EXHIBIT 17-H

 

FINAL MINUTES

Water Demand Committee

Monterey Peninsula Water Management District

April 13, 2004

 

 

Committee members present:    Larry Foy (Chair)

Kristi Markey (arrived at 3:15 PM)

David Pendergrass

 

Committee members absent:      None

 

District staff present:    Rick Dickhaut, Chief Financial Officer

                                       Stephanie Pintar, Water Demand Manager

                                      Arlene Tavani, Executive Assistant

 

District Counsel present:  David C. Laredo

 

1.         Call to Order 

The meeting was called to order at 3 PM in the District conference room.

 

2.                  Approve Minutes of March 9, 2004

Director Foy made a motion that was seconded by Director Pendergrass to approve minutes of the March 9, 2004 Water Demand Committee meeting.  The motion was approved on a vote of 2 – 0.  Director Markey was absent for the vote.

 

3.                  Status Reports

A.           Report on Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting of April 6, 2004

   Ms. Pintar reported that Diana Ingersoll was elected to the position of committee Chair.  The committee discussed near-term water supply concepts and decided that the TAC was not prepared to make a recommendation.  The committee also discussed development of a common methodology to estimate future water needs.  They expressed support for using each jurisdiction’s general plan as the basis for establishing future water needs.  The committee will discuss this issue at their next meeting and develop a formal recommendation for the Board.

 

B.           Report on Water Demand Division Database Project

         Ms. Pintar advised that staff and the consultant are working daily to map the Water Demand Division processes.  Development of a database prototype is underway.  The total cost should be within the contracted amount.

 

C.           Report on Effort to Update the Commercial Water Factors

   Chair Foy stated the committee’s consensus that the data base project should be completed first, and then a decision could be made on how to proceed with an update to the commercial water factors.

 

   This item was removed from the April Board meeting agenda and has not yet been scheduled for another hearing.  The cost estimate for completion of the work is between $125,000 and $300,000.  For $125,000, information from the District’s database and Cal-Am’s water use records would be analyzed.  An additional $175,000 could be spent on determining if a hotel contained large bathtubs and, or a swimming pool.  On-site inspectors must collect that type of information. Ms. Pintar explained that the commercial water factors were last updated in 1992 before the installation of low-flow fixtures.  It is assumed that water use has dropped since 1992 due to the installation of low-flow fixtures.  The proposed study would analyze water use for 15 types of commercial uses.  Info cannot be gathered from other agencies because no other agency uses specific water use factors to quantify potential water use at a site.  It was suggested that a fee could be assessed on commercial water permit applications or requests for water credit transfers, in order to pay for the study. 

 

4.                  Action Items

A.           Consider Request for Multi-Function Copier in the Water Demand Division

On a motion by Director Markey and second by Director Foy, the committee agreed unanimously on a vote of 3 – 0 to approve the purchase of a copier.

 

B.           Consider Potential Modifications to Water Use Credit Transfer Program

On a motion by Director Foy and second by Director Markey, the item was continued to the May 11, 2004 Water Demand Committee meeting, and scheduled for consideration by the Board at the May 17, 2004 meeting.  The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 3 – 0.

 

The following comments were made by the committee members during the discussion.  (1) The intent of any rule change is to tighten-up and clarify our rules so that this will require nothing more than a negative declaration.  (2) Whatever standard is developed for estimating water credit for transfer must ensure that there is no increase in water use.  Support was expressed for the proposal to require 5 to 10 years of water use records and averaging.  (3) This ordinance would establish staff approval of water credit transfers, so a system should be in place to keep the Board notified of any water credit transfers.

 

C.           Discuss and Recommend Modifications to Regulation 6 – Fees

The committee members agreed to continue this item for further discussion at the May 11, 2004 Water Demand Committee meeting.

 

The committee discussed the proposed list of new processing fees and asked for clarification from staff on those items.  They expressed concern about services 6, 7, 10, 11 and 18 listed on Exhibit C-1 of the staff report (on file at the District office).  Ms. Pintar stated that she would revise the list to more clearly characterize the services listed. During item 7, Director Comments, the committee agreed that a flat rate should be charged for processing deed restrictions.  

 

D.          Review Provisions and Make Recommendation Regarding Ordinance No. 104, Modifying the Administrative Appeal Process

The committee members agreed that no modifications should be made to Ordinance No. 104.

 

5.                  Comments from the Public

No comments.

 

6.                  Set Future Meeting Date

The committee agreed to meet on May 11, 2004.

 

7.                  Director Comments

Director Foy asked when the Board will develop new rules on quantifying water credit for outdoor water use.  Ms. Pintar responded that Ordinance No. 115 addressed that subject by granting credit for outdoor water use that occurred prior to 1985 and has been continuous since then.  Director Pendergrass expressed concern regarding the extensive amount of time needed to process water distribution system permits since the adoption of Ordinance No. 105.  Director Markey urged staff to advise the Board of any requirements in the District’s Rules and Regulations that are time consuming, but seem to be unnecessary.  Director Pendergrass advised the Board that the issue of developing a new Memorandum of Understanding on overlapping jurisdiction between the District, the Monterey County Water Resources Agency and the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is still unresolved.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 PM.

 

 

U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2005\20050127\InfoItems\17\item17_exh17h.doc