HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-037
1
2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
3 TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, OTHER AREA CITIES, AND
4 FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF A HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN.
RESOLUTION NO.
98-37
5
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
6 SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
7
8 authorized
SECTION 1.
The Mayor of the City of San Bernardino is hereby
and directed to
execute on
behalf of
said city a
9 Memorandum of Understanding (a copy of which is attached as
10 Attachment A), relating to the development and implementation of a
11 Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan.
12 / / / /
13 / / / /
14 / / / /
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
.98-37
1
RESOLUTION. . AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY, OTHER AREA CITIES, AND FEDERAL AND
2 STATE AGENCIES TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A HABITAT CONSERVATION
3 PLAN.
4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by
5 the Mayor and Common Council of the city of San Bernardino at a
6
7
joint regular
February
8 Council Members
9 NEGRETE
10 CURLIN
11 ARIAS
12 OBERHELMAN
13 DEVLIN
14 ANDERSON
15 MILLER
16
17
18
19 day of
meeting thereof, held on the 16th
day of
, 1998, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES NAYS
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ABSTAIN
ABSENT
~<~ 11- (~4"AJC
cit Clerk
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this~~
February
20
21
22 Approved as to form
23 and legal content:
24
JAMES F. PENMAN
City Attorney
25
26 By:
27
28
, 1998.
--;~ /tfc-u~
, . --...
Tom MInor, Mayor
city of San Bernardino
i)
1'/.
. u (;:"V'Vy><.t,,-,
2
98-3'7
ATTACHMENT "A"
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BY AND BETWEEN THE
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND GAME, THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, THE FIFTEEN AFFECTED
CITIES IN SOUTHWESTERN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AND ADDITIONAL
UNDERSIGNED PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING A HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN TO CONSERVE WILDLIFE AND PLANT SPECIES OF CONCERN
IN THE SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY.
This Memorandum of Understanding (Memorandum) is made and entered into as of the date
of signature by and among the County of San Bernardino and the undersigned cities, state
and federal agencies and other participating local agencies and public utilities. The
signatories collectively are referred to as the "Participating Agencies." The Participating
Agencies for the purposes of this Memorandum are public utilities and those agencies that
have local land use authority, are self-governing local agencies or are state or federal
agencies with land management authority and/or jurisdiction over plant and animal species
and natural habitats which are the subject of the Habitat Conservation Plan.
WHEREAS, the governmental Participating Agencies are among the local governments, self-
governing agencies, and state and federal agencies that have administrative responsibility or
regulatory authority over lands within the planning area that are subject to Federal and State
statutes including the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended, the California
Endangered Species Act of 1984 (CESA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the
Federal Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the California Natural Community Conservation
Planning Act, state planning and zoning laws, and local ordinances, and,
WHEREAS, these statutes direct the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("Service") and the
California Department of Fish and Game ("Department") to conserve, protect, and enhance
plant, fish, and wildlife species and their habitats from adverse effects resulting from public
and private development and actions, and,
WHEREAS, the various statutes and sources of authority under which the Participating
Agencies function do not empower any individual agency to implement a comprehensive,
multi-agency program for long-term viability of species of concern, and,
WHEREAS, the Participating Agencies recognize the need for comprehensive and
coordinated protection of species of concern, and the need to integrate their responsibilities
and authorities in a coordinated manner to ensure successful, timely, and mutually beneficial
resolution of issues involving species of concern, and,
WHEREAS, the state and federal agencies participating in this Memorandum will ensure that
their regulatory decisions and land use practices will comply with state and federal
environmental and endangered species statutes and regulations and that their management
actions will promote appropriate use and protection of sensitive biological areas under their
jurisdictions, and,
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
1
98-37
WHEREAS, the local governments participating in this Memorandum will ensure that their
land use decisions will comply with state and federal environmental and endangered species
statutes and regulations and that their governing actions will promote appropriate use and
protection of the areas identified as having important biological values in southwestern San
Bernardino County under their jurisdictions while promoting sound decision making practices
that attempt to balance the ecological and economic needs for the region, and
WHEREAS, efforts to coordinate conservation programs among local, State, and Federal
agencies in California are exemplified by the signing in 1991 of The Agreement on Biological
Diversity by twenty-seven Federal, State, and local agencies including the Bureau of Land
Management, the Service and the Department, and which Agreement provides a framework
for collaborative conservation planning on a bioregional or local scale, and,
WHEREAS, biological resources are important to all citizens of San Bernardino County,
including indigenous people and future residents,
THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed and understood that,
1.0 PURPOSES OF MEMORANDUM
The governmental Participating Agencies have administrative and/or regulatory
responsibilities over species of concern in the southwestern San Bernardino County. They
have voluntarily entered into this Memorandum for the following purposes:
1.1 To define their roles and responsibilities in the development and
implementation of a San Bernardino Valley Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP),
1.2 To develop a MSHCP that is consistent with the ESA, the CESA and the
Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, and ensures
conservation and protection of currently listed, proposed and candidate species and
species of concern and their habitats within the designated plan area. The boundaries
of the plan are described in Attachment A. The species proposed to be covered by
the plan are enumerated in Attachment B.
1.3 To provide definition and certainty to the planning process prior to substantial
investment of time and funding, and
1.4 To demonstrate a commitment to this process as the forum for a
comprehensive approach to resolving land use and endangered species conflicts.
2.0 PURPOSES OF THE PLAN
It is agreed that the plan will be a coordinated multi-agency, multi-species conservation plan
focusing on certain covered species within the plan boundaries. The purposes of the plan
are:
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
2
'98-37
2.1 Protection of Covered Species. To conserve and protect covered species and
the ecosystems on which they depend in perpetuity within southwestern San
Bernardino County pursuant to the ~ESA and CESA, and not preclude recovery of
listed species.
2.2 Provide Equity in Regulation. To provide a comprehensive means to
coordinate and standardize mitigation and compensation requirements so that public
and private actions will be regulated equally and consistently, reducing delays,
expenses, and regulatory duplication. It is intended that the plan will eliminate
uncertainty in developing private projects and will prescribe a system to ensure that
the costs of compensation and mitigation are applied equitably to all.
2.3 Reduce Cumulative Effects. To prescribe mitigation measures for private
development and agency actions to lessen or avoid cumulative impacts to the covered
species and eliminate, whenever possible, case-by-case review of impacts of projects
when consistent with the mitigation and compensation requirements prescribed by the
plan.
2.4 Incidental Take Permit. To obtain the necessary permits or take authorizations
from the Service and the Department to authorize the incidental take of listed species
covered in the plan in connection with otherwise lawful activities within the area
subject to the plan as provided by Section 10(a) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the
CESA.
2.5 Conservation (Pre-listing) Agreements. The MSHCP is intended to provide for
the long term preservation of covered species not currently listed as threatened or
endangered pursuant to the ESA or CESA such that should they become listed, the
Department and the Service shall, barring "unforeseen or extraordinary" conditions,
authorize incidental take for the species. To accomplish this, all non-listed species
being considered under this plan will be treated as if they are already listed.
"Unforeseen or extraordinary" conditions shall be defined in the MSHCP and its
Implementation Agreement, but such conditions, for the purposes of this MOU, are
generally understood to be: (1) environmental, demographic and/or genetic stochastic
circumstances that were not and could not be anticipated during the preparation of the
Plan, or (2) information developed during MSHCP implementation monitoring that
identifies consequences of MSHCP implementation procedures that may jeopardize
the continued existence of the species.
2.6 Provide Oversight. Control Measures and Standards of Success. To establish
a means in which the MSHCP will provide appropriate and successful methods of: (1)
reporting; (2) accounting audits; (3) funding (short and long term); (4) periodic and
independent biological evaluation; and (5) opportunities for adequate public
participation.
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
3
98-37
3.0 HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN COMPONENTS
3.1 The Plan. The principal component of this effort is the preparation of a
MSHCP. The plan will adopt and adhere to the best available information on or
methods of conservation biology and identify listed and unlisted species to be covered
in the plan. It will seek to minimize the threats that would lead to listing of presently
unlisted species covered in the plan and identify a reserve system, financing and
management which are sufficient to conserve the covered species. The plan will
include the development and analysis of appropriate biological data, an alternatives
analysis that includes, but is not limited to, an alternative that would not result in "take"
of listed species and the reasons why not selected, the delineation of sensitive habitat
-areas supporting the covered species addressed in the plan, and the identification of a
habitat preserve system that will support the continued existence of all species
proposed to be covered in the plan.
3.2 Section 10(a) Permit and 2081 Take Authorization Applications. Applications
, for permits under Section 10(a) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the CESA will be
submitted to the Service and the Department when the draft plan is issued. The plan
will function as the MSHCP for the purpose of making the permit applications. Plan
implementation will be described in an accompanying Implementation Agreement. It
is intended that the review and approval of the MSHCP by the Participating Agencies
will satisfy the requirements of applicable Federal and State environmental law. It is
the intent of the parties to eliminate project-by-project review of the effect of
development activities on the Covered Species, to the full extent authorized by law,
and to ensure that mitigation/compensation measures are not imposed beyond those
detailed in the MSHCP for such development activities provided conditions under
which the MSHCP was formulated have not significantly changed. Such a plan will
satisfy the Federal and State agencies with respect to the protection of the Covered
Species by, among other possible mechanisms, providing uniform and biologically
viable mitigation/compensation measures for application to development activities.
Such mitigation measures will be developed subject to the approval of Federal and
State agencies.
Individual landowners, groups of landowners, or development interests may choose to
comply with the terms and conditions of the MSHCP affecting their proposed activities.
Alternately, they may choose to prepare and submit their own conservation plan and
Section 10(a) permit application when their activities may result in incidental take of
federally listed species and, if State or local agency approval is required, they may
choose to submit their proposal outside the existing conservation plan umbrella.
3.3 Implementation Agreement. The conservation plan shall be implemented
through an enforceable agreement. The Agreement shall specify the operating
parameters of the conservation plan for the San Bernardino Valley. The Agreement
specifies the obligations, authorities, responsibilities, liabilities, benefits, rights, and
privileges of all parties or signatories to the subject conservation plan to be prepared
and submitted with the Section 10(a) permit and 2081 authorization applications. The
Agreement shall also provide for expeditious issuance of Section 10(a) permits and
2081 authorizations for Covered Species not currently listed pursuant to the ESA or
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
4
.98-37
CESA by incorporating "Pre-listing" commitments into the Agreement. It is intended
that the Agreement will be entered into by all Participating Agencies approving the
conservation plan, and any private party having an obligation or role in implementing
the conservation plan. The Agreement will provide specific mitigation commitments
for private parties and Public Agencies conducting otherwise lawful activities, and
assurances by the Participating Agencies to prevent the imposition of inconsistent or
overlapping mitigation/compensation requirements under any Federal, State, or local
law.
3.4 CEOA AND NEPA Compliance. Concurrent with preparation and release of the
draft and final plans, a joint environmental review document will be prepared and
- released which will satisfy Federal and State requirements.
3.5 Decision. The acceptance of the plan, the CEOA and NEPA environmental
documents and the Section 10(a) permit applications and the signing of an
Implementation Agreement by the Service will result in the issuance of Section 10(a)
permits, pursuant to Section 10(a) of the ESA, to the local agencies that are
participants in the planning effort for the public and private lands involved.
The acceptance of the plan and the CEOA environmental documentation and the
signing of an Implementation Agreement by the Department will result in the issuance
of 2081 take authorizations for the covered species that are adequately protected by
the plan pursuant to the CESA to local agencies that are participants in the plan for
the public and private lands involved. Other appropriate decision documents will be
issued by the Participating Agencies.
3.6 Implementation. Following or concurrent with the issuance of the biological
opinion, adoption of the plan, and receipt of the 10(a) permits and 2081 take
authorizations, the signatories will revise their land use plans and policies to conform
with the plan and the 10(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations or withdraw from the
program. Take authorizations may not be in effect until land use plans are amended.
Should any participant withdraw from the program, it may adversely affect the plan
area and covered species list and therefore may require appropriate modifications of
the plan. The signatories will also ensure that future plans, policies, and actions will
be in conformance with the plan and the Section 10(a) permits and 2081 take
authorizations.
Should the need arise to amend the plan in accordance with established procedures
due to new information or the development of more effective management
prescriptions or techniques, such amendment will occur through a cooperative effort
involving the agencies and the public in the southwestern San Bernardino County that
are subject to 10(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations or biological opinions that
may have already been issued.
3.7 Conservation Strategy. The plan shall maXimize the use of appropriate
publicly-owned lands, comply with legally mandated conservation measures, and
provide incentives for conservation of private lands (land acquisition, density transfers,
land swaps, tax incentives, mitigation banks, etc.).
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
5
-
98-37
3.8 Implementation Funding. The scope of the plan and any preserve system must
take into account realistic, affordable funding sources. The plan shall be based upon
tangible and affordable sources of funds and may provide for increased conservation
if other local, state or federal funding becomes available.
4.0 ROLE OF THE PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
4.1 General Roles and Responsibilities. The County of San Bernardino shall act as
the functional lead agency utilizing the assistance, support and cooperation of the
cities and local agencies in preparation of the plan. The county, cities and local
agencies shall have administrative responsibility for preparation and implementation of
- the plan. When and if a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is established to facilitate and
oversee the plan preparation or implementation, the lead responsibility shall pass to
the JPA. Until a JPA is established for that purpose, a Coordinating Committee shall
coordinate the preparation and implementation of the plan. The Coordinating
Committee shall consist of a Chairperson appointed by the Board of Supervisors, one
additional member appointed by the Board of Supervisors, one member appointed by
each of the other signatory Participating Agencies, and additional persons appointed
as follows. The Coordinating Committee may appoint additional persons to its
membership, on such terms as it deems appropriate, who may include representatives
of conservation organizations, industry, private interest groups, and public volunteers.
The Coordinating Committee shall provide for public involvement in plan preparation.
The Service and the Department shall participate in the planning process by
responding to work products and by providing direction on the acceptability of
proposed habitat preserve designs and implementation mechanisms.
4.2 Assistance to the County. Each Participating Agency agrees to provide to the
County, without cost to the County, the following information and assistance:
(a) Data. All relevant information it possesses for the lands within its
jurisdiction.
(b) Technical Assistance. Staff and support to assist with the following
planning tasks:
(1) Developing management prescriptions relevant to the land within
its jurisdiction.
(2) Providing effective liaison with adjacent jurisdictions.
(3) Developing and Implementing a public participation program to
ensure adequate public participation within its area of jurisdiction,
as required by State Law or local ordinance.
(4) Preparing 10(a) permit and 2081 take authorization applications.
(5) Providing any other assistance and/or support as might be
mutually agreed upon with the County.
(c) Point of Contact. Designate, in writing, the name of the individual
official(s) who will function as the primary agency contact for
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
6
.98-37
coordination with the County. The names, addresses, phone numbers
and affiliations of these individuals are set forth in Attachment C.
4.3 Plan Conformance. In order to be a permittee, Participating Agencies will
ensure that their land use plans and policies are revised to conform with the approved
plan and the 10(a) permits and 2081 take authorizations, and any other applicable
regional, state or federal resource management plans.
4.4 Plan Preparation Funding. Funding for this plan will come from a variety of
sources - Participating Agency contributions, endowments from private or non-profit
entities, matching grant programs such as offered by the National Fish and Wildlife
- Foundation,' and other State and Federal funds such as those established by the
California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act, the lntermodel Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Traffic Management Environmental
Enhancement (TMEE) program and Land and Water Conservation Fund program.
The Participating Agencies will also provide a fair share contribution to funding the
plan preparation and implementation by allocating appropriate staff and support
services.
4.5 Proposed Schedule. Signatories acknowledge that time is of the essence and
hereby agree to make their best efforts to complete and obtain final approval of the
plan by a target date of December 31, 2000. A timeline setting forth specific dates for
the completion of each identified task necessary to complete the plan is contained in
Attachment D.
4.6 Environmental Compliance. In recognition of the goal of achieving the timely
preparation and approval of the plan, all Participating Agencies hereby agree that they
will submit any and all comments on the appropriate environmental documentation on
a timely basis, unless otherwise provided by law.
5.0 ROLE OF THE COUNTY
The County of San Bernardino agrees to provide the following resources and to perform the
following functions according to the funding mechanisms agreed to by the cities, local
agencies, county and other interested parties:
5.1 Lead Agency. Act as lead agency for the plan. As lead agency, the County will
provide overall leadership and coordination among the Participating Agencies in the
development of this plan. This includes functioning as Local Lead Agency in
complying with the CEQA in conjunction with the Department and coordinating NEPA
compliance in coordination with the Service.
5.2 Planning Team Personnel. Provide the primary members of the planning team.
5.3 Facilities Equioment and Support. Provide office facilities to house the planning
team and provide necessary support such as office machine supplies, etc. The County
also agrees to provide automated support, such as word processing and geographic
information system products directly or through contracts.
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
7
98-37
5.4 Data. Provide any relevant data in its possession for the use of the planning
team and the Participating Agencies and secure additional data on public lands as
needed to allow completion of the plan and encourage private landowner participation.
The County also agrees to participate in the analysis of the data and formulation of
management prescriptions.
5.5 Public Participation. Assume lead responsibilities for ensuring adequate public
participation by affected parties and interests and actively seek overall public
participation in the planning effort.
- 5.6 Point of Contact. Designate, in writing, the name of the person designated as
the primary County contact for the planning effort.
5.7 Endangered Species Acts. Submit the draft plan and draft environmental
compliance documentation to the Service and the Department for analysis, review,
and comments. The County will then submit final applications to the Service and the
Department for review and processing.
5.8 Plan Preparation Funding. Funding for this plan will be as described in Section
4.4 above. As a Participating Agency, the County will also provide a fair share
contribution to funding the plan preparation and implementation by allocating
appropriate staff and support services.
6.0 ROLE OF THE U.S. FISH AND WilDLIFE SERVICE AND THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
6.1 Technical Assistance Biol09ical Data and Advice. The Service and the
Department shall advise and make available all public information on the species and
their habitats and shall agree to a final list of species and habitats to be addressed
during the initial stages of plan preparation. The Service will also provide guidance on
what constitutes the best available scientific and commercial information for the
purpose of permit applications.
6.2 Interim Work Product Approval. The Service and the Department shall provide
comments and guidance (in writing) on interim work products at major milestones in
the planning process so as to contribute to an efficient, cost-effective MSHCP that is
capable of being completed according to the schedule in Attachment D. The following
actions are identified as major milestones for the purpose of this paragraph: (1)
agreement on the proposed list of species to be covered in the plan, (2) agreement on
the list of associated habitats or ecosystems, (3) agreement on scientific criteria for
conducting field surveys and the format for compiling and reporting information, (4) a
determination of what constitutes mitigation to the maximum extent practicable, (5)
preliminary approval of a proposed preserve system and related Implementation
Agreement, and (6) agreement on of the appropriate environmental documentation for
the plan.
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
8
I 98-37
To assist in providing data pertaining to current or future development plans of
individual projects during the preparation of the conservation plan, and to provide
opportunities to minimize negative impacts upon long-term conservation planning and
the viability of biological resources, and to assist in the preparation of the conservation
plan and its ultimate implementation, the Participating Agencies will utilize the Interim
Project Review Process, included as Attachment F, to consider the potential effects of
individual projects on the MSHCP.
6.3 Issuance of Section 101a) Permits and 2081 Take Authorizations. The Service
and the Department agree to issue the required permits and take authorizations for
listed species to the local agencies upon finding that the plan and permit/authorization
- applications meet the criteria for issuance of an incidental take permit and
authorization contained in Section 10(a)(2)(8) of the ESA and Section 2081 of the
Public Resources Code for those species through the establishment of a preserve
system that conserves adequate habitat and provides for the retention and
management of such preserves in perpetuity. The Service and the Department also
agree to provide for expedited issuance of Section 10(a) permits and 2081
authorizations for Covered Species not currently listed pursuant to the ESA or CESA
in the event that a non-listed covered species is listed in the future.
6.4 Assurances to Plan Participants. The approved plan shall provide assurances
to Participating Agencies and landowners that if the plan is implemented as proposed,
no additional land or financial compensation will be sought from them without their
consent if "unforeseen" or "extraordinary" circumstances should arise with respect to
either listed or unlisted species that are covered by the properly functioning plan. It is
understood that species not covered by the plan will not be afforded the same
assurances as those that are covered. However, in the event that a species not
addressed in the MSHCP is listed at some future date, the Service and the
Department agree to use the MSHCP as a forum for addressing the conservation
needs of the species as required by the ESA and CESA in the same manner that
Covered Species have been addressed. All Participating Agencies will make every
attempt at accommodating the conservation requirements of the newly listed species
within the existing conservation strategies and preserves of the MSHCP.
7.0 ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
7.1 Good Faith. This Memorandum is entered into freely and in good faith by the
signatory agencies. Each agency affirms that execution of this document is within its
legal purview and agrees to fulfill the role slated herein and any other tasks and
responsibilities incumbent upon Participating Agencies. All of the Participating
Agencies by signature to this Memorandum agree to diligently pursue completion of
the subject MSHCP and endorse consensus decisions of the Coordinating Committee
as long as the proposed actions are within the statutory and regulatory ability of their
respective agency.
7.2 Interim Proiect Reviews and Approvals. All Participating Agencies recognize
that planning efforts undertaken pursuant to this Memorandum can be prolonged
beyond anticipated planning schedules due to various unforeseen circumstances. All
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
9
98-37
parties agree that interim land use actions shall be considered on a case by case
basis within the purview of each agencies' individual jurisdiction and in compliance
with existing laws and regulations. The MSHCP planning effort shall not be cause to
create a "de facto" moratorium for on-going, otherwise legally adequate programs and
activities. All permit applications processed during the period of the MSHCP
development will be evaluated on their individual merits and in consideration of
cumulative impacts to the species and their habitat. Appropriate incentives to land
holders for the protection on non-listed species may be achieved through
consideration of density transfers, land swaps within the MSHCP area, "Debt for
Nature" exchanges, tax incentives through gifts, donations and conservation
e"asements, mitigation banks and purchase of affected property.
7.3 Future Listings. It is understood by all parties that the MSHCP planning
process and the plan itself, when adopted, is not a substitute for necessary listings of
species pursuant to the ESA or CESA. Rather, for all currently unlisted species
covered by the approved plan, it is understood that, should future listings occur, the
Service and Department shall not require the commitment of additional land or
financial compensation beyond the level of mitigation which was otherwise adequately
provided for covered species under the terms of the properly functioning plan.
7.4 Limit of Authority and Funding. The signatory agencies agree and understand
that performance under this agreement by any party is dependent upon the lawful
appropriation, availability, and allocation of funds by proper authorities and that this
agreement does not constitute a commitment of funds, which must be made by
separate action of the appropriate officials of each party.
7.5 Public Involvement. It is the intent of the parties to the Memorandum that the
public will be afforded sufficient opportunity to provide input to the MSHCP, not only
during the required CEQA and NEPA review process, but during the scoping and
planning process, as well.
7.6 Effective Date of Agreement. This agreement shall take effect upon the dates
of signature.
7.7 Amendment of This Memorandum. This Memorandum may be amended at
any time with the concurrence of all parties. Approved amendments must be in writing.
7.8 Termination. This agreement shall automatically terminate upon approval and
adoption of the plan or on December 31, 2000, which ever occurs first, unless
extended as provided in Paragraph 7.7 above.
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
10
98-37
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HERETO have executed this Memorandum, on the
date(s) set forth below, as of the day and year first above written,
By
Date
Chair,
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors and Flood Control District
San Bernardino, California
By
Date
- Mayor,
City of Chino
Chino, California
By
Date
Mayor,
City of Chino Hills
Chino Hills, California
By
Date
Mayor,
City of Colton
Colton, California
By
Date
Mayor,
City of Fontana
Fontana, California
By
Date
Mayor,
City of Grand Terrace
Grand Terrace, California
By
Date
Mayor,
City of Highland
Highland, California
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
11
98-37
By
Mayor,
City of Lorna Linda
Lorna Linda, California
By
Mayor,
City of Montclair
Montclair, California
By
Mayor,
City of Ontario
Ontario, California
By
Mayor,
City of Rancho Cucarnonga
Rancho Cucarnonga, California
By
Mayor,
City of Redlands
Redlands, California
By
Mayor,
City of Rialto
Rialto, California
By
Mayor,
City of San Bernardino
San Bernardino, California
By
Mayor,
City of Upland
Upland, California
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
12
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
98-3-7
By
By
By
By
By
By
By
By
By
Mayor,
City of Yucaipa
Yucaipa, California
Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Carlsbad Field Office
California State Director,
Bureau of Land Management
District Engineer,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Forest Supervisor, San Bernardino National Forest
U.S. Forest Service
Director,
California Department of Fish and Game
Region Director,
Southern California Edison Company
District Manager,
Southern California Gas Company
Regional Director,
Metropolitan Water District
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
13
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
By
By
98-37
Board President,
San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District
Board President,
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District
MSHCP MOU - Revised 12-8-97
14
Date
Date
98-37
ATTACHMENT A
BOUNDARIES OF THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
The Habitat Conservation Plan for the San Bernardino Valley will encompass the
ar.ea generally bounded by the county lines between San Bernardino County and
_Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside Counties on the west and south and the San
Bernardino National Forest Boundary on the north and east.
A-1
98-37
ATTACHMENT B
List of Species Proposed to Be Coverd in the
Valley-Wide Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
98-37
Status
Species Federal State
Coast horned lizard FC2/FSS CSC
Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei
San Bernardino ring-necked snake FC2/FSS
Diadophis punctatus modestus
Coastal rosy boa FC2/FSS
Lichanura trivirgata rosafusca
Coast patch-nosed snake FC2/FSS CSC
Salvadora hexalipis virgultea
Two-striped garter snake FC2/FSS
Thamnophis hammondii
Birds
White-tailed kite CFP
Elanus leucurus
Northern harrier CFP
Circus cyaneus
Sharp-shinned hawk FSS CSC
Accipiter striatus
Cooper's Hawk FSS CSC
Accipiter cooperii
Ferruginous hawk FC2 CSC
Buteo regalis
Golden eagle CSC
Aquila chrysaetos canadensis
American peregrine falcon FE SE
Falco peregrinatus
Prairie falcon FSS CSC
Bill;Q mexicanus
B-2
'98 - 37
Status
Species Federal State
Western Burrowing owl FC2 CSC
Speotyto cunicularia hypugea
Long-eared owl CSC
6s.iQ otus
Southwestern willow flycatcher PE/FSS SE
Empidonax 1@i.!lli extimus
California horned lark FC3
Eremophila alpestris actia
Coastal cactus wren FC3B CSC
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus
California gnatcatcher FT/FSS CSC
Polioptila californica
Least's Bell's vireo FE SE
Vireo bellii pusillus
California yellow warbler CSC
Oendroica oetechia brewsteri
Yellow-breasted chat CSC
Icteria Y.iNn
California rufous-crowned sparrow FC2/FSS CSC
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
Bell's sage sparrow FC2 CSC
Amphispiza ~ belli
Tricolored blackbird FC2 CSC
Agelaius tricolor
Mammals
Greater mastiff-bat FC2 CSC
Eumops perotis californicus
B-3
98-37
Status
Species Federal State
San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit FC2 CSC
Lepus californicus bennettii
Los Angeles pocket mouse FC2 CSC
Perognathus longimembris brevinasus
San Diego pocket mouse FC2 CSC
Chaetodipus fgJJgx fgJlgx
San Bernardino kangroo rat FC2 CSC
Dipodomys merriami parvus
Southern grasshopper mouse FC2 CSC
Onychomys torrid us ramona
San Diego desert wood rat FC2 CSC
Neotoma lepida intermedia
B-4
98-37
Status
Family
Species Federal State CNPS
Plants
Marsh sandwort CRY FE SE 18
Arenaria paludicola
Coulter's saltbush CHN 1B
Atriplex coulteri
Parish's britllescale CHN FC2 1B
Atriplex parishii
Nevin's barberry BER FC1 SE 18
Berberis nevinii
Round-leaved boykinia SAX 4
Boykinia rotundifolia
Thread-leaved brodiaea L1L FC1 SE 1B
Brodiaea filifolia
Brewer's calandrinia POR 4
Calandrinia breweri
Plummer's lily L1L 1B
Calochortus plummerae
Peninsular spineflower PLG 4
Chorizanthe leptotheca
Parish's spineflower PLG FC2
Chorizanthe ~ var. ~
Prostrate spineflower PLG 4
Chorizanthe procumbens
Saw-grass CYP 18 or 2
Cladium californicum
Slender-horned spineflower PLG FE SE
Dodecahema leptoceras
8-5
B-6
98-37
Status Codes:
FE
FT
PE
FC1
FC2
FSS
SE
SR
CSC
CFP
CNPS
NOTE:
Listed as Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
Listed as Threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
Proposed Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
Category 1 candidate for federal listing for which substantial information on
the biological vulnerability and threat supports the appropriateness of
proposing the species to be listed as endangered or threatened.
Category 2 candidate for federal listing for which insufficient biological
information exists to support listing.
Forest Service Sensitive Species
Listed as Endangered by the California Department of Fish and Game
Listed as Rare by the California Department of Fish and Game
California Department of Fish and Game "Species of Special Concern"
California Fully Protected
California Native Plant Society
1A Plants presumed to be extinct.
1 B Plants that are rare, threatened or endangered.
2 Plants that are rare, threatened or endangered in California, but
common elsewhere.
3 Plants for which insufficient data is available.
4 Plants that are of limited distribution in California and their
susceptibility to threat appears low at this time.
Appearance of a species on this list does not imply the presence or
occurrence of the species in all jurisdictions located within the boundaries
(Attachment A) of the MSHCP.
B-7
98-37
ATTACHMENT C
LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES AND POINT OF CONTACT
San Bernardino County
Land Use Services Department
Randy Scott, Planning Manager
385 N. Arrowhead Ave., Third Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182
(909) 387-4146
(909) 387-3223 (FAX)
City of Highland
Planning Department
Steve Walker, City Planner
26985 East Base Line Avenue
Highland, CA 92346
(909) 864-6861 Ex!. 215
(909) 862-3180 (FAX)
City of Chino
Community Development Department
Chuck Coe, Director
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91708
(909) 590-5520
(909) 591-6829 (FAX)
City of Loma Linda
Community Development Department
Dan Smith, Director
25541 Barton Road
Loma Linda, CA 92354
(909) 799-2830
(909) 799-2890 (FAX)
City of Chino Hills
Community Development Department
Bruce Coleman, Director
2001 Grand Avenue
Chino Hills, CA 91709-4869
(909) 590-1511 Ex!. 223
(909) 590-5646 (FAX)
City of Montclair
Community Development Department
Hal Fredericksen, City Planner
5111 Benito Street
Montclair, CA 91763-0808
(909) 625-9431
(909) 621-1584 (FAX)
City of Colton
Community Development Department
David Zamora, Director
650 North La Cadena Drive
Colton, CA 92324-2893
(909) 370-5065
(909) 370-5154 (FAX)
City of Ontario
Planning Department
Jerry Blum, City Planner
303 East "B" Street, Civic Center
Ontario, CA 91764
(909) 391-2506
(909) 391-0692 (FAX)
City of Fontana
Community Development Department
Frank Schuma, Director
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92334
(909) 350-6724
(909) 350-7691 (FAX)
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
Brad Buller, City Planner
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 989-1851
(909) 948-1648 (FAX)
City of Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
Patrizia Materassi, Director
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
(909) 824-6621
(909) 783-7629 (FAX)
City of Redlands
Planning Department
Jeff Shaw, Director
30 Cajon Street
Redlands, CA 92373
(909) 798-7555
(909) 798-7503 (FAX)
C-1
,
98-37
City of Rialto
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Donn Montag, Principal Planner
150 South Palm Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376
(909) 421-7218
(909) 873-4814 (FAX)
City of San Bernardino
Department of Planning and Building
Services
Micahael Hays, Director
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92402
(909) 384-5071
(909) 384-5461 (FAX)
City of Upland
Community Development Department
Jeff Bloom, Director
460 North Euclid Avenue
Upland, CA 91785
(909) 931-4144
(909) 931-4123 (FAX)
City of Yucaipa
Community Development Department
John McMains, Director
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399
(909) 797-2489 Ext. 231
(909) 790-9203 (FAX)
C-2
98-37
Cl
f-
Z
w
:2
:r:
o
~
C
.!!!
a.
C
o
+:iQ.)
co
2:-5
Q) Q)
m.r.
C 0
O(J)
0-0
-Q)
19m
.- 0
.00.
CO 0
:r: .....
mo.
Q)-O
.- C
1rl CO
o.Q)
(J) C
, .-
+:i~
- :::J
~O
>-c
Q).Q
--
Iii ~
>co
o a.
C l!!
.- a.
"E
CO C
C CO
Qio.
m
C
CO
(J)
m
.r.
-
C
o
E
LO
m
Q) m
E ~
CO'en
<.9 :::J
-0.0
clii
CO 0
.r.O
m....!
~i.i:cn
c _ a.
Q) 0 :::J
E_o
Q) C .....
Q)Q)O)
.....E-
0) 1:: CO
~coc
-o.Q)
C Q) E
~ Cl C
a.coe
o 'c 'S
Q) ..... C
>.EQ)
Q)'-
Cllii-g
cOra
co"m
a. l!l.!!1
.- :=:
-02:=
CQ)-
CO (J) :::J
C Q) m
o ~.!!1
+:o=co
ra _ C
~~ ~
..... -0 ra
oc-
8rafl
>-.r. 0
o.~ ....!
C u.. m
Q) . Q)
C) U) ;;
~=>C3
Q)
-
C
..-
m
.r.
-
C
o
E
LO
N
....
C
Q)
C
o
a.
E
o
o
~
-0
~
C
o
:0:-
ra
o
>-l;:
:0 "C
E ~~
Q)-o(J)
m_-
m Q) ",
......_ v
......u..~
Q) ._~
mc.o
~2E
ra ra Q)
-Ern
ra m
Clara
-
o.:::Jo.
.- ra ra
~ra:2
.....-
Q)CU";"';-
C Cl c
:= . - ~
O~o
-0 a. a.
c ra E
ra ..... 0
....! 0) 0
o
-O-Q)
co>
_.r. ._
'u 0.-
_ ra
t"Orom
.2 "C: 0)
O)Q)Q)
..Q~>
o
ai
N
m
.r.
-
c
o
E
CJ)
..-
c
o
:0:-
ra
.....
ra
a.
l!!
a.
c
ra
a.
C')
m
.r.
-
c
o
E
ex>
Q)
o
c
.~
a.
E
o
o
Iii
-
c
Q)
E
c
e
'S
c
W
'<t
m
.r.
-
c
o
E
'<t
-
c
Q)
E
Q)
Q)
.....
0)
~
c
o
:0:-
ra
-
c
Q)
E
Q)
a.
E
-0
C
co
C
o
:0:-
ra
.....
co
a.
l!!
a.
-
E
.....
Q)
a.
o
:0:-
ra
E
E
~
0)
o
.....
a.
LO
.r.
-
c
o
E
......
c
o
:0:-
a.
o
-0
~
C
ra
a.
(0
Q)
:::J
-0
Q)
.r.
o
(J)
Q)
>
:0:-
ra
-
c
~
<0
-
....
-
co
-
on
-
....
-
N",
>=
N
-
-
-
o
'"
<0
....
co
~.
':"i"',
N
;-~
o
::;;
c:
~
~
,,'"
00.
C c: ~
.Q .~ c..
C6 c..~
.5 ~ E E
"C.c 0....
~oE6()~
en 0 Q,) _
<<IO~16S~a
}-tj'<((ij1i3aJ:;
cmc.eEg.
~~~c:E"O
co.ca..ef!<(
'-<<Ie.-tne
~iO.!!i;e.!!
.Eoa..wc..a..
co
'"
on
'"
....
'"
'"
'"
N
'"
-
'"
o
'"
'"
N
<0
N
....
N
co
N
-
6
"'on
>3.N
....
N
'"
N
N
N
N
o
N
N",
>:--
o
::;;
c:
~
~
,,'"
00.
c: c:e
.Q .~ a..
~ a.~
._.2;> E E
"E.c 0
t/')oEcou~
"ti 0 ~:;:: - u c:
cuUcn<<lS:;:o
I- ~< m ~ "':=
cmQ.eEg.
m;ecE"O
gt.cD..e!<(
'-=COc.-CJc
.!!1U.!!~e.!!
EOa..wo.a..
98-37
ATTACHMENT E
-
DEFINITIONS
1. Covered Species. Plant and animal species which will be found adequately
protected from extirpation by the implementation of the MSHCP, and meet
issuance criteria for a 10(a) permit.
2. Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). A plan developed to allow
incidental take of species as described in Section 10(a)(1)(8) of the federal
- Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended.
3. Implementing AgreemenHs). A contract entered into by the Wildlife Agencies
and a Local Jurisdiction in which the parties agree to implement the conditions
and actions described in a Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
4. Listed Species. Plant and animal species protected by listing as threatened
or endangered species by one or both of the Federal and State Endangered
Species Acts.
5. Preserve System. Area to be perpetually preserved for its habitat value through
the coordinated implementation of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
6. Public Land. Land in the ownership or perpetual control of a local, State or
federal government agency.
7. Species of Concern. Plant and animal species that are listed as endangered or
threatened pursuant to the Federal or State Endangered Species Acts, a
candidate species proposed to be listed pursuant to these acts, or rare species
in the plan area.
8. Take Authorization. A term to describe the collective permits, authorizations,
and agreements which will be issued by the Service or the Department to
participating local jurisdiction permittees.
Take authorizations may be given by the Service and the Department:
(a) The Service may issue take authorizations under ESA Section
1 0(a)(1 )(8), and Section 4(d) for the California gnatcatcher.
(b) The Department may issue take authorizations under California
Fish and Game Code Sections 2081 for candidate, threatened, and
endangered species; and Section 2835 for the NCCP Act of 1992.
E-1
98-37
ATTACHMENT F
INTERIM PROJECT REVIEW GUIDELINES
This document establishes an agreement among the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
("Service"), the California Department of Fish and Game ("Department") and all other
federal, state and local agencies participating in the San Bernardino Valley Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) pertaining to an Interim Project Review
Process to be utilized during the preparation of the Plan.
The Interim Project Review Guidelines (IPRG) have two related purposes: (1) to ensure
early review and consideration of proposed projects by the Service and the Department
so that projects which could preclude the successful development of the MSHCP will be
identified at the earliest possible point in the development review process, and (2) to
provide a opportunity for dialogue between the lead agency, the project applicant and
the regulatory agencies to explore alternatives or mitigation measures which could
minimize and mitigate potential project impacts.
Local Agencies have identified that significant problems have arisen in the past when
comments on proposed projects are not received from the Department of Fish and
Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service until very late in the lead agency's decision-
making process. To address this problem with respect to projects which may have the
potential to preclude long-term conservation strategies addressed in the MSHCP or
impact the viability of biological resources, the Service and the Department are
committing to meet with the appropriate project proponent at the earliest feasible point.
Early identification of potential impacts will assist in the preparation of environmental
documents for the project and provide the opportunity to identify potential project
alternatives and mitigation measures for consideration in compliance with Public
Resources S 21080.3(a).
The IPRG specifically does not create an additional layer of project review nor to confer
any additional authority on the Department, the Service or lead agency. The
recommendations of the Service and Department are advisory; the final decision of
whether to approve, modify, or deny a project remains in the hands of the lead agency
pursuant to existing laws.
A. Guidelines for Projects to Be Included in the Review Process
Each lead agency and/or project proponent shall determine whether a project should be
reviewed pursuant to the IPRG. Generally, the lead agency or project proponent may
consider that a project as defined by CEQA S 21065, except those projects statutory or
categorically exempt from CEQA, located within the sensitive habitat areas of the
MSHCP boundaries, has the potential to preclude long term preservation planning or
impact the viability of biological resources, and it is appropriate to utilize the IPRG. The
lead agency retains the discretion to determine that a project within the plan area,
because of the project's characteristics, has no impact on the viability of biological
resources and would not preclude long term preservation planning.
F-1
98-37
B. Overview of the Process/Relationship to CEQA and NEPA
The Service and the Department shall each identify a lead person for project review
and meeting attendance. The lead person for the County and each city shall be the
Planning Director or the Planning Director's designee. Other Participating Agency will
be determined on an as-needed basis. The Planning Director/designee or project
proponent shall initiate consultation by notifying the designated representative of the
Service and the Department of the need for a review meeting for one or several
specified projects. Where the project proponent is a private landowner/developer, the
PlannJng Director for the lead agency shall also be notified. Prior to the project review
meeting, the Planning Director/designee or project proponent shall provide basic
information (as delineated under "Procedures" below) to the Service and the
Department.
For purposes of CEQA, the project review meeting and any related activities (site visits,
follow-up correspondence etc.) shall constitute a consultation pursuant to Public
Resources Code 9210BO.3(A). If possible at the meeting, but otherwise in not more
than 30 days following the meeting or such shorter period of time as shall be necessary
to enable the lead agency to comply with Title 14 California Code of Regulations
915102, the Service and the Department shall provide input to the lead agency as to
whether either agency believes the project may have the potential to preclude long-term
preservation planning or impact the viability of a biological resource. The Service and
the Department shall also indicate specific issues which either believe should be
addressed; suggest any studies they believe may be necessary to assess project
impacts to specific biological resources; and propose any mitigation measures or
project alternatives which they believe should be considered, which may include such
incentives to land holders as density transfers, land swaps within the MSHCP area,
"Debt for Nature" exchanges, tax incentives through gifts, donations and conservation
easements, mitigation banks and purchase of affected property.
When either the Service or the Department identifies the potential for a project to
preclude long-term preservation planning and that the project will have a significant
impact on biological resources and identifies either project alternatives and/or mitigation
measures, which are addressed in a Mitigated Negative Declaration or a Draft
Environmental Impact Report, the lead agency/project proponent, the Service and the
Department may agree to schedule an additional meeting to discuss the Negative
Declaration or the Draft Environmental Impact Report within 30 days after the
preparation and release of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and within 45 days after
the preparation and release of a Draft Environmental Impact Report.
It is recognized that implementing the IPRG is a voluntary cooperative process and
neither confers any authority not granted by existing planning and environmental laws,
nor negates any authority so granted. The IPRG is intended only to facilitate
cooperation among the lead agencies, the resource agencies and project applicants to
ensure timely review of projects which have the potential to preclude long term
preservation planning and to facilitate the resolution of issues which might affect the
successful preparation of the MSHCP.
F-2
98=37
C. PROCEDURES
1. At least three weeks prior to the desired IPRG meeting date the Planning
Director/designee or project proponent shall notify the Service and the
department and the MSHCP contact person in writing of any project(s) which the
lead agency or project proponent wishes to have reviewed at the IPRG meeting.
For each project, the lead agency/project proponent will transmit two copies of
each of the following:
. a location map on a 7.5' quad sheet identifying the project site
. a site plan or other illustration depicting the project as proposed
. the project application or other summary sheet identifying existing general
plan designation and zoning, and any proposed changes; existing land use
on the site; and the type and intensity of land use proposed.
. the Initial Study or Environmental Assessment and a biological resource
survey if one has been prepared; if one has not been prepared then a
description of the site including vegetation, presence of a floodplain, blueline
stream, or other environmental resource, hazard or constraint, and a list of
sensitive species which have the potential to occur on site.
. Any other information deemed pertinent by the lead agency.
2. The lead agency or project proponent shall be responsible for notifying the other
party of the date, time, and location of the IPRG review meeting, if the
attendance of the project applicant is desired.
3. At the review meeting, the lead agency, project proponent, the Service and the
Department will have the opportunity to discuss the project, answer questions,
etc. A representative from an adjacent jurisdiction which may be affected by the
proposed project may also attend the meeting at that jurisdiction's discretion. At
the review meeting if possible, otherwise in not more than 30 days after the
review meeting, the Service and the Department representatives shall provide
the following information to the lead agency and the project applicant:
. A statement as to whether, in the agency's opinion:
The project will not preclude long term conservation planning or
adversely impact the viability of a species.
The project has the potential to preclude long term conservation
planning or adversely impact the viability of a species and
additional studies on specific species may be necessary, and
project alternatives and/or mitigation measures need to be
assessed in the environmental review process.
4. A project may be scheduled for an additional IPRG meeting at an appropriate
date if there is a need for the Service or the Department to respond to a Draft
Environmental Impact Report or Mitigated Negative Declaration.
F-3