Regular Meeting

Board of Directors

Monterey Peninsula Water Management District

September 16, 2002



The meeting was called to order at 7:10 PM in the Seaside City Council Chambers.


Board members present:

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


Directors absent:  David Potter – Monterey County Board of Supervisors


District staff present:

Ernesto A. Avila – General Manager

Rick Dickhaut – Chief Financial Officer

Henrietta Stern – Project Manager

Joseph Oliver – Water Resources Manager

Darby Fuerst – Senior Hydrologist

Cynthia Schmidlin – Human Resources Specialist

Larry Hampson – Water Resources Engineer

Arlene Tavani – Executive Assistant


District Counsel present:  David C. Laredo


The assembly recited the Pledge of Allegiance.


The following comments were directed to the Board during Oral Communications.  (1) Robert Greenwood, representing the Carmel Valley Association, requested a response to questions he posed in a letter dated August 29, 2002.  (2) Roy Thomas, representing the Carmel River Steelhead Association (CRSA), explained that the Monterey County Herald erroneously reported that the CRSA would like to take over operation of the Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility.  Mr. Thomas stated that his comment to the reporter was that the Monterey Bay Salmon Trout Project or the California-American Water Company might be qualified to operate the facility.  (3) Alan Williams, representing the Pebble Beach Company, requested that the Board consider the financing plan for expansion of the CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project at the October 21, 2002 meeting.  He stated that representatives from Pebble Beach Company are prepared to meet with the District on this issue at any time.





On a motion by Director Pendergrass and second by Director Edwards, the Consent Calendar items were approved unanimously, with the exception of Item 1 that was pulled for separate consideration.  The motion was approved on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Potter was absent.


On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Henson, the minutes were approved with a clarification to Item 7, Update on Estimate of District Revenues and Expenditures Since 1978.  The second sentence should state “The total does not include $50 million received from certificates of participation issued to build reclamation project facilities and funds submitted for the sale of reclaimed water and remitted back to the project.”  The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Potter was absent.












Assemblyman Keeley explained that Plan B is the result of legislation he authored that was signed into law by Governor Pete Wilson in 1998.   The legislation required the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to develop an alternative to the proposed Carmel River Dam project that could be implemented if a dam were proved to be infeasible.  There were four objectives associated with Plan B:  (1) develop a firm water supply to address the shortfall identified in SWRCB Order 95-10; (2) minimize the risk of institutional challenges to implementation of a plan; (3) protect the economic well being of the community by minimizing costs; and (4) avoid or minimize impacts to biological or community resources.  The preliminary  draft report identified the water supply solution as a combination of seawater desalination; in-basin storage; and 3,000 acre-feet of water rights from the Carmel River.  However, the water rights component was dropped from consideration when the National Marine Fisheries Service opposed that option.  The final Plan B report proposes a two- part solution that includes an aquifer storage and recovery project and a seawater desalination plant.   The aquifer storage and recovery project involves taking a relatively small amount of water from the Carmel River during high flow periods and storing that water in the Seaside groundwater basin for future use.   The cost is estimated to be $18 million.  The seawater desalination plant is the largest component of Plan B and involves constructing the plant next to the Duke Energy facility at Moss Landing.  Existing seawater intake and brine outfall facilities could be utilized.  Also, energy costs would be lower than expected because there would be no transmission charge associated with use of the electricity.  The estimated cost to construct the desalination facility, transmission lines, tanks and pump stations is approximately $100 million.   Operational costs for the combined projects would be approximately $6.4 million per year.  Assemblyman Keeley stated that the projects could be developed according to a consolidated CEQA/NEPA process.  Construction could begin in 2004 and be completed by 2007.  If the project were to be constructed by Cal-Am, the capital and operating costs could be passed on to the rate payers.   If a public agency constructed the project, voters could approve the sale of revenue or general obligation bonds that would eventually be paid by local rate payers and tax payers.   A decision on who will construct the project may be based on the outcome of an upcoming meeting of Cal-Am’s Board of Directors.   In response to questions raised by Board members, Assemblyman Keeley stated that the PUC could serve as lead agency on this project.  If Cal-Am decided to be the project proponent for desalination and aquifer storage and recovery, then the PUC could serve as lead agency for the CEQA and NEPA process.  Mr. Keeley stated that Cal-Am might decide to develop the desalination plant because the proposed project site is outside of the District’s boundaries.  Under that scenario, the District might develop the aquifer storage and recovery project since it would be within the District boundaries.


Steve Leonard, General Manager of the California-American Water Company, advised the Board that he sent a letter to rate payers in the Hidden Hills area and reminded them that there is a potential water supply problem and recommended that water conservation continue through the end of the water year (September 30, 2002).  Mr. Leonard reported that water use in the Hidden Hills area reached 207 acre-feet, while the limit for the water year is 229 acre-feet.   General Manager Avila reported that the District received a letter from Cal-Am, dated September 13, 2002 stating that the company is in the process of making a decision as to whether or not to withdraw its application for construction of the Carmel River Dam.  Mr. Avila also noted that the Seaside City Manager informed him that structural changes will be made to the Seaside City Council Chambers by the end of 2002, in order to bring the chambers into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.



District Counsel Laredo reported on the 5:30 PM Closed Session of September 16, 2002.  He stated that the Board met and discussed anticipated litigation as listed on the agenda but there was no reportable action.   Regarding the Closed Session of August 29, 2002, Mr. Laredo stated that the Board discussed the following items but there was no action to report:  (1) Cal-Am’s application No. 02-04-022 to the Public Utilities  Commission for a Rate Increase; (2) a conference with labor negotiators; (3)  Mary Currier, Chris Currier and Roy and Jeanell Kaminske v MPWMD, Case No. M59299 and (4) cities

of  Seaside, Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove and Sand City v MPWMD, Case No. M59441.


A brief report in the form of a letter from the Water Demand Committee was distributed to the Board and copies made available to the public.  There was no discussion of this item.



In response to a request from Director Edwards, General Manager Avila reported that the pump at the Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility was operational.  In October the Board will be asked to increase the General Manager’s authority to approve funding for emergency measures at Sleepy Hollow.   Mr. Avila reported that the District has been in contact with Pebble Beach Company representatives regarding funding mechanisms for improvements at the CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project.  An update will be provided at the September 21, 2002 Board meeting.   Mr. Avila noted that he is not aware of any incidence of District staff being unavailable to visit the Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility on weekends.    Chair Lindstrom suggested that fishery experts be invited to participate in a tour of the Sleepy Hollow Facility.  The group could suggest to District staff improvements that might be made to the facility.    Director Henson proposed that the District determine the cost to use the powers of eminent domain to condemn California-American Water Company facilities and purchase the local water company.  Chair Lindstrom directed that the Administrative Committee investigate the cost.  He stated that before a final decision is made to begin eminent domain proceedings, this item would be brought before the full Board.  Director Edwards stated that the Board should receive comment from the public before any action is taken.


Motion 1        A motion was proposed by Director Henson and seconded by Director Lehman to file the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration with the County Clerk and begin the public review process.  The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Potter was absent.


Motion 2        A motion was proposed by Director Erickson and seconded by Director Lehman to revise the first reading version of the ordinance in Rule 40 sections 2, 3 and 4 and conduct the first reading on October 21, 2002.  Staff was directed to review Rule 40, sections 2, 3 and 4 and determine if changes should  be made to the phrases “and/or” with a goal of clarifying the intent of the ordinance.  In addition, the ordinance should be corrected in Rule 40.A.4, line 2 to state “April 18, 2001.”  The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Edwards asked that in lieu of calling a committee meeting, the revised ordinance be distributed to the Policy and Technical Advisory Committee members with a request that they provide written comments.


Motion 3        A motion was proposed by Director Erickson and seconded by Director Henson to amend the first reading version of the ordinance and expand the definition of the area to which the ordinance applies to include the Carmel River Watershed within the District boundary.  District staff was advised that if concerns arise regarding the notice to adopt a negative declaration, those concerns should be brought before the Board on October 21, 2002.  The motion was approved on a vote of  4 – 2.  Directors Erickson, Henson,  Lehman and Lindstrom voted in favor of the motion.  Directors Edwards and Pendergrass voted against the motion. Director Potter was absent.


During the public hearing on this item, Fran Farina representing Save Our Carmel River, addressed the Board.  She urged the Board to expand the scope of the ordinance to include the entire Carmel River watershed within the District boundaries. 


Motion 1        Chair Lindstrom proposed a motion to defer work on Task 2.0 for 30 days to allow Phase 1 information gathering and begin Seaside Basin Plan efforts.   Director Edwards seconded the motion.


Motion 2        Chair  Lindstrom offered an amended motion to direct District staff to begin work immediately on Task 2.0 – Carmel River Flow Threshold Development; assign it highest priority over all other District projects; and to work on the Seaside Basin Management Plan as time allows.  In addition, the District should have minimal interaction with other agencies on the Threshold Report with a goal of completing the report in 90 days.  Director Henson seconded the motion.  The motion was approved on a vote of 4 – 2.  Directors  Erickson, Henson, Lehman and Lindstrom voted in favor of the motion.  Directors Edwards and Pendergrass voted in opposition to the motion.  Director Potter was absent.


The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item.  (1) Roy Thomas, representing the CRSA, stated that it would be a waste of money for the District to prepare the Threshold Report.   According to Mr. Thomas, the National Marine Fisheries Service has already formulated recommended flows for the Carmel River.  (2) Patricia Bernardi, a resident of Carmel Valley representing SOCR, indicated her agreement with comments made by Roy Thomas.  She also expressed concern about the proposal to limit involvement with other agencies.  Ms. Bernardi threatened to challenge the District in court, if necessary, to prevent the District from receiving 7,900 acre-feet in additional water rights from the Carmel River.   (3) Tex Irwin expressed concern that the Threshold Report would be prepared without the benefit of input from other agencies for subsequent use in the Water Supply Project EIR, which was also being prepared solely by the District.  Mr. Irwin stated that he did not support preparation of the Threshold Report.  (4)  Steve Leonard, California-American Water Company.   In response to a question from the Board, Mr. Leonard stated he was surprised to learn that Cal-Am would be asked to pay for preparation of the Threshold Report.  He recommended that coordination with other agencies should not be considered an optional task, but a mandatory task.


On a motion by Director Henson and second by Director Pendergrass, the water supply strategy and budget was unanimously approved on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Potter was absent.   No comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item.



Director Henson offered a motion that was seconded by Director Edwards to authorize the General Manager to execute contracts as outlined in the staff report for a not-to-exceed amount of $69,000.  The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6 – 0.  Director Potter was absent.


Roy Thomas, representing the CRSA addressed the Board during the public hearing on this item.  He stated that the project location is in a dynamic portion of the river, and warned that the project could be washed out during a high flow period.  Mr. Thomas opined that the logs to be used in project construction may result in habitat that is inferior to conventional woody habitat formed by downed oak trees.   He questioned whether this was intended to be a woody habitat project or a bank stabilization project.


A copy of the presentation made by Darby Fuerst, Senior Hydrologist, is on file at the District office.  No action was required of the Board.   No public comment was directed to the Board on this item.


There was no discussion of these items.

























The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session at 10:15 PM.






















































The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:45 PM.

























































1.          Consider Approval of Minutes from the Regular Board meeting of August 29, 2002








2.       Consider Authorization of Funds for Laboratory Analyses and Report for Bioassessment Samples


3.       Consider Authorization of Funds for Printing and Mailing of District Newsletter



4.      Presentation by Assemblyman Fred Keeley on the Carmel River Dam Alternative Plan B Project Report





















































5.              Report on Conservation Measures Implemented within the Hidden Hills Unit of California-American Water Company














6.                 Report on Closed Session of August 29, 2002












7.                 Receive Water Demand Committee Report on Possible Multiple Desalination Plants on the Peninsula


8.                 Board Comments and Referrals


























9.                 Conduct CEQA Determination and First Reading of Ordinance No. 105 – Amending Rules and Regulations Governing Water Distribution Systems



































10.             Confirm Initial Work Plan and Assumptions for Carmel River Flow Threshold Report for Water Supply Project EIR

















































11.             Consider Adoption of October through December 2002 Quarterly Water Supply Strategy and Budget




12.            Consider Authorization of Funds for Installation of Large Wood Habitat Structures at the deDampierre Restoration Project












13.            Receive Report on San Clemente Dam Safety Remediation Project




14.                Letters Received

15.                Committee Reports

16.                Strategic Planning Initiatives Progress Report

17.                Monthly Water Supply Project Report


18.                Carmel River Fishery Report

19.                Water Conservation Program Report

20.                Water Use Credit Transfer Status Report

21.                Monthly Allocation Report

22.                Monthly Cal-Am Sales Report

23.                Monthly Cal-Am Production Report

24.                Production Report – CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project

25.                Monthly Water Supply Status Report



26.            Conference with Legal Counsel (Gov. Code Section 54956.9)

                  A.        California-American             Water Company             Application No. 02-04-            022 to the Public             Utilities     Commission             for Authority to             Increase Rates for             Service for               2003, 2004 and 2005


27.            Conference with Labor Negotiators (Gov. Code Section 54957)

                  A.          Agency Designated               Representative:                Ernesto A. Avila

                                Unrepresented               Employees:                Confidential Staff Unit

                  B.           Agency Designated               Representatives:                Ernesto A. Avila, Rick               Dickhaut, Cynthia               Schmidlin

                                Employee               Organization:                Laborers’ International               Union of North               America, AFL-CIO,               (LIUNA/UPEC) Local               270



28.            Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Gov. Code Section 54956.9)

                  A.          Mary Currier, Chris               Currier and Roy    and               Jeanelle Kaminske v               MPWMD, Case No.               M59299, Monterey               County Superior Court

                  B.           Cities of Seaside,               Carmel, Del Rey Oaks,               Monterey, Pacific               Grove and Sand City v               MPWMD, Case No.               M59441, Monterey               County Superior Court













                                                                                                                                Ernesto A. Avila, Secretary to the Board



A. Tavani, 10/4/02, Brd minutes, 8 pages