Page 3 - scvwa_sb634

— 3 — Ch. 833

Statutes of 1962). The agency is a State Water Project contractor and
provides wholesale water service to the Santa Clarita Valley region, which
has a population of over 270,000.
(c) The agency provides retail water service to a portion of the valley
through its Santa Clarita Water Division, which has approximately 30,700
service connections.
(d) Newhall County Water District is a county water district formed
pursuant to the County Water District Law (Division 12 (commencing with
Section 30000) of the Water Code). The district provides retail water service
in the valley to approximately 9,750 service connections.
(e) Castaic Lake Water Agency is the owner of all of the outstanding
stock of Valencia Water Company, which is a private company that provides
retail water service in the valley to approximately 31,350 service
connections.
(f) Representatives from the agency and the district began meeting in
2015 for the purpose of settling litigation between the entities arising from
the agency’s purchase of the company’s stock. As the settlement discussions
progressed, both sides began to see merit in and discuss the possibility of
combining the two entities into a new public agency.
(g) Beginning in February 2016, the agency and the district began
conducting an extensive evaluation and public process to determine whether
creating a new combined public entity is in the best interest of the residents
of the Santa Clarita Valley. This effort included a series of joint meetings
and public workshops to gather information and public input.
(h) The agency and the district also launched an Internet Web site
dedicated to the subject to inform the public and seek input, conducted two
public opinion surveys, commissioned an independent third party to conduct
a financial evaluation of a proposed new entity, prepared a comprehensive
joint new public water district formation study, and presented to many
groups and at events across the valley throughout 2016.
(i) The independent financial evaluation determined that both the agency
and the district are in sound financial condition and that the formation of a
new combined district would achieve operational cost efficiencies and
economies of scale in project costs and pave the way for savings. The public
opinion surveys also showed support for creating a new combined public
entity, and the joint study determined that in addition to foundational
efficiencies and cost savings, a new combined district would be much better
positioned to provide improved regional water resource management.
(j) On December 13, 2016, the agency and the district held a joint public
board meeting and voted to enter into an agreement to settle litigation
between the two agencies. The settlement agreement includes a commitment
to seek state legislation to combine the agency and the district into a new
public entity.
(k) The agency and the district concluded in the settlement agreement
that they conducted an open and transparent process and that ratepayer value
and multistakeholder benefits have been the central priority. Based on this
process, the agency and the district anticipate there will be multiple benefits

90

229