Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flood Control Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alameda County Flood Control outlines $585M in critical projects affecting Hayward; benefit assessment ballot planned
Summary
Alameda County Flood Control staff presented a prioritized list of flood-control projects for Zones 2, 4 and 9, including work in northern Hayward, and said a zone-by-zone benefit assessment ballot is planned for spring after an engineer’s report and stakeholder outreach.
Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District staff and consultants told the Hayward City Council on Jan. 28 that a benefit-assessment ballot process is planned to fund prioritized flood-control projects in Zones 2, 4 and 9, and that several projects would affect small portions of northern Hayward.
Consultant Sybil Hatch said the districts grouped unmet capital needs and narrowed a long list to the most critical projects. She told the council the three-zone package estimates were about $272 million for Zone 2, $301 million for Zone 4 and $12 million for Zone 9, with district leaders proposing a benefit-assessment program phased over 20 years to pay for construction and long-term resilience work.
Why it matters: The district manages major channels; the city keeps curbs, gutters and storm drains. Hatch said improving creek capacity and reconstructing aging infrastructure would reduce flood risk, protect homes and businesses, and could remove some FEMA-designated floodplain maps — a change that can affect whether property owners need federally backed flood insurance.
Details, timeline and costs: Hatch said current benefit-assessment revenue is modest ("people pay about $25 a year for a typical single-family home in this area"), and the benefit assessment has not increased since 1993. The district plans a formal engineer’s report required under Proposition 218, board approval targeted around March, ballots mailed to property owners in April with a roughly 45-day return period, and a public hearing in May; the assessment would take effect only if property-owner ballots in a zone approve it.
Questions from the council focused on local impacts. Council members asked whether Hayward’s wastewater treatment plant would be affected (the district staff said no, the sewer plant is a sanitary system and was designed not to flood) and whether the district could implement projects without a passed assessment (staff said many critical projects would be unaffordable without the assessment and the district would pursue grants in tandem).
Ending: The presentation was informational; the council did not take formal action but multiple members invited continued coordination and localized outreach. District staff said they will finalize the engineer’s report, pursue stakeholder engagement and seek board approval ahead of the mailed ballot process.
