EXHIBIT 18-D

MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

DRAFT

FINDINGS of APPROVAL

CONSIDER APPLICATION TO AMEND

CALIFORNIA AMERICAN WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO SERVE MONTEREY BAY SHORES ECORESORT

Service area: APN 011-501-014

Application #20080915MBS, Permit #M09-03-L4

Adopted by MPWMD Board of Directors on January ___, 2009

Unless noted otherwise, all cited documents and materials are available for review at the MPWMD Office, 5 Harris Court, Building G, Monterey (Ryan Ranch).

It is hereby found and determined as follows:

1. FINDING: Security National Guaranty, Inc., (SNG) is identified as the owner of the subject 39.04-acre parcel in Sand City identified as APN 011-501-014, on which a multi-use resort known as the Monterey Bay Shores Ecoresort (MBSE) is planned. The proposed water purveyor and co-applicant is California American Water (CAW), a regulated public utility. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD or District) and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) previously approved annexation of the subject parcel into the CAW service area, but service is restricted by MPWMD Ordinance No. 132. The City of Sand City approved an earlier (larger) version of the MBSE in December 1998. SNG holds water rights totaling 149 acre-feet per year (AFY) from the Seaside Groundwater Basin as directed by the Superior Court in the Seaside Basin Adjudication.

EVIDENCE: Application #20080915MBS, site map and associated materials submitted September 15, 2008; additional application materials submitted in October 2008. MPWMD Permit #M07-03-L4 to CAW approved on October 15, 2007. CAW Advise Letter #712 to the CPUC and map dated October 23, 2008. MPWMD Ordinance No. 132 adopted January 24, 2008. Notice of Determination for MBSE filed by City of Sand City on December 2, 1998. Seaside Groundwater Basin Judgment (Final Decision) dated March 27, 2006, Monterey Superior Court Case #M66343, California American Water vs. City of Seaside et al.

2. FINDING: The 39.04-acre parcel will be within the area served by CAW.

EVIDENCE: Permit application and other materials as specified in Finding #1.

3. FINDING: No new wells or water supply facilities regulated by MPWMD are associated with this permit application. The Seaside Groundwater Basin Watermaster has confirmed that an Alternative Production Allocation (APA) of 149 AFY is reserved for use on the subject property, and may be delivered from an offsite CAW well located in the Seaside Basin.

EVIDENCE: Permit application and other materials as specified in Finding #1. Letter from Seaside Basin Watermaster to SNG dated September 19, 2008.

4. FINDING: The applicants have applied for a permit to amend the CAW Water Distribution System (WDS) to enable up to 90 AFY of CAW water service to parcel APN 011-501-014.

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials as specified in Finding #1.

5. FINDING: Based on District staff analysis of the application, 90 AFY has been set as the annual production limit from the Seaside Basin to meet the water needs for the parcel specified in Finding #1.

EVIDENCE: MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #3.

6. FINDING: The application to amend the CAW water distribution system, along with supporting materials, is in accordance with District Rules 21 and 22.

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials as specified in Finding #1. Letter from MPWMD to SNG dated October 31, 2008 that application is complete.

Required Findings (MPWMD Rule 22-B)

7. FINDING: The approval of the permit would not cause unnecessary duplication of potable water service with any existing system. The proposed system will be limited to one master connection for resort complex on the subject parcel. It is noted that an inactive well exists on the property, and could be used as an emergency back-up, with proper treatment. A monitoring well also exists on the property. The property benefits from overlying water rights to percolating groundwater. [Rule 22-B-1]

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials as specified in Finding #1. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Conditions of Approval #1 through #4.

8. FINDING: The approval of the permit would not result in water importation or exportation to or from the District, respectively. [Rule 22-B-2]

EVIDENCE: The referenced property is located wholly within the MPWMD as shown on District boundary location maps.

9. FINDING: Approval of the application would not result in significant adverse impacts to “Sensitive Environmental Receptors” (SER) as defined by MPWMD Rule 11, including the Seaside Groundwater Basin. The Monterey County Superior Court has determined the “natural safe yield” and specified pumping rights of property owners as part of the Seaside Basin Adjudication, including 149 AFY for the applicant. [Rule 22-B-3]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Adjudication Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1.

10. FINDING: The application is based on specified water rights associated with the subject parcel as determined by the Superior Court as part of the Seaside Basin Adjudication. [Rule 22-B-4]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Final Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1.

11. FINDING: A long-term reliable source of water supply of 90 AFY of CAW is available to the subject property as this amount is less than the 149 AYF specified under the Seaside Basin Adjudication. The Watermaster has confirmed the arrangement between CAW and SNG. [Rule 22-B-5]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Final Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1. Letter from Seaside Basin Watermaster to SNG dated September 19, 2008.

12. FINDING: The source of water supply is the CAW water distribution system, primarily from wells in the Seaside Basin. The cumulative effects of issuance of this WDS permit would not be expected to result in significant adverse impacts to the source of supply or the species and habitats dependent on the source of supply due to actions by the Superior Court to reduce Seaside Basin pumping to the natural safe yield. [Rule 22-B-6]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Final Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #3.

13. FINDING: The source of supply for the subject parcel is derived from fractured bedrock in the Seaside Basin, which is not within the jurisdiction of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). [Rule 22-B-7]

EVIDENCE: MPWMD hydrogeologic maps on file; January 20, 2009 e-mail confirmation of Kenneth Emanuel, SWRCB technical staff member, confirming applicant written summary of October 10, 2008 meeting regarding SWRCB jurisdiction in Seaside Basin.

14. FINDING: MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4 does not allow a permanent intertie to any other water distribution system. The proposed project will be connected to the CAW system. Temporary water service from offsite sources may not be necessary as the fully integrated CAW wells and piping system should adequately cover the emergency water needs of the development. Furthermore, there is an existing onsite non-CAW well that can be reactivated for certain back-up uses, as allowed by County Health authorities. [Rule 22-B-8]

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials specified in Finding #1. MPWMD Permit # M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #13.

15. FINDING: A back-flow protection device to prevent contamination of the CAW system is not necessary as CAW is the water purveyor. A devise may be needed if a non-CAW onsite well is reactivated for emergency use [Rule 22-B-9]

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials specified in Finding #1. MPWMD Permit # M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #14.

Minimum Standards for Granting a Permit (MPWMD Rule 22-C)

16. FINDING: The application adequately identifies the responsible parties as the California American Water and Security National Guaranty, Inc. [Rule 22-C-1]

EVIDENCE: Permit application materials specified in Finding #1.

17. FINDING: The application meets the definition of a “multiple-parcel connection system” as water will be provide by CAW, a public utility with nearly 39,000 customers, for commercial and landscape use on the 39.04-acre parcel, and is therefore subject to California Title 22 water quality standards. [Rule 22-C-2]

EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in Finding #1. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Conditions of Approval #1, #2, #3, and #15; California Administrative Code, Title 22.

18. FINDING: The application identifies the location of the source of supply for the water distribution system (CAW WDS). [Rule 22-C-3]

EVIDENCE: Permit application as specified in Finding #1, including engineering maps. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #4.

19. FINDING: The approval of the application would not create an overdraft or increase an existing overdraft of a groundwater basin, and a superior right has been demonstrated. The Superior Court has determined the “natural safe yield” and specified pumping rights of property owners as part of the Seaside Basin Adjudication. [Rule 22-C-4]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Final Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1. Letter from Seaside Basin Watermaster to SNG dated September 19, 2008. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #3.

20. FINDING: The approval of the application would not adversely affect the ability of existing systems to provide water to users due to conditions of approval that limit future water use to a reasonable and acceptable amount. Overlying water rights holders are also co-equal to other overlying users. [Rule 22-C-5]

EVIDENCE: Seaside Groundwater Basin Final Decision dated March 27, 2006 as specified in Finding #1. Letter from Seaside Basin Watermaster to SNG dated September 19, 2008. MPWMD Permit #M09-03-L4, Condition of Approval #3. California Water Code.

Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

21. FINDING: In the review of this application, MPWMD has followed those guidelines adopted by the State of California and published in the California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15000, et seq. Specifically, the MPWMD, as a Responsible Agency under CEQA for this action, has complied with Guidelines Section 15096, and relies on actions by the CEQA Lead Agency, the City of Sand City. In December 1998, Sand City certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the MBSE (SCH#97091005), and adopted a series of resolutions associated with approving the Coastal Development Permit for the project. In October 2008, a Revised Draft Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Monterey Bay Shores Resort was prepared to describe the revised (smaller) project that is now proposed. A key change is water service by CAW via SNG’s adjudicated water rights rather than service by onsite shallow wells. This Addendum was adopted by the City of Sand City at a public hearing on January 20, 2009. In making its decision on this application, the MPWMD has considered all of the environmental documents and findings made by the lead agency and has concluded that none of the conditions set forth in Guidelines 15162 have occurred since the adoption of the Addendum on January 20, 2009.

EVIDENCE: The Notice of Determination for Monterey Bay Shores Resort Final EIR (SCH#97091005), filed with the County Clerk on December 2, 1998, along with Cal. Dept. of Fish and Game Environmental Filing Fee Cash Receipt #68608. List of resolutions of approval by Sand City dated December 4, 1998. October 2008 Revised Draft Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Monterey Bay Shores Resort prepared for City of Sand City (light blue cover transmitted December 2008). City of Sand City Resolution #SC 09-06 adopted January 20, 2009 adopting the Addendum and providing a list of minor errata. MPWMD Notice of Determination prepared on January ___, 2009 as directed by the MPWMD Board on January __, 2009 as part of its approval of the subject WDS permit.

22. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Sections 15091 and 15092, the MPWMD Board finds that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, based on the documentation cited in Finding #21. Mitigation measures are not made as conditions of approval by MPWMD for this action. The full record for all facets of the project is located in the offices of the City of Sand City, 1 Sylvan Way, Sand City.

EVIDENCE: Final Environmental Impact Report for the MBSE (SCH#97091005), certified December 1998. The Notice of Determination for Monterey Bay Shores Resort Final EIR (SCH#97091005), filed with the County Clerk on December 2, 1998. MPWMD Notice of Determination prepared January ___, 2009 as described in Finding #21.

23. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted by the MPWMD Board for approval of the subject permit.

EVIDENCE: MPWMD Notice of Determination prepared January ___, 2009 as described in Finding #21.

U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2009\20090129\PubHrgs\18\item18_exh18d.doc