DOCSLIB.ORG

203287 TP Final Vol 2.Ai

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
203287 TP Final Vol 2.Ai 4.7 Cultural Resources 4.7 Cultural4.7 4. WSIP Facility Projects – Setting and Impacts 4.7 Cultural Resources Cultural resources include paleontological resources, archaeological resources, historical resources, and human remains. This section provides a program-level assessment of potential WSIP impacts on historical, paleontological, or archaeological resources that might be present in the vicinity of the WSIP projects and/or historic water system facilities. Programmatic mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potentially significant impacts on these cultural resources are identified in this section and presented in detail in Chapter 6. This analysis does not identify specific cultural resources at each of the 22 WSIP facility project sites, although some previously identified cultural resources are located at or near those project sites. Site-specific analysis will be conducted as part of separate, project-level CEQA review for individual WSIP projects. 4.7.1 Setting and Resource Types Paleontological Setting Paleontological resources within the WSIP study area consist of the fossilized remains of plants and animals, including vertebrates (animals with backbones) and invertebrates (e.g., starfish, clams, ammonites, and coral marine). Fossils of microscopic plants and animals, or microfossils, are also considered in this analysis. The age and abundance of fossils depend on the location, topographic setting, and particular geologic formation in which they are found. The geologic formations containing the majority of fossils in the WSIP study area are considered geologically young; the oldest fossil-bearing formation dates to the Paleocene epoch (65 million years old). Most of the fossil-bearing geologic units in the WSIP study area were formed in ancient marine environments such as inland embayments, coastal areas, and extensive inland seas. However, in the eastern portion of the study area, some vertebrate fossils have been found in non-marine formations consisting of sand, gravel, and mudflow deposits. San Joaquin Region Paleontological resources in the San Joaquin Region are most prevalent in geologic formations located along the western margin of the San Joaquin Valley. These formations include the marine sandstone, mudstone, siltstone, and shale of the San Pablo Formation (including units of the Neroly Sandstone, Cierbo Sandstone, and Briones Sandstone); various undivided conglomerate, sandstone, and siltstone units (including the Carbona and Oro Loma Formations); and the Moreno Formation. The Moreno Formation, which is present along the western margin of the Great Valley as an elongated and continuous, northwest-trending unit, consists of shale, sandstone, and siltstone that were once deposited in a deep-marine environment. The Moreno Formation contains abundant fossils, including a variety of marine reptiles, fish skeletons, and various marine invertebrates; plant remains such as wood, leaves, and needles; and the remains of dinosaurs (USFWS/CDFG, 2006). Dinosaurs are rarely found in California, but many of the plesiosaurs and mosasaurs found in the state come from the Moreno Formation (USFWS/CDFG, 2006). SF Planning Department Case No. 2005.0159E 4.7-1 PEIR on SFPUC Water System Improvement Program / 203287 4. WSIP Facility Projects – Setting and Impacts 4.7 Cultural Resources The University of California Museum of Paleontology Collections Database lists 81 fossil localities in San Joaquin County; the majority of these sites are along the western boundary of the San Joaquin Valley. Several fossil localities are grouped in the San Pablo and Moreno Formations west of Vernalis near the Tesla Portal of the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct (UCMP, 2006). These fossils include an extinct horse, mammoth, and boney fish dating to the Pleistocene epoch, about 1.8 million years ago. The Collections Database includes a fossil locality at the Hetch Hetchy Tunnel (Locality No. 3315), which is listed as a discovery site for a prehistoric camel (up to 1.8 million years old). Only a few fossil localities have been identified in the younger alluvial deposits throughout the central portion of the San Joaquin Valley. Fossil localities appear again on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley near Oakdale, where the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct extends through the Mehrton Formation, a non-marine formation ranging in age from 24 to 5 million years old (Miocene). Fossils found at sites in the Mehrten Formation near Oakdale include early (Miocene age) turtles, tortoises, kangaroo rats, single-hoofed horses, and mammoths. Sunol Valley and Bay Division Regions Many fossil localities in the Sunol Valley and Bay Division Regions occur in marine and non-marine deposits ranging in age from 10,000 to 5.3 million years old.1 These geologic formations include non-marine sediments of the Santa Clara Formation, Livermore Gravels, and Irvington Gravels. Marine fossil-bearing geologic deposits include the Cierbo Sandstone found in the San Pablo, Monterey, Santa Margarita, and Panoche Formations, and in the older (55 to 34 million years old) Domengine Formation. The majority of the fossils found in the Sunol Valley and Bay Division Regions are vertebrate fossils, including extinct bison, camels, boney fish, mammoths, and horses, although some localities contain marine invertebrate fossils such as bivalves (clams). A fossil of a mastodon from the Pleistocene epoch was discovered in Sunol (Locality No. 6535), while an unidentified vertebrate fossil was discovered in the vicinity of Calaveras Dam (Locality No. 3937) (UCMP, 2006). The distribution of fossil localities and the location of corresponding geologic units indicate that most of the paleontological resources in the Sunol Valley Region are east and south of Interstate 680 in the upland foothills of the Diablo Range. Fossil localities diminish west of Interstate 680, towards the Santa Clara Valley and the central portion of the Bay Division Region, because the Santa Clara Valley and the south San Francisco Bay margin is underlain by much younger alluvial and basin deposits that do not contain abundant fossil remains. There are 280 fossil localities in Alameda County, but only 36 in Santa Clara County (UCMP, 2006). Some of the fossil localities in Santa Clara County contain vertebrate fossils, including a bison and another mammal that appears to be an ancient descendant of an elephant or sea cow. 1 The age range of these deposits is referred to as the Plio-Pleistocene, which is the period of time that spans the Pliocene epoch (5.3 to 1.8 million years ago) and the Pleistocene epoch (1.8 million to 10,000 years ago). SF Planning Department Case No. 2005.0159E 4.7-2 PEIR on SFPUC Water System Improvement Program / 203287 4. WSIP Facility Projects – Setting and Impacts 4.7 Cultural Resources Peninsula and San Francisco Regions There are few fossil localities in the Peninsula and San Francisco Regions. Most fossils are found along the Pacific Coast in the younger (Pliocene, 5.3 to 1.8 million years ago) marine units, such as the Purisima Formation, Monterey Formation, Butano Formation, Colma Formation, and Merced Formation, and in locations within the outcropping marine units in the Santa Cruz Mountains, west of the WSIP regions. Fossils found along the coast include vertebrates (e.g., extinct camels, horses, and sea mammals) and invertebrates (e.g., clams and corals). Fossil localities diminish along the eastern flank of the Santa Cruz Mountains, likely due to the presence of chaotically mixed and severely fractured Franciscan Complex bedrock and geologically younger alluvial deposits in the upland foothills.2 No fossil localities were identified in the Crystal Springs Reservoir or San Andreas Reservoir areas. The lack of fossil localities is partly due to the Franciscan Complex bedrock surrounding the reservoirs and the degree of fracturing in this bedrock unit caused by the San Andreas Rift Zone. The closest fossil locality south of the WSIP study area is an extinct sea mammal, an ancestor of the sea lion (UCMP, 2006). To the north, the closest fossil locality to the study area is an extinct horse from the Pleistocene epoch (1.8 million to 10,000 years ago). Archaeological / Prehistoric-Period Setting Both prehistoric and historic resources are considered archaeological resources. This discussion of prehistoric archaeology addresses cultural patterns in the WSIP study area through the time of European contact. Historic archaeological resources, starting with the Mission era, are discussed below under “Historic-Period Setting.” Numerous prehistoric archaeological sites have been identified in a variety of environments within the WSIP study area. In many cases, these sites are buried by alluvial deposits at or near former or existing wetland boundaries, along seasonal and perennial watercourses and other sources of fresh water such as springs, at the base of foothills, or at or near vegetation ecotones (i.e., a region between two neighboring but dissimilar plant communities). Many of the sites are deposits of stone tools, while others are large habitation sites that represent years of layered subsurface material or residues that chronicle the behavior of the inhabitants. Efforts to reconstruct the prehistoric period into broad cultural stages (e.g., the Windmiller, Berkeley, and Augustine Patterns, as discussed below) allow researchers to describe a wide variety of sites with similar cultural patterns during a given period of time, thereby creating a regional chronology. In some cases, regional patterns in material culture are reflected in areas that are broader than the WSIP regions. For example, the greater San Francisco Bay Area is often discussed as a single region in terms of archaeological sequences (Moratto, 1984). As a result, a broad discussion of the region that encompasses the Bay Area would include the Bay Division, Peninsula, and San Francisco Regions, in addition to elements of the Sunol Valley Region, 2 Fossils are rarely found in the Franciscan Complex bedrock of the Coast Range Province; any fossil remains originally present in the rock would not likely remain because the Franciscan Complex in this area is a chaotically mixed and fragmented mass of rock in a sheared matrix.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvements and Skyline Bridge Replacement Projects
    Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvements and Skyline Bridge Replacement Projects Highlights, Timelines & FAQs In 2018, work was competed on several interconnected efforts by the County of San Mateo and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to make improvements to the Lower Crystal Springs Dam and replaced the bridge on top of the dam, which allows the re-opening of Skyline Boulevard. Below are some key facts: Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvement Highlights (SFPUC Project): • Doubling the width of the spillway to 200 feet • Raising the parapet wall on top of the dam by 9 feet • Replacing the stilling basin (which stills released water before it enters San Mateo Creek) with a new larger basin and erosion protection at the toe of the dam • $35 million total project cost, over two years (completed December 2012) Skyline Bridge Replacement Highlights (County of San Mateo project): • The new bridge is 626 feet long and 51.5 feet wide and approximately 7 feet higher than the former bridge. • Constructing retaining walls at the Scenic Vista Point parking area due to the change in bridge elevation. • Created a new 15-foot wide recreational trail on the west side of the bridge that is separated from vehicular traffic and providing connectivity for Crystal Springs Regional Trail users. • Installed new split rail fencing. • A new trail section south of the bridge allows trail users to continue along the Crystal Springs Regional Trail to the relatively new “South of Dam” trail section. • PG&E relocated overhead 230kV electrical transmission lines to the underside of the new bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California
    Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program August 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Prepared for the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program by EOA, Inc. 1410 Jackson St. Oakland, CA 94612 August 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................1 2.1 Description of Study Area ...................................................................................................1 2.2 Regulatory Information........................................................................................................1 2.3 Previous Water Quality Investigations ................................................................................2 3.0 METHODS ..............................................................................................................................2 3.1 Bioassessment....................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • 1180 Main Street Project, Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report, Redwood City, San Mateo County, California
    1180 Main Street Project, Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report, Redwood City, San Mateo County, California Prepared for: Premia Capital, LLC 801 Hamilton Street Redwood City, CA Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. January 18, 2019 1180 MAIN STREET PROJECT, CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY AND EVALUATION REPORT, REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA This document entitled 1180 Main Street Project, Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report, Redwood City, San Mateo County, California was prepared by Stantec Inc. (“Stantec”) for the account of Premia Capital, LLC (the “Client”). Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document. Prepared by (signature) Joanne Grant, Archaeologist, MA, RPA Reviewed by (signature) John A. Nadolski, M.A. Approved
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2019 and 2018
    Sustaining the resources entrusted to our care. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission An Enterprise Department of the City and County of San Francisco, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 Prepared by SFPUC Financial Services Eric Sandler Assistant General Manager, Business Services & Chief Financial Officer This page has been intentionally left blank. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory Section (Unaudited) Page General Manager’s Transmittal Letter....................................................................................................... 1-14 The Reporting Entity................................................................................................................................ 2-4 Long-Term Strategic Goals, Major Accomplishments and Initiatives, and Financial Planning.......... 4-11 Business Continuity and Emergency Planning...................................................................................... 11-12 San Francisco’s Budget Process............................................................................................................ 12 Financial Transparency, Reporting and Auditing Process.................................................................... 12-13 Financial Authority and Policies............................................................................................................. 13
    [Show full text]
  • Podcast Show Notes & Transcript
    SHOW NOTES & TRANSCRIPT EPISODE SHOW NOTES Episode Title: Crystal Springs Dam Episode # & Date: Episode #24 – April 9, 2020 About this Episode: Peter uncovers the history of San Mateo’s great drinking water and the impressive Crystal Springs Dam that makes it possible. Episode Web Page: https://sanmateofocus.com/crystal-springs-dam/ EPISODE TRANSCRIPT This is San Mateo Focus, I’m Peter Radsliff filling in this week for Judy Gordon. When choosing what to present for this episode, it wasn’t lost on Judy and I how surreal life is right now and whether talking about local topics even made a difference in a San Mateo that is locked- down. But maybe because of this lack of normalcy, it’s all the more important to ensure we have some semblance of routine in our lives. It’s with that in mind that we offer ongoing stories of San Mateo’s history, culture, food, and things to do. Onto this week’s episode. When San Mateans hear the words Hetch Hetchy, most know it’s the name of a valley in Yosemite National Park about a four-hour drive away. Some might also know it’s the site of the impressive 431- foot tall O’Shaughnessy Dam that forms the Hetch Hetchy reservoir, which feeds the 160-mile long journey to Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir for us San Mateans to drink. What most probably don’t know is that the Lower Crystal Springs reservoir first existed because of the 141-foot tall Crystal Springs Dam that was built over San Mateo Creek in 1888, a full 35 years before O’Shaughnessy Dam opened in Hetch Hetchy! In this episode we’re going to explore the history of the Crystal Springs Dam and how vital it is to the lifestyle, economy, and safety of San Mateo.
    [Show full text]
  • AGENDA REGULAR MEETING of the BOARD of DIRECTORS District Board Room, 2890 Mosquito Road, Placerville, California February 25, 2019 — 9:00 A.M
    AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS District Board Room, 2890 Mosquito Road, Placerville, California February 25, 2019 — 9:00 A.M. Board of Directors Alan Day—Division 5 George Osborne—Division 1 President Vice President Pat Dwyer—Division 2 Michael Raffety—Division 3 Lori Anzini—Division 4 Director Director Director Executive Staff Jim Abercrombie Brian D. Poulsen, Jr. Jennifer Sullivan General Manager General Counsel Clerk to the Board Jesse Saich Brian Mueller Mark Price Communications Engineering Finance Jose Perez Tim Ranstrom Dan Corcoran Human Resources Information Technology Operations PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to comment about items not on the Agenda may do so during the public comment period. Those wishing to comment about items on the Agenda may do so when that item is heard and when the Board calls for public comment. Public comments are limited to five minutes per person. PUBLIC RECORDS DISTRIBUTED LESS THAN 72 HOURS BEFORE A MEETING: Any writing that is a public record and is distributed to all or a majority of the Board of Directors less than 72 hours before a meeting shall be available for immediate public inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board at the address shown above. Public records distributed during the meeting shall be made available at the meeting. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California law, it is the policy of El Dorado Irrigation District to offer its public programs, services, and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including individuals with disabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) evaluates the potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the Hetch Hetchy Communication System Upgrade Project (the “Proposed Action”) by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) in cooperation with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) co-lead agencies United States Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS), and the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS). The Purpose and Need, Project Objectives, and Proposed Action are described in Section 1.0 of this document. An EA/IS is intended to provide an objective, impartial source of information to be used by the lead agency and members of the public in their consideration of the project. The EA/IS itself does not determine whether or not the project will be approved, but only serves as an informational document in the planning and decision-making process. This joint environmental document was developed to meet the requirements of both NEPA and CEQA. This document contains a Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration (PMND) and an initial study (IS) prepared in accordance with the CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000 et seq. The purpose of this EA/IS is: (1) to determine whether implementation of the project would result in potentially significant effects to the environment, and (2) to incorporate mitigation measures into the project design, as necessary, to eliminate the project’s significant or potentially significant effects or reduce them to a point where they are clearly less than significant.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuolumne Agencies' Statement on Voluntary Agreements
    February 12, 2020 – Agenda Item #7G BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING February 7, 2020 Correspondence and media coverage of interest between January 27, 2020 and February 6, 2020 Correspondence To: Press Release From: TID, MID, and SFPUC Date: February 5, 2020 Subject: Tuolumne agencies’ statement on voluntary agreements Media Coverage Water Supply Conditions: Date: February 7, 2020 Source: FoxNews.com Article: What does atmospheric river mean? How the “Pineapple Express impacts the West Coast Date: February 3, 2020 Source: KJZZ 91.5 FM Article: Some Droughts Are “Perfect.” Here’s Why Date: February 3, 2020 Source: Mountain Democrat Article: Sierra snowpack dwindling after dry January Water Policy: Date: February 6, 2020 Source: Daily Journal Article: Bay funding gets House approval Date: February 6, 2020 Source: San Francisco Chronicle Article: Top EPA official in California says firing water “100% personal” Date: February 5, 2020 Source: Fish Sniffer Article: Voluntary Settlement Are Disastrous for Fish and the Ecosystem – and Are Not New Date: February 5, 2020 Source: Los Angeles Times Article: Newsom administration trying again for a river flow deal Date: February 5, 2020 Source: Maven’s Notebook Article: Metropolitan Bay Delta Committee: Delta Conveyance Update, Plus a Brief Update on the Voluntary Agreements February 12, 2020 – Agenda Item #7G Water Policy, cont’d.: Date: February 5, 2020 Source: Sacramento Bee Article: Newsom seeks peace with Trump in California water wars. Enviros are ready to fight Date: February 4, 2020 Source: Cal Matters Article: Gov. Newsom: California must get past differences on water. Voluntary agreements are the path forward.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter Regarding Request for Reconsideration-Heneghan (PDF)
    ~} • i • t KEVIN R. HENEGHAN ~..~ PARTNER DIRECT DIAL (415) 995-5801 DIRECT FAX (415) 995-3411 E-MAIL [email protected] August 6, 2012 Members, Ballot Simplification Committee Department of Elections City and County of San Francisco 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 48 San Francisco, CA 94102 Re: Comments on Request for Reconsideration of Approved Digest for "Water and Environment Plan" Dear Members of the Ballot Simplification Committee: On behalf of Save Hetch Hetchy, we would like to thank each of you for your thoughtful consideration of the ballot digest at last week's hearing. We write in opposition to the request for reconsideration filed by Spreck Rosekrans and Lance Olson. In short, we believe that the digest approved by the Ballot Simplification Committee( "BSC") correctly describes that the purpose of this measure is to develop a plan to drain the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and we urge the BSC to reject the request for reconsideration. The request for reconsideration urges the Ballot Simplification Committee to amend the digest to use "...end the use of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir..." rather than "...drain the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir..." when discussing the two-phase plan proposed by the initiative. The BSC should not accept this invitation to use euphemistic language when plain language will suffice and should maintain the use of "drain" which clearly conveys the purpose of the initiative. It is worth pointing out that Restore Hetch Hetchy( "RHH"), the nonprofit organization which has placed the measure on the ballot, regularly uses the term "drain" to describe the goal of RHH and its initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco and Hetch Hetchy Valley Gabriel L
    __________________________________________________________________ The Forbidden Water: San Francisco and Hetch Hetchy Valley Gabriel L. Mansfield Gabriel Mansfield is a sophomore history major from Onarga, Illinois. He wrote this paper for Dr. Lynne Curry’s HIS 2500: Historical Writing and Research Methods. After graduation Mr. Mansfield wishes to pursue a career in academic librarianship and double as “Duke Silver” at local jazz clubs. _____________________________________________________________________________ Northwest of the Yosemite Valley, Half Dome, and other iconic landmarks at Yosemite National Park in Northeastern California is a small valley known as Hetch Hetchy. This was a quiet spot that Sierra Club founder, nature lover, and preservationist John Muir described as “a grand landscape garden, [and] one of Nature’s rarest and most precious mountain temples.”1 At the beginning of the 20th Century, this beautiful expanse drew the attention of the city of San Francisco, which planned to dam the area to create a reservoir to use as a water source. Unfortunately for San Franciscans, this would not be an easy journey because of the stiff opposition to the city’s plan. This resistance would primarily be spearheaded by Muir, whose actions would ultimately not be enough to quell the city’s desire for this new water source. In late 1913, Congress would grant the city permission to begin building a reservoir in Hetch Hetchy Valley. Some of the few instrumental people in this effort to build the dam included: chief forester and conservationist Gifford Pinchot, and James Phelan, the mayor of San Francisco and a dam supporter from the time when the application was first submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Reason Foundation • 3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 400 • Los Angeles, CA 90034 Hetchy Watershed
    he history and current dynamics of the seventh largest be argued that they in fact make a “profit” on reselling Hetch Tmulti-utility system in the United States, San Fran- Hetchy water. The word “profit,” for a municipal agency, cisco’s Hetch Hetchy system, are complex to say the least. of course, is definitional and arguable, but relatively high- Many players are involved, including, but not limited to, salaries, secure jobs, lots of time and money to lobby Sacra- city, regional, state, and federal politicians; state and federal mento, plus many benefits cannot be discounted to zero. courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States; This is not good policy in the best interests of San Fran- and any number of multilevel governmental jurisdictions. cisco and its citizens and the takeover can only be turned Currently, the city of San Francisco has control over the back by vigorous leadership from the mayor to restore the operation of the Hetch Hetchy water and power system, but effectiveness of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commis- within the political sphere suburban interests have orches- sion (SFPUC), a city department that oversees the Hetch trated a well-organized effort to transfer this authority from Hetchy water and power system. Furthermore, the Hetch the city to a multi-headed public agency—BAWSCA—some- Hetchy power system should be reorganized to function as a what like the Metropolitan Water District of Southern competitive service directly to San Francisco households and California. Obviously, this can only be an overview of a very businesses. complicated situation. A Brief History of Hetch Hetchy Under this transfer of authority, San Francisco would become just one of 30 retail services with the whole- The ramifications of the Hetch Hetchy dilemma are sale water and power system governed by the recently rooted in its history.
    [Show full text]
  • 656955000 Public Utilities Commission of the City And
    NEW ISSUE - Book-Entry Only Ratings: S&P:"AA-" Moody's: "Aa2" (See "RATINGS.") In the opinion of Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, San Francisco, California, Bond Counsel to the SFPUC ("Bond Counsel''), interest on the 2019 Series ABC Bonds is exempt from personal income taxes imposed by the State of California. Interest on the 2019 Series ABC Bonds is includable in the gross income of the owners of the 2019 Series ABC Bonds for federal income tax purposes. Bond Counsel expresses no opinion regarding any other tax consequences related to the ownership or disposition of, or the accrual or receipt of interest on, the 2019 Series ABC Bonds. See "TAX MATTERS" herein. $656,955,000 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO San Francisco Water Revenue Bonds, 2019 Series ABC $622,580,000 $16,450,000 $17,925,000 2019 Sub-Series A Bonds 2019 Sub-Series B Bonds 2019 Sub-Series C Bonds (Refunding - Federally Taxable) (WSIP) (Refunding - Federally Taxable) (Refunding - Federally Taxable) (Green Bonds) (Hetch Hetchy) (Local Water Main) Climate Bond Certifi<>d Dated: Date of Delivery Due: November 1, as shown on inside front cover General. This cover page contains certain information for quick reference only. It is not intended to be a summary of the security or terms of the water revenue bonds captioned above. Potential investors are instructed to read the entire Official Statement, including the appendices hereto, to obtain information essential to making an informed investment decision. Authority for Issuance. The Public Utilities
    [Show full text]