Board of Directors
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
June 17, 2002
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM in the Monterey City Council Chambers.
Kris Lindstrom, Chair - Division 4
Alexander "Zan" Henson, Vice Chair - Division 5
Alvin Edwards - Division 1
Judi Lehman - Division 2
Molly Erickson - Division 3
David Pendergrass - Mayoral Representative
David Potter - Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Directors Absent: None
District Staff Present:
Ernesto A. Avila - General Manager
Rick Dickhaut - Chief Financial Officer
Stephanie Pintar - Water Demand Manager
Joseph Oliver - Water Resources Manager
Andy Bell - Planning and Engineering Manager
Henrietta Stern - Project Manager
Darby Fuerst - Senior Hydrologist
Cynthia Schmidlin - Human Resources Specialist
Arlene Tavani - Executive Assistant
District Counsel Present: David C. Laredo
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
The assembly recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The following comments were directed to the Board during the Oral Communications period. (1) Gillian Taylor, Ventana Chapter of the Sierra Club, asked if the District had received any response to questions it raised about the Monterra Ranch and Cañada Woods water distribution systems in a letter dated January 18, 2002. (2) David Dilworth, Helping Our Peninsula's Environment, expressed support for comments made by Gillian Taylor. He requested that the Board notice all interagency meetings that the District participates in. He asked that this issue be placed on a future Board meeting agenda. (3) John Fischer, resident of Pacific Grove, clarified the statement he made at the May 20, 2002 Board meeting. He noted that the Pebble Beach Company must pay $1 million per year for the next 27 years to fund the CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project. (4) Mark Beique asked the Board to announce its position on the proposed merger between the California-American Water Company and Thames Water Plc. (5) Roy Thomas, Carmel River Steelhead Association (CRSA), suggested that the California-American Water Company might be able to repair the well at the Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility quickly, before the District Board has a chance to approve funding for District staff to proceed with repairs. He asked if the District had a program in effect to monitor compliance with drought tolerant landscape requirements. (6) Nilda Argandoña introduced David Murdoch, owner of IntelEco a company that manufactures water distillation equipment. Mr. Murdoch gave a brief description of the RM100 Vacuum Distiller manufactured by IntelEco that is designed to purify and recycle household grey water. Information provided by Mr. Murdoch is on file at the District office. (7) William Woodworth asked the Board of Directors if the District was working to obtain water from the Cal-Fed Program, and if the promotion of cisterns for stormwater storage was a Board priority.
On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Henson, items 1, 4 and 6 were adopted; items 2 and 3 were deferred for consideration with Action Items; and item 5 was pulled for separate consideration. The motion was adopted on a vote of 7 - 0.
The Board discussed this item during consideration of Action items. On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Henson, the Appropriations Limit was adopted on a vote of 7 - 0.
The Board discussed this item during consideration of Action Items. No action was taken on this item as no action was required.
On a motion by Director Edwards and second by Director Henson, the staff recommendation to authorize an expenditure not to exceed $26,000 for rental pumps during the remainder of calendar year 2002 was approved unanimously on a vote of 7 - 0.
General Manager Avila explained that the Board meeting agenda was developed with a revised numbering system.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
General Manager Avila and Darby Fuerst provided information to the Directors on the protocol for operations at Moore's Lake. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the Rancho San Carlos Partnership met on April 25, 2002 and discussed protocol for operation of Moore's Lake. On May 21, 2002, the Rancho San Carlos Partnership emailed a revised, interim protocol to the interested parties for review and comment. The District received a copy on June 12, 2002. Requests for copies of the protocol have been referred to the NMFS, since the portion of Garzas Creek that is covered by the protocol is outside of the District boundary.
General Manager Avila announced that future monthly Board meetings would be conducted at the Seaside City Council Chambers. At the suggestion of Director Edwards, District staff was directed to prepare a resolution for adoption at the July 15, 2002 meeting, thanking the City of Monterey for allowing the Board of Directors to conduct monthly meetings in the Monterey City Council Chambers over the past 23 years.
District Counsel Laredo reported that the case of Currier and Kaminski versus MPWMD, Case No. M59299, was referred to David C. Laredo as lead counsel. The other items listed on the agenda were discussed briefly.
Mr. Laredo reported that on May 29, 2002, Monterey County Superior Court ruled in the case of Security National Guarantee versus MPWMD, Case No. M51797, that the claims against the MPWMD were not valid. All issues were resolved in favor of the District. In the case of Seaside et al versus MPWMD, Case No. M59441, challenging the District's enactment of Ordinance No. 102, the petitioners' request that Ordinance No. 102 be stayed was denied by the court. The matter is not fully resolved and has been referred to special counsel.
There was no discussion of this item.
On a motion by Director Pendergrass and second by Director Edwards, the Water Supply Strategy and Budget was approved unanimously. In addition, the Board requested that the California-American Water Company advise the public as soon as possible of the water situation and the need to continue water conservation efforts.
The following comments were received during the public hearing on this item. (1) David Dilworth disagreed with the District's assertion that the Water Supply Strategy and Budget is in compliance with Order 95-10 and the Endangered Species Act. According to Mr. Dilworth, even if pumping from the Carmel River is maintained at minimum levels, red legged frogs and steelhead fish will be killed as a result of low flows. (2) Patricia Bernardi, Save Our Carmel River (SOCR), warned the Board that if inflow into the Carmel River is only 45percent of normal the District could be "in dire straits" by October or November of 2002. She told the Directors that the District is presently subject to a "rationing program," which is a 20 percent reduction in water use mandated by SWRCB Order 95-10. (3) Charles Kemp, California-American Water Company, stated that the community must continue its water conservation efforts. He agreed to contact Cal-Am's public information representative about implementing measures to increase the public's awareness of the need to conserve water. (4) Fran Farina, SOCR, noted that she had contacted the District twice within a week to report incidents of water waste. Ms. Farina expressed disagreement with the Board's decision to set the production goal from a future water supply project at 15,285 acre-feet. (5) Roy Thomas, CRSA, stated that residential water rates increase if water use exceeds a minimum amount. He noted that commercial water use might be reduced if commercial water rates were calculated in the same manner as residential water rates.
Motion No. 1 - Director Erickson offered a motion to approve the first reading version of Ordinance No. 104 with the following changes. (1) Page 57 of the Board packet, Finding No. 3, second line, replace the word "clarify" with the word "amend." (2) Page 59, Rule 71, section B, line 2, after the words "board member" delete the word "set" and add the following "the Chair shall set the matter for." (3) Add the following sentence to Rule 70 of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations, "No Board member shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest solely by making a request for an appeal." (4) Page 59, Rule 71, item C, delete the last sentence and replace with the following, "the board of directors shall transmit a copy of its decision to the applicant and the appellant." (5) Add the following wording to Rule 70 of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations, "The Board has the discretion to refund appeal fees to an appellant if the Board finds that the appeal has provided a significant non-pecuniary benefit to the public and/or the environment." The motion was seconded by Director Henson.
Amendment No. 1 - On a motion by Director Henson and second by Director Erickson, Motion No. 1 was amended to delete the word "non-pecuniary" from number (5).
Amendment No. 2 - On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Henson, Motion No. 1 was amended to require that Rule 70 of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations be changed to state that, "Determinations of the General Manager or the District Engineer may be appealed to the District Board, in writing, within twenty-one (21) days."
Motion No. 1 and the amendments were approved by the Board on a vote of 5 - 2. Directors Lehman, Potter, Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted in favor of the motion. Directors Pendergrass and Edwards opposed the motion.
The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) David Dilworth, HOPE, requested that appeal fees be waived for persons representing the "public interest." He cited case law that defined "public interest." (2) Roy Thomas, CRSA, agreed that there should be a way to recognize the needs of groups that do not have funds to retain legal counsel. (3) Kristie Markie, spoke in support of offering an exemption from appeal fees to groups that represent the public interest.
Director Erickson proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Lindstrom to approve the budget with the following amendments: (1) delete the proposed new Engineering Technician position; (2) delete the $10,000 contingency for potential increases to Board member compensation; and (3) reduce the overall budget by 5 percent. The motion failed on a vote of 4 - 3. Directors Lehman, Potter, Pendergrass and Edwards voted against the motion. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson supported the motion.
Director Edwards proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Pendergrass to approve the budget as presented. The motion was adopted on a vote of 4 - 3. Directors Lehman, Potter, Pendergrass and Edwards voted in favor of the motion. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson opposed the motion.
The following comments were received during the public comment period on this item. (1) Patricia Bernardi, resident of Carmel Valley, asked if funds were set aside in the budget for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report on the Allocation Program. (2) David Dilworth, HOPE, suggested that the Board schedule a study session to review the District's revenue structure. He noted that 20 to 40 percent of the District's revenue is based on new water connection permit fees. Mr. Dilworth requested that funds be budgeted to ensure that the public is notified of interagency meetings that District staff participates in. (3) Lou Haddad, resident of the City of Monterey, made several suggestions: (1) the User Fee should be reduced from 7.25 percent to 6.5 percent; (2) the proposal to hire an Engineering Technician should be denied; (3) the District should provide an explanation for the requested 2.1 percent cost-of-living wage increase; and (4) the District should provide justification for the high cost of new vehicles proposed for purchase.
Motion No. 1 - Director Henson offered a motion to approve the time line and plan outlined in the staff note. The motion was seconded by Director Lindstrom.
Amendment 1 - Director Henson proposed that Motion No. 1 be amended to include that a request for proposals be developed for assistance with development of the EIR associated with ordinance development. Director Lindstrom did not second the amendment, and withdrew his second on Motion No. 1.
Motion No. 2 - Director Henson offered a motion to approve the time line and plan outlined in the staff note, and in addition, direct staff to develop a request for proposals for assistance with development of the EIR associated with ordinance development. The motion was seconded by Director Edwards. The motion was approved on a vote of 4 - 3. Directors Lehman, Potter, Pendergrass and Edwards voted in favor of the motion. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted against the motion.
Motion No. 3 - Director Erickson offered a motion to approve the staff recommendation and encourage staff to shorten the time line, and to look at ways to increase public input in the process with the goal of coming together and developing an agreement, or reaching agreement on an ordinance or ordinances. The motion was seconded by Director Lindstrom. The motion failed on a vote of 4 - 3. Directors Lehman, Potter, Pendergrass and Edwards voted against the motion. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted in favor of the motion.
The following comments were received during the public comment period on this item. (1) David Dilworth, HOPE, recommended that the District put out to bid the contract for consultant services to assist with preparation of an EIR. Mr. Dilworth asked that the District "delineate" how the water supply project EIR and an EIR on a Seaside groundwater management ordinance would "interact" with each other. (2) Diana Ingersoll, Director of Public Works for the City of Seaside, stated that development of a Seaside groundwater management ordinance was a "premature" step. According to Ms. Ingersoll, the District must provide the City with more technical information on the Seaside Basin before proceeding with development of an ordinance. (3) Fran Farina, SOCR, noted that several studies of the Seaside Basin have been completed over the past 20 years. She suggested that the firms who prepared those studies might be qualified to assist with the EIR effort, due to their knowledge of the Seaside Basin. (4) Tex Irwin, a resident of the Monterey Peninsula, stated that creation of ordinances should not be the first step in the process of Seaside Basin groundwater management. He advocated for increased stakeholder involvement in the Seaside Basin management process, prior to development of an ordinance. He urged the Board to consider the recommendation of the Policy and Technical Advisory Committees, to defer development of an ordinance at this time. (5) Patricia Bernardi, resident of Carmel Valley, asked why the District proposed to prepare an EIR on interim ordinances. She also questioned the District's decision to contract with Jones & Stokes for assistance with preparation of an EIR.
The meeting was recessed at 9:50 PM and reconvened at 10:00 PM.
14. Present Time Line and Plan for Development of Ordinances Regarding Seaside Ground Water Basin Management
This item was deferred to the July 15, 2002 Board meeting.
Director Erickson proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Lehman to: (1) issue a request for proposals (RFP) for legal services; (2) appoint an ad hoc committee to work with staff to develop the RFP and approve the final product; and (3) accept suggestions from Directors and members of the public as to names of attorneys that should receive the RFP. The motion was approved on a vote of 5 - 2. Directors Lehman, Lindstrom, Henson, Erickson and Edwards voted in favor of the motion. Directors Potter and Pendergrass opposed the motion. Directors Henson, Edwards and Erickson volunteered to serve on the ad hoc committee.
The following comments were received during the public comment period on this item. (1) Fran Farina spoke in favor of retaining De Lay & Laredo as legal counsel to the District. (2) Patricia Bernardi, resident of Carmel Valley, stated that she recognized the District's right to send out a request for proposal. She proceeded to express support for retaining De Lay & Laredo as legal counsel to the District.
This item was deferred to the July 15, 2002 Board meeting.
17. Consider Postponement of Ratification of Appointments to the Carmel River Advisory Committee
There was no discussion of the Informational Items/Staff Reports.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS
18. Letters Received
19. Committee Reports
20. Strategic Plan Update
21. Monthly Water Supply Project Status Report
22. Carmel River Fishery Report
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS
23. Water Conservation Program Report
24. Water Credit Transfer Report
25. Monthly Cal-Am Sales Report
26. Monthly Cal-Am Production Report
27. Monthly Allocation Report
28. Production Report - CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project
29. Monthly Water Supply Status Report
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session at 10:10 PM.
ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
30. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Gov. Code Section 54957)
A. Agency Designated Representatives: Ernesto A. Avila, Rick Dickhaut, Cynthia Schmidlin
Employee Organization: Laborers' International Union of North American, AFL-CIO, (LIUNA/UPEC) Local 270
B. Agency Designated Representative: Ernesto A. Avila
Unrepresented Employees: Confidential Staff Unit
31. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov. Code Section 54957)
A. General Manager
32. Conference With Legal Counsel (Gov. Code Section 54956.9)
A. California-American Water Company Application No. 02-040-022 to the Public Utilities Commission for Authority to Increase Rates for Service for 2003, 2004 and 2005
33. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Gov. Code Section 54956.9)
A. Cities of Seaside, Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove and Sand City v. MPWMD Case No. M59441
B. Mary Currier, Chris Currier and Roy and Jeanelle Kaminske v MPWMD, Case No. M59299. Monterey County Superior Court
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 PM.
Ernesto A. Avila, Secretary to the Board