RD 2034 PG&E Bills Reclamation District 2034 Final 46 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment K Correspondence Regarding West Pump Expenses Reclamation District 2034 Final 47 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment L Correspondence Regarding West Pump Expenses Reclamation District 2034 Final 48 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment M PG&E Bills 2008-2015 Reclamation District 2034 Final 49 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment N Audit for RD2034 From: Starkey, Kirk [mailto:KStarkey@SolanoCounty.com] Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 2:28 PM To: LAFCO 2 (external) Subject: RE: Audit for RD2034 Hi Michelle – We have not audited this entity and we have not received any audit reports from them either. If they happen to submit an audit report as part of their application could you please have them forward another copy to our office. Thank you, Kirk Kirk Starkey | Deputy Auditor-Controller, Internal Audits Solano County 675 Texas St., Suite #2800 | Fairfield, CA 94533 707.784.3057 kstarkey@solanocounty.com Reclamation District 2034 Final 50 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment O Maintenance Agreement with Solano Irrigation District Reclamation District 2034 Final 51 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment O (continued) Reclamation District 2034 Final 52 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018 Attachment P FEMA Standards FEMA Flood Insurance “The National Flood Insurance Program defines a levee system as a flood risk reduction system that consists of a levee, or levees, and associated structures, such as closure and drainage devices, which are constructed and operated in accordance with sound engineering practices to protect a hydraulically distinct area. A levee is a manmade structure, usually an earthen embankment designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control, or divert the flow of water so as to provide protection from temporary flooding. Levee systems are designed to provide a specific level of protection. They can be overtopped or fail during flood events larger than those for which the system was designed. Levee systems also decay over time, which may increase the likelihood of failure. They require regular maintenance and periodic upgrades to retain their level of protection. When levees do fail, the resulting damage, including loss of life, may be much greater than if the levee system had not been built. Any community and/or other party seeking recognition or continued recognition of a levee system on a Flood Insurance Rate Map must provide FEMA with data and documentation, certified by a registered professional engineer, showing that the levee system is expected to provide 1-percent-annual-chance (base) flood risk reduction.” 12 FEMA Disaster Assistance Based on a federal major disaster declaration, state and local governments including certain reclamation districts may be eligible for federal disaster assistance and can apply for reimbursement of eligible costs due levee breaks and flooding caused by a major storm event. FEMA reimbursement covers emergency response costs, debris removal, emergency protective measures related to the floods, and the repair or replacement of damaged public facilities. 13 12 FEMA, “Meeting the Criteria for Accrediting Levee Systems on Flood Insurance Rate Maps: How-To Guide for Floodplain Managers and Engineers,” May 18, 2016 13 FEMA Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide, April 2018 Reclamation District 2034 Final 53 Municipal Service Review December 10, 2018