Board of Directors
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM in the District conference room.
Board members present:
Alexander “Zan” Henson, Chair – Division 5
Judi Lehman, Vice Chair – Division 2
Alvin Edwards, Division 1
Molly Erickson, Division 3 (Arrived at 7:30 PM)
Kris Lindstrom, Division 4
David Pendergrass, Mayoral Representative
Board members absent:
David Potter, Monterey County Board of Supervisors
General Manager present: Fran Farina
District Counsel present: David C. Laredo
The assembly recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
On the recommendation of District Counsel, Director Lindstrom made a motion to add an urgency item to the agenda titled Action Item No. 15, Discuss Schedule for Surf ‘n Suds Water Transfer Revocation Hearing and Consider Recommendation from Special Counsel. Director Lehman seconded the motion. It was adopted unanimously on a vote of 5 – 0. Directors Edwards, Henson, Lehman, Lindstrom, and Pendergrass voted in favor of the motion. Directors Erickson and Potter were absent.
No comments were directed to the Board during Oral Communications.
On a motion by Director Pendergrass and second by Director Lindstrom, the Consent Calendar was unanimously approved on a vote of 5 – 0. Directors Edwards, Henson, Lehman, Lindstrom and Pendergrass voted in favor of the motion. Directors Erickson and Potter were absent.
General Manager Farina reported that the community will exceed its water budget for October 2003. A letter has been sent to California-American Water Company (Cal-Am) with instructions on steps that the District’s Water Conservation and Standby Rationing rules require the water purveyor to take when moving into Stage 2 of the water conservation program. Cal-Am must evaluate its leakage rate to determine if it exceeded 7 percent over the past twelve months. In addition, water conservation requirements will be applied to large water users and irrigators.
District Counsel Laredo did not present a report.
Director Pendergrass requested that the entire Board consider implementation of new rules regarding the installation of bathrooms under Ordinance No. 98 that were mandated by Chair Henson at the September 23, 2003 Water Demand Committee meeting. Director Henson agreed to add the item to a future agenda.
Director Lehman requested that the Board receive a report on the permitting process for drilling wells. General Manager Farina agreed to add an item to the next Water Demand Committee meeting agenda.
On a motion by Director Lehman and second by Director Lindstrom, Ordinance No. 110 was adopted unanimously on a vote of 5 – 0. Directors Erickson and Potter were absent.
The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) Marc Beique, a resident of Monterey, spoke in support of expanding the rebate program. He also proposed establishment of a water bank. Permitees could elect to place unused water credits in a fund that could be accessed by people who need water credits. (2) John Fischer, resident of Pacific Grove, suggested that the District work with owners of apartment complexes to develop retrofitting requirements for re-circulating or instant-access hot water systems. (3) Nancy Isakson expressed concern about the high cost of rebate programs. For example, the District estimates that 150 acre-feet of water were saved through retrofitting 4,600 toilets. The cost to the District based on a $100 rebate per toilet would be $460,000 not including staff time. She stated that a cost-benefit ratio analysis shows that the rebate programs are expensive. (4) Larry Foy urged the Board to proceed with caution when requiring the installation of cisterns. He also noted that if the selection of ultra-low flow fixtures on the market is limited, there may be a problem in the future if we find that certain models don’t operate efficiently, as in the case of one-half gallon flush toilets. (5) Sheryl McKenzie, Government Affairs Director for the Monterey County Association of Realtors (MCAR), stated that water credit obtained through retrofitting should be transferable. She spoke in support of establishment of a water bank.
Director Pendergrass proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Edwards, to suspend Chair Henson’s direction to eliminate water credit for installation of the one-half gallon flush Microphor toilet. The motion failed on a vote of 2 – 4. Directors Edwards and Pendergrass voted in favor of the motion. Erickson, Henson, Lehman and Lindstrom voted against the motion. Director Potter was absent.
The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) McKenzie Patterson stated the one-half gallon toilets have been in use in his home for 22 years and he has installed them in 20 Peninsula residences and Devendorf Park in Carmel. According to Mr. Patterson, the one-half gallon toilets operate well if they are properly installed and maintained. (2) Sheryl McKenzie, Government Affairs Director for the MCAR, suggested that the survey sent out to users of the one-half gallon toilet should have asked the question, “Would you rather have the option to install the one-half gallon toilets, or not install them and not be allowed to build your house?” Ms. McKenzie noted that the 35 survey respondents who expressed dissatisfaction with the toilets represent only 17 percent of persons who installed them. (3) Marc Beique stated that if the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency supports installation of the one-half gallon flush toilets, then he would also advocate for them. (4) Mitzi Dallas stated that the one-half gallon flush toilets are installed in many units she has built. They operate well if installed and maintained properly. Applicants should have the option to install the one-half gallon flush toilets.
Director Lehman proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Erickson, to adopt the first reading of Ordinance No. 111 and delete any reference to the one-half gallon flush toilet. 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) Nancy Isakson urged the Board to complete an initial study prior to first reading of the ordinance. (2) Marc Beique, a resident of Monterey, suggested that the ordinance require installation of instant access hot-water systems that heat water at the tap, because re-circulating systems are energy intensive. He also noted that outdoor water use is the main source of water waste and urged the Board to address that issue. (3) Sheryl McKenzie asked for clarification of item 29, Outdoor Water Uses, listed on Table 1. (4) Larry Seeman, representing the City of Seaside, stated that the City could not comment on the ordinance until an initial study is prepared and the appropriate environmental analysis is completed. He recommended that the Board defer first reading of the ordinance until the CEQA analysis has been prepared. Mr. Seeman requested that the City of Seaside receive a copy of the CEQA documents.
Director Edwards proposed a motion to reject the first reading of Ordinance No. 112. Director Pendergrass seconded the motion. The motion failed on a vote of 2 – 4. Directors Edwards and Pendergrass voted in support of the motion. Directors Erickson, Henson, Lehman and Lindstom voted in opposition to the motion. Director Potter was absent.
Director Henson proposed a motion that staff present additional information on cisterns and the feasibility of requiring the installation of low-flow washing machines so that the Board can make a decision about whether to codify related rules in the ordinance. Ordinance No. 112 should also include a statement that the District will pursue establishment of a ban on self-generating water softener systems and sustainable landscape regulations. There was no second to the motion.
Director Lindstrom proposed a motion that was seconded by Director Erickson, to develop two conservation ordinances. One would establish baseline conservation measures for indoor water use, and the other would establish sustainable landscape regulations that embody baseline measures for outdoor water use. The Board would provide direction to staff on details of the ordinance. The motion was adopted on a vote of 4 – 2. Directors Erickson, Henson, Lehman and Lindstrom voted in favor of the ordinance. Directors Edwards and Pendergrass voted in opposition to the ordinance. Director Potter was absent.
The Board directed staff to consider the following items in development of the baseline conservation ordinances. Provide an exemption for low and very-low income housing. Ensure that jurisdictions, building contractors, plumbers, and realtors participate in review of the ordinances. Coordinate with the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency regarding development of a rule to ban self-generating water softeners. Include conservation measures that apply to apartment buildings. The first priority is development of an ordinance on exterior water use.
The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) Sheryl McKenzie, Government Affairs Director MCAR, stated that the MCAR is opposed to the ordinance. She disagreed with the requirement that low-flow dishwashers and washing machines be installed at point of sale. She also expressed concern over the cost to install the required conservation measures. Ms. McKenzie stated that a 10-year old study found that for every $1,000 added to the cost of a house, 100 families are priced-out of the home buying market. In addition, the requirements would increase the cost to construct new low-income housing units. (2) Nancy Isakson expressed agreement with comments made by Ms. McKenzie. She stated that a cost-benefit analysis of the ordinance must be conducted. She encouraged the Board to prepare an economic analysis of the effects of this ordinance, even though such a study is not required under CEQA. (3) Marc Beique, a resident of Monterey, stated that requiring the conservation measures in all residences and businesses is not appropriate. Waterless urinals may not be practical for certain applications such as in hospitals. He stated that a 2,000 square-foot house would yield approximately 500 gallons of water for a cistern. He questioned the high cost for 500 gallons of water. He noted that under the proposed rules, costly cistern systems would be required in all new housing including low-income projects. (4) Nelson Vega stated that the ordinance unfairly targets persons who sell a house or remodel after 2006. He reasoned that all members of the community use water and should share in the responsibility to conserve water. He proposed that a more equitable method of achieving water savings is to require that individual water users pay more for their water if they exceed an established limit. (5) Tex Irwin, a Monterey Peninsula resident, asked if the proposed rules require that an entire apartment complex be retrofitted when only one apartment is remodeled. He suggested that installation of irrigation systems should not be required for projects that have no landscaping. (6) Ray Worrell, a member of MCAR, stated that his home does have a cistern system. In his experience, the cistern fills in the winter when that water is not needed and is empty in the summer. According to Mr. Worrell, a cistern system is only useful for outside irrigation if it includes a pressure system, and even then water flow is not adequate. The system requires maintenance. He recommended that the Board should not mandate the installation of cistern systems. (7) John Fischer asked the Board to consider including apartment buildings in the residential category of its ordinance. (8) Bob McKenzie, a resident of Monterey, described the ordinance as “silly.” He stated that per-capita water consumption in the District is the lowest in California, and that additional water conservation requirements are not needed. He urged the Board to refrain from adoption of the ordinance. (9) Larry Foy, President of the Monterey County Hospitality Association, expressed concern about the suggestion that apartments be included in the remodeling requirements of the proposed ordinance because that might be extended to hotels that generally remodel every 7 years. According to Mr. Foy, the hospitality industry has saved more water than any other sector of the community through the retrofitting of laundry facilities, toilets and other required measures. To impose additional measures would be unfair. (10) Jim Clark, a resident of Del Rey Oaks, stated that the sewer system on the Monterey Peninsula was designed to carry a specific amount of flow. Expanding requirements for the installation of low-flow water using fixtures will reduce the amount of flow through the sewer lines and could create a problem in the sewer system. He urged the Board to focus on development of a water supply.
The meeting was recessed at 9:20 PM and reconvened at 9:30 PM.
Director Edwards proposed a motion to cancel the hearing on the Surf ‘n Suds matter and close the issue. Director Lindstrom seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 6 – 0. Directors Edwards, Erickson, Henson, Lehman, Lindstrom and Pendergrass voted in favor of the motion. Director Potter was absent.
No public comment was directed to the Board on this item.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM.
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. Consider Approval of Minutes from the Regular Board Meeting of September 15, 2003
2. Adopt Board Meeting Schedule for 2004
3. Consider Authorization of Conservation Funds to Hire Temporary Employees for Records Reorganization
4. Authorize Expenditure of Mitigation Funds for Replacement of Fish Counter at San Clemente Dam
5. Authorize Expenditure of Mitigation Funds for Extra Work by John F. Otto, Inc. for Interim Sediment Retrofit Project at Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility
6. Authorize Payment for Fort Ord Monitor Well License Renewal
7. Consider Contract with the Carmel River Watershed Conservancy to Provide Services for an Environmental and Biological Assessment of Portions of the Carmel River Watershed
8. Consider Authorization of an Agreement to Provide Arbitrage Calculation Services for the Carmel Area Wastewater District/Pebble Beach Community Services District (CAWD/PBCSD) Wastewater Reclamation Project Certificates of Participation
9. Consider Adoption of Treasurer’s Report for July 2003
GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
10. Board Comments and Referrals
11. Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 110 – Expanding the Toilet Retrofit Rebate Program to Include Rebates for Ultra-Low Consumption Dishwashers, Ultra-Low Consumption Washing Machines, Dual-Flush Ultra-Low Flush Toilets, Hot Water Demand Pumping Systems and Rainwater Cisterns
12. Ratify elimination of Water Credit for Half-Gallon Flush Toilets
13. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 111 – Amending District Rule 24 and Rule 11
14. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 112 – Amending Baseline Water Conservation Requirements and Amending and Republishing Rules 11, 142, and 144
Fran Farina, Secretary to the Board