Agenda - 01-16-1997 - 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

November 1996 Attorney review presented by County Attorney. Attorneys recommend separating land use planning issues from boundary agreement and propose amendments to Joint Planning Land Use Plan and/or other plans to accomplish land use goals. Task Force agrees to meet again in January to consider whether to split land use/planning issues from water/sewer boundary issues. Issues Under Consideration During Task Force deliberations on the draft boundary agreement a number of issues have been raised that have generated discussion and in some cases, disagreement. The current draft of the proposed agreement contains alternative language in three areas that addresses the difference of opinion among the Task Force members. These issues are fisted below in the order in which they are found in the draft. I. Extension Opublic water and sewer service into the Rural Buffer There has been no recommendation by members of the Task Force that basic water and sewer service be extended into the Rural Buffer . However, there has been discussion regarding provision of service to Public health emergencies and"essential public facilities" (as per the County Water and Sewer Policy) where extension would be into or through the Rural Buffer. On the proposed boundary map (attached), the Rural Buffer is within the OWASA Long-Term Interest Area-an area where extensions of service are not anticipated but where OWASA would be the designated provider in the case of a public health emergency or essential public facility. One disagreement on language among Task Force members occurs in this area, as to whether it is necessary to explicitly mention utility service within the Rural Buffer if it is already stated that other land use agreements will not be superseded by the boundary agreement (Section I.D.2). Z Equity Issues Much discussion has centered around one of the correlative objectives from 1994 pertaining to addressing equity issues. This objective states that the process should"Promote equity for all parties. Formulate Service Area and other agreements so that benefiting parties pay their fair proportional share of operating and capital costs incurred by the entity serving that district or interest area." Some Task Force members have argued that this objective should be interpreted to mean that any County tax dollars spent on water and sewer extension in one part of the County should be coupled with a like amount available for other areas of the County, including the Towns. Some members have raised concerns about the use of County tax dollars for system improvements in northern Orange. Issues of possible"double-taxation" for Town residents and concerns about funding for County Economic Development Districts have been expressed in terms of whether benefiting parties are paying their fair share.