1 .



Meeting Date:

June 16, 2005





David A. Berger,




General Manager

Line Item No.:


Prepared By:



Cost Estimate:


General Counsel Approval:  N/A

Committee Recommendation:  N/A

CEQA Compliance:  N/A


SUMMARY:   The District Board adopted 2004-05 Strategic Plan includes an objective for convening a “Water Summit.”  As discussed during development of the Strategic Plan, this Water Summit is anticipated to be a special public meeting/workshop to review the status of, and the District’s potential role in, a regional approach with other public entities to resolving the Monterey Peninsula’s long-term water augmentation need.  Originally planned for January or February 2005, the Board delayed scheduling the Water Summit in part to enable it to potentially consider the governance and management structure for a Regional Urban Water Supply project.  The purpose of this agenda item is for the Board of Directors to plan the desired content, format and timing of its proposed Water Summit.


RECOMMENDATION:  Staff recommends that the Board discuss and provide staff direction on structuring a Water Summit workshop that includes the potential policy issues it wishes to consider, and covers the desired workshop format.  Based on the Board’s direction, staff would prepare a draft Water Summit agenda for review with the Chair and Vice Chair; poll Directors for an available date in the targeted month(s); and coordinate other arrangements for conducting the Water Summit. 


The following is a list of potential policy issues and format questions that the Board may find helpful in planning the Water Summit:


Policy Issues


  1. What role should the District play in a potential Regional Urban Water Supply (RUWS) governance structure?  Should the Water Summit focus on RUWS project governance and management concepts the County Water Resources Agency developed in collaboration with the city and water agency managers working group (Exhibit 1-A)? 


  1. Should the RUWS Board governance concept that the County Board of Supervisors recently endorsed be considered transitional to a permanent structure (Exhibit 1-B)?  Should other long-term governance concepts be considered, such as the alternative proposed by the Elkhorn Slough Coalition (Exhibit 1-C)? 


  1. Are there other basic policy issues that should be addressed, for the purpose of guiding Board consideration of a draft RUWS Board formation agreement? 


  1. Although a regional-scale, publicly owned desalting facility is expected be the initial and primary focus of the RUWS project, should other near- and long-term water supply project opportunities that address the Monterey Peninsula’s need be included in the Water Summit?  Some examples are Board strategy and approach to: 


    1. Potential District acceleration of Phase 2/3 of the Aquifer Storage and Recovery project;


    1. District cooperation with the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) and Marina Coast Water Agency (MCWA) on the Phase I extension of their Regional Urban Recycled Water Project to irrigate north Monterey Peninsula golf courses, parks, landscaped street medians and other non-potable uses (Exhibit 1-D, part one); and 


    1. District collaboration with MRWPCA on its Groundwater Replenishment Project, which contemplates conveyance of recycled water purified to State drinking water standards for recharging the Seaside Groundwater Basin (Exhibit 1-D, part two).


  1. Should other water supply opportunities that are currently inactive also be addressed?  Examples include proposals for a new Carmel River reservoir, dredging of the Los Padres Reservoir, and MPWMD Sand City desalting plant. 


  1. Should Monterey Peninsula land use jurisdictions’ General Plan “build-out” projections be considered in the Water Summit?  How would these projections be integrated with water supply capacity planning for RUWS projects?


  1. Should methods for engaging the community in the Board’s decision-making process be covered?   


8.      Can the Water Summit serve to update existing Board water supply strategy to guide the District’s fiscal 2005-06 actions?  Or, should the next annual Strategic Plan update session of the Board be used for this purpose?   


  1. What are the specific expected outcomes of the Water Summit?


Format and Timing Issues


  1. Should elected and appointed officials from Monterey Peninsula cities and Monterey County be invited to participate in the Water Summit?  Should other public entities be represented in the RUWS discussions? 


  1. Should local congressional and state legislators be invited, and/or representatives of government agencies with water supply regulatory responsibilities?   


  1. Should the Water Summit be professionally facilitated?


  1. What’s the ideal venue and meeting layout?


  1. What month(s) should be targeted for the Water Summit?


  1. When during the week/day should it occur?


  1. What amount of time should be planned?


  1. How should it be publicized to the community?


  1. Are there other important Water Summit format or timing questions that should be addressed?


BACKGROUND:  The Water Supply section of the District’s 2004-05 Strategic Plan includes an objective that calls for convening a Water Summit meeting following Monterey County’s then-anticipated initiation of a publicly-owned, regional desalination facility (or alternative project) to solve the long-term water supply needs of the Monterey Peninsula and other urbanized regions of the county (Exhibit 1-E). The purpose of the Water Summit is to address the District’s desired role in such a project and facility.  The policy-making process to create a potential publicly-owned, Regional Urban Water Supply project was launched on November 30, 2004 by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, to be conducted in collaboration with affected cities, MPWMD and other water/wastewater agencies and interested citizens in North County, the Northern Salinas Valley and on the Monterey Peninsula. 


At the January 27, 2005 Board meeting, Curtis Weeks, General Manager of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA), provided an oral overview of the RUWS project regional collaboration process, which included convening a working group of senior managers of affected cities, MPWMD and other water/wastewater agencies to develop RUWS project governance concept alternatives.  He advised that the RUWS project would likely focus on a publicly-owned, regional desalination facility at Moss Landing, as well as other ways to address long-term urban water supply needs.  At the March 21, 2005 meeting, Mr. Weeks presented a progress report on the RUWS project, during which he advised that two good governance concept alternatives had evolved from several meetings of the senior managers’ working group.  Mr. Weeks stated that he expected these governance concept alternatives would be presented to the County Board of Supervisors, and affected water/wastewater agency boards and city councils in April.  Mr. Weeks also advised that the managers working group had not yet addressed how the regional desalting facility would be designed, built and operated; but that companies in addition to the two current Moss Landing project proponents that could be selected. 


At the March 21, 2005 meeting, MRWPCA General Manager, Keith Israel, updated the Board on preliminary findings contained in his agency’s Groundwater Replenishment Project feasibility study that could enable several thousand acre-feet per year of purified, recycled water to be made available for recharging the Seaside Groundwater Basin, and later recovery for indirect potable reuse in compliance with applicable State health standards.    


Mr. Weeks presented a summary of the primary RUWS governance concept alternatives in an April 4, 2005 meeting attended by elected representatives of the Board of Supervisors, mayors and board chairs of the District and other water/wastewater agencies.  MPWMD staff made a summary presentation on these governance concept alternatives at the April 18, 2005 Board meeting.  Acting Chair Markey requested that this item be agendized for discussion and direction at the May 16, 2005 Board meeting.  The item was discussed on that date, and the Board scheduled a June 16, 2005 Water Summit planning workshop to determine its desired approach for addressing RUWS governance issues.  At the Board’s request an invitation to participate in this planning workshop was sent to all of the entities participating in the RUWS discussions. 


On April 19, 2005, Curtis Weeks presented the Monterey County Board of Supervisors with the RUWS governance concept alternatives (Exhibit 1-A).  Supervisors unanimously approved Mr. Weeks’ recommendation that the County continue to collaborate with the cities and water/wastewater agency managers in developing a draft agreement to form a RUWS Board consisting of members of the Board of Supervisors, City Councils and elected Directors of MPWMD and other water and wastewater agencies.  The Board of Supervisors would have responsibility over the RUWS and ultimately be accountable to county government.  The Board of Supervisors also directed that County funding sources be identified to establish a RUWS program management function.  Finally, the Board of Supervisors indicated that a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Board for governing a publicly-owned regional water supply project remains a viable alternative.  Mr. Weeks is re-convening the senior managers group to discuss key provisions of an RUWS Board formation agreement later this month.  District staff believes that a RUWS Board draft formation agreement could be ready for review by the affected public agency governing boards by July or August 2005. 


Finally, although the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has made considerable progress to date, our current schedule anticipates that the TAC, Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and Water Demand Committee will need until August 2005 to submit their report and recommendation for District Board consideration related to uniform water demand “factors” for use in forecasting future residential and commercial water need within the District, based on the land use elements of the Monterey Peninsula jurisdictions’ general plans.  A special meeting of the PAC/TAC is targeted for July 26 or August 2, 2005 for the purpose of reviewing the TAC’s proposed water demand factors.            



1-A      RUWS Governance Concept Alternatives Summary Powerpoint Presentation

1-B      MCWRA General Manager, Curtis Weeks’ 4/19/04 Report to Board of Supervisors

1-C      5/16/05 Letter from Elkhorn Slough Coalition Director, Madeleine Clark

1-D (Part 1)    MRWPCA/MCWD Regional Urban Recycled Water Project Description  

1-D (Part 2)    MRWPCA Seaside Groundwater Basin Replenishment Project Description

1-E      Water Supply Objective in District’s updated Strategic Plan (adopted 10/18/04)