EXHIBIT 17-D
FINAL MINUTES
Rules and Regulations Review
Committee of the
Monterey Peninsula Water
Management District
Board of Directors
The
meeting was called to order at 10:35 AM in the District conference room.
Committee members present: Judi Lehman, Chair
Michelle
Knight
Larry
Foy (Alternate)
Committee members absent: David Pendergrass
Staff members present: David A. Berger, General Manager
Henrietta
Stern, Project Manager
Arlene
Tavani, Executive Assistant
District Counsel present: David C. Laredo
No comments were received. No members of the public were present.
Action Items
1.
Consider Approval of October
27, 2004 and February 7, 2005 Committee Meeting Minutes
On a motion by Director Knight and second by Director Foy, the minutes
of October 27, 2004 and February 7, 2005 were approved by the committee on a unanimous
vote of 3 – 0.
2. Consider Approval of Conceptual Ordinance No. 123 to Amend MPWMD
Rules and Regulations to Create an Impact-Based System for Water Distribution
System Permits
On
a motion by Director Foy and second by Director Knight, the committee directed
District staff to amend the ordinance based on direction given at the meeting,
and bring the ordinance back to the committee for review at their May 3, 2005
meeting. The motion was approved
unanimously on a vote of 3 – 0. The suggested changes to the
ordinance and staff report are listed below.
No public comment was received on this item.
(1)
Rule 20.C.3, in the first
line, delete the word “each” and replace it with the word “all.” (2) Whenever the term “General Manager or
staff designee” appears, delete the reference to “or staff designee.” (3) In Exhibit 2-B, describe the CEQA review
required for all five review-levels. (4) Make a note on Exhibit 2-D, Concepts
for Ordinance No. YY, Impact-Based Assessment of WDS, that the Board reviewed
this information at the August 16, 2005 Board meeting and it is provided now as
background information. (5) It is not necessary to provide Exhibit 2-F,
Comparison of Existing vs. Proposed WDS Review Levels, with subsequent versions
of the staff report. (6) It is not necessary to provide Exhibit 2-G, Pros and
Cons of Impact-Based Permit Review, with subsequent versions of the staff
report. (7) Add to Section 6, A.6.c of the ordinance a sentence stating that
notice of the Hearing Officer’s action should be provided to each and every
Board member. The committee directed
that a notice of decision would be sufficient, there is no need to provide the
entire hearing packet.
3. Review Ordinance No. 114 “Special Fixture Unit Accounting” Rules
On a motion by Director Foy and second by Director Lehman, the
committee voted unanimously to recommend to the Board that no changes be made
to Rule 24-C. The motion was approved on
a vote of 3 – 0.
No public comment was received on this item.
4.
Discuss Rule 11 Definition of
“Site” and “Unity of Ownership”
On a motion by Director Foy
and second by Director Knight, the committee voted unanimously to recommend to
the Board that land should be considered to be held with “unity of ownership”
only when the deed and title to all land comprising the “site” are
substantially identical, are unvaried, have uniform character, and are devoid
of diversity. District staff was
directed to include the clarification of the term “Site” in the policies and procedures
clarification ordinance that will be considered by the Board at a future
meeting. The motion was approved on a
vote of 3 – 0.
No public comment was received on this item.
Other Items
There were no other items
brought forward for discussion.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at
11:50 AM.
U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2005\2005boardpackets\20050516\InfoItems\17\item17_exh17d.doc