 Board of Directors Meeting for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District for January 19th, 2023. Holly, will you take roll please? President Smalley. Here. Vice President Hill. Here. Director Ackerman. Here. Director Falls. Here. Director Mayhood. Yeah, you're muted. Director Mayhood. Here. Thank you. Okay. Rick, are there any additions or deletions to the closed session agenda? The staff has none. Okay. Any oral communications from members of the public for items that are on the closed session agenda? There doesn't appear to be any members of the public present. Okay. Well then, we can adjourn to the closed session. Let's see you in a minute. I'm 31. Thank you. And yes, I see it's 631. Do we need to take roll again? Yes, we do. Oh, okay. Since this is now the open session of the Board of Directors Meeting for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District for July 19th, we're convening that. Holly, would you take roll please? President Smalley. Here. Vice President Hill. Here. Director Ackerman came on for a moment and said she would be right back. So I will watch for her to return. Director Falls. Here. Director Mayhood. Here. So when she comes back, I'll make note of that time. Okay, thank you. Okay. Rick, any additions or deletions to the open session agenda items? Staff has none, Chair. Okay. Then oral communications. Any oral communications from members of the public or items that are not on the agenda for this evening? I don't see any hands up. Um, we can go ahead and proceed then. The president's report, I have nothing to report on this evening. So let's proceed to unfinished business, which is the remote meeting authorization. In order to be able to continue the, these remote meetings for another month and a half. Does any board member? I see one wanting to comment on this. Yes, I would like to move that we ratify and re-adopt the resolution attached to the agenda that allows us to continue with remote meetings. Okay. Um, does anybody from the public wish to comment on this? Before we take a vote on it, I see, I see none from the public. But okay, Bob. I just wanted to, um, I guess confirm with Gina that the, um, these remote meetings are still uh, scheduled to be ended at the end of February. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Uh, we'll give that a holly. Will you, Jamie? Sorry, um, I just wanted to follow up on that and find out whether there's any possibility that it will be extended. I saw that president Biden extended the federal emergency authorization. Now I know that Gavin Newsom has not extended ours in the state. So I know that it's currently not extended. But Gina, I just wondered, I mean, since the federal authorization was extended, is there a chance that this one will be? Well, I don't think so. And the reason is that there are different emergencies that are in play. So, um, the current federal emergency has to do with the storms. And the, um, right now remote meetings are being conducted under AB 361, which deals more specifically with the COVID emergency. So while, let's just say the storm emergency was ongoing after March 1, and the storm still presented an emergency, that would create a basis to conduct like a traditional emergency meeting under the Brown Act, but it, it doesn't trigger all these unusual remote meeting provisions that have come with COVID. Sorry about that. All right. Thank you. Okay. Given that, Holly, will you take a vote on this, please? President Smalley? Yes. Vice President Hill? Yes. Director Ackman? Yes. Director Fultz? Yes. Director Mayhood? Yes. Okay. And that motion passes. Moving on to new business, um, item 11a is the, um, storm update. Um, and the new roll update from Rick. Thank you, Chair Smalley. Um, you all should have got an addendum, hopefully to the agenda with the most current list of storm damage to date. Um, that list, uh, may still grow. We're still out, uh, checking, uh, facilities. Um, quick, uh, short little update, then I'll take questions. You know, the, the shape of the district, as of today, PG&E power has been restored to all facilities. A drone booster up in, in Lumpico was the, the last site you have power restored. And, uh, the recent upgrades to the Lumpico storage proved to be a great success by adding and maintaining, uh, a seven day storage. So it was not critical, uh, but we did have to walk in from time to time to, uh, to service generators and so forth. But, um, we maintained good stores, uh, in Lumpico the whole time. Uh, it flooded, the building flooded as it's right next to Lake Lumpico. It had three or four feet of water in it. There was some issues, but we're getting all that back in auto. And it's running and things are looking really good out there. We still have communications issues, uh, with several of our sites requiring, uh, daily tank checks and manual operations of pumps. Um, and we hope to get communications restored in the next couple weeks. The phone company is much slower in their response than, uh, than power. We still have a couple of pumps down that we lost due to power spikes and phase rotation from PG and E, um, I think we lost three different, uh, booster pumps. And we are in the process of replacing. We lifted our last, uh, boil notice today, uh, up in the Riverside Grove area, where we had, uh, I believe five connections that were impacted out of waters due to landslide activity up on Stewart Street in Riverside Grove. We are working on putting in temporary, uh, above ground water mains to feed. I think we have one house left, uh, and it's in the process of being rebuilt. So no one's living there still out of water, um, at the end of Stewart. Our Lyon surface water treatment plant is running at capacity, roughly 1200 gallons per minute. Um, our storage in, uh, most zones was almost 100% fully restored. We are moving water, um, south, uh, and, uh, within before the weekend, which is tomorrow, we should be moving surface water, um, up into our south system. Um, we still have our Kirby, our Felton sources, uh, out of service due to, uh, Fall Creek is still, uh, has a very high flow, uh, unsafe for staff to enter to clean, uh, the intake. So, and we also have, uh, damage to, uh, bull and Bennett supply lines, tree damage, um, that, uh, we are, uh, prod in the process of, uh, repairing, repairing. Um, you saw the, uh, the list, I think is what we're getting close to 2.8 million in, uh, damage. Be more than happy to take any questions. Uh, we're hearing all types of reports from the president's visit being, it sounds like category A and B right now, which are debris removals and temporary work such as putting the temporary pipe in the Huckleberry and others, uh, is at 100% due to the president's visit today. We have not heard yet on category F, which is replacement. I'm assuming that those, um, totals will get increased from the 75%, hopefully at least 92 a hundred. The president's been very generous, um, with the storm damage repair. Uh, with that, uh, I'd be more than happy to take any questions on that list or any damage that, uh, the board may have. Okay. Uh, Bob, any questions on this? Uh, no questions. Yeah. No. Gail. No. Jamie. No questions, but I just want to offer real sincere thanks to Rick and all of the staff for what must seem like working nonstop the last few weeks. Um, I know how hard that kind of emergency response work can be. And so I hope that there's something that we can do for the staff when things calm down just to, you know, thank them for all of their efforts here. Appreciate it. Yeah, staff safety was our number one concern in rotating, um, long hours, um, uh, and they're holding up great and we're starting to taper off. And we hope that we'll only have the on call person working this weekend. Okay. Well, thank you for that update, Rick. Um, moving on then. The, um, members of the public. Oh, thank you. Um, and Holly reminded me of that earlier this evening, but I don't have the note written on my screen yet. Um, does anybody from the public have questions on this damage description that district manager Rogers presented seeing none? Okay. We can move on then. Thank you, Gail. Um, next item is the Huckleberry Island emergency repair. Rick, right? And I do believe we have the district engineer, uh, on the call to present, uh, this item to the committee. I am indeed here. Thank you, Rick. I don't see you, but okay. This item is a recommendation that the board, uh, instruct district manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with Anderson Pacific to repair the broken main at Huckleberry. This is another break in the same location we had previously been looking at for a very different reason. In this case, the stream that is just a little bit north of this location suffered a tree across it and jumped its banks and washed out the embankment that supports our pipeline. Pipeline broke and was essentially a broken pipe hanging 20 feet in the air inaccessible. And so we on an emergency basis reached out to Anderson Pacific who went immediately to work. I would like to point out that they have bent over backwards to work with the district on this and have put in almost a thousand feet of 12 inch temporary main and a six inch connection to Huckleberry Island so that we have our headline back in service, allowing us to, as director Rogers mentioned, move water south from our surface sources here from the lion plant down into the Felton system, which is currently lacking any other surface water. With that, I will take questions. Okay. Let's go around the horn then. Jeff, any questions? So what action is Josh asking for us to do tonight to approve this contract? Yes, sir. We are asking for the board to approve the contract. Yes. I think that the best way to formulate a motion related to this would be to ratify the contract with Anderson, the attached contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering. Okay. Thank you for that, Gina. We're still looking at the wording that was in the memo from the January 5th meeting where this was still some aspect of work in progress in the last two weeks. The work has progressed a lot more, who I expect nearly completed at this point. So, okay. Rick, did you want to comment on that? I just wanted to make clear and Josh kind of made it clear that this work has already been done and due to the fact that we didn't have board meetings, we're kind of playing catch up to get this work approved. And we would have came sooner, but as you all know, the communications and power kept us from having board meetings. And the urgency of this work required us to move. Okay. Bob, any questions on this? No, thanks. Okay. Gil? I don't really have any questions on the work and obviously I'm going to vote yes, but I do want to say that I was not really happy with the memo here that went around. It's clear to me that the reason this is an emergency is because of things that have happened during these recent storms. But if you look at the second paragraph under background, it describes basically that the area was undermined by a small landslip in September of 2021. Obviously, if you've waited around for three and a half months and you're doing it now, that wasn't an emergency. And I think it's important that we, in documenting this, that we say that this emergency is something that happened during the storm. And it's an important to say that because then we're going to get reimbursed 100% for it. And if you read this current memo, there's no way for anybody to know that. So I just hope that there's some way to fix this so that the record is correct, that we're responding to a storm-related emergency that deserves 100% reimbursement. That is my mistake, which I apologize. The only thing I can say is we're trying to do too much all at once. Gina, you would be the one to tell us how to correct this. So I'm all yours. In terms of qualifying for FEMA funding, the contract that was signed that's in the packet contains a statement of the reasons why it constitutes an emergency you're being entered into. And so certainly that the clarification scale that you're making is well taken. But in terms of qualifying for FEMA funding, the contract should stand on its own and demonstrating the reasons. All right. Well, then if that's the case, then what I've said is basically just a quibble and it's not important. Okay. Jamie, did I solicit you yet? Any comments? Yeah, not yet, but no comments. Okay. All right. Then before we go out to the public, would anybody like to make the motion so the public knows what it is that we're considering here? I will move that we ratify the contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering. Thank you as indicated in the report by staff. Okay. I'll second that. Okay. Any questions from members of the public on this? I see none. Okay. Holly, would you take a vote? We'll call vote on this, please. President Smalley? Yes. Vice President Hill? Yes. Director Ackman? Yes. Director Falls? Yes. Director Mayhood? Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Thank you for that. Moving on then, the next item is the Santa Cruz integrated regional water management plan. Rick? Yes. Thank you. And the environmental programs manager Lancer should be here to present this item. Carly? Thank you, Rick. So this is a funding opportunity that the district is pursuing through the regional water management group or RWMG. The RWMG developed an integrated regional water management plan in 2016, which was adopted by the then board. The plan has since been addendumed and will need to be readopted to be eligible to receive funding if it is awarded. The application sinks to heart in 13 pump house stations, which are currently wooden at risk of fire damage. The total cost of the funding request is 305,000 with a 50% match of 305,000 as well. Implementing agencies, including agencies that will lead activities to be reimbursed by the grant must adopt a resolution authorizing the RWMG to apply for funds on their behalf. Staffers requesting adoption of the attached resolution, which is extended C and the IRWM addendum plan, which is links in the memo. I'm prepared to answer any questions the board may have. Okay. Questions on this then? Gail? Okay. I'm a little confused. Which item are we talking about now? C or D? Yeah. Okay. So you're asking for us just to adopt the integrated regional water management plan. That's one vote, right? And then the other is one in which we approve the request for funding. You talked about just trying to understand what we're supposed to be discussing right now and what you want us to vote on first. Mark, did you want to? Yes, Carly, I'd like you to clarify that. Okay, sure. So we want to both adopt the resolution that's extended C as well as adopt the IRWM plan, which was linked in the memo. So it's two separate adoptions, one for the resolution and then one for the plan that's been updated. Yeah. I'll provide a clarification there that the resolution adopts the plan and addendum. So if the board votes to adopt the resolution, it will bear in the addendum. Okay. Sorry, I'm not hearing what you're saying, Gina. Can you speak up a little? Thank you. Sure. The only vote that's needed on this item is to adopt the resolution. And when we get to that, I would like to clarify a few words for purposes of the record to make sure that the resolution has the right language in it. Okay. Given that understanding then, Gail, do you have questions on this? I still don't understand. I'm sorry. I'm being dense. Go on to somebody else. Okay. Jeff, a little bit of the same situation here. It looks like we've got two things we're doing once. Yeah, that's okay. There's two resolutions. So which ones are we talking about? This is the one item 11C on page 18 of 19. Right. It is not the drought relief funding. It's 11C, the integrated regional water management plan. Right. But I think I understand what Director Mahed is saying now. It looks like the resolution is referring to adopting the plan that was updated since 2016. And we also need to approve the regional water management group to apply for the grant funding on our behalf. But there's no resolution attached to that. So the memo is incorrectly written. Sorry about that. Okay. Is there a sunset date for this, Carly? Yes, I believe they're trying to submit it by the end of the month here. Okay. So we don't have a clear memo or resolution in front of us at this point. Well, the resolution still stands. We still need to adopt this resolution, but we also need to allow for the group to apply on our behalf. And I think that's something we could probably do after they submit. It's more important to get the resolution that's currently here approved tonight. Okay. So you're asking us first to approve the resolution? Yes. Okay. Can I just have one question about this? Why did we not adopt this back in 2019 or whatever it was revised? Yeah, that's a good question. They actually hadn't had anyone readopted until now. They're reaching out to all the agencies to do that currently. And I think it's because we hadn't pursued the funding since then. We were awarded funding in 2016, and now we're pursuing the next round of funding, which then has us having to adopt that updated version. Okay. It's been an appropriate time for me to ask Gina how she wants to change it, because I don't, otherwise I'd make a motion that if she's going to change something. Right. Tell us, tell us. On page 45 of the board packet, it's the second page of the resolution that's before the board. In the first complete whereas clause at the top of the page, there's a reference to the county of Santa Cruz. It should be to the San Lorenzo Valley Water District. And in the now therefore we had resolved clause on the same. I apologize. I misspoke under past and adopted. It should say January 19, 2023. And I assume that's a holdover because this packet was originally prepared for a prior board meeting. Okay. I'm looking at page 45 in the agenda. And I think I see the discrepancy that Gina's pointing out, but I'm not sure on this fifth day of January, 2022. Well, this two week delay doesn't mean that we delay it a year in two weeks. So the year is incorrect also. Yes. That's a big issue. Yeah. So that's a technical issue before this gets signed. It has to get adjusted. So as I understand it, Harley wants us to approve this resolution and then they'll have to come back with the second one of some sort to actually apply for the money. Am I correct? Right. So I don't see this one at this time. This doesn't really commit us to anything other than supporting the goals and objectives of the Santa Margarita. Yeah. Gail. I would like to make a motion that we adopt the resolution that adopts the Santa Cruz integrated regional water management plan with the changes suggested by Gina and with the stipulation that the last line says passed and adopted this what day is it? 19th day of January 2023 by the following vote. Thank you for that, Gail. I will second that, but at the same time, we need to get further comments, questions from both board members and staff. And the follow-up. I'm sorry. And the public, not staff. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Jeff. Bob, any questions on this aspect? As we work through it. I just had a question and a comment. The question, is there anybody on our staff that's currently actively involved with either the steering committee or in some operations of this organization? Not at this time. Rick and I have both been involved in the last few months, but it was really to pursue the funding. And we also did provide, Josh, James and I did put together a list of current projects that we thought could be eligible for the funding and didn't have that incorporated into the updated plan. We are invited to their meetings and we have attended some of the meetings, but not regularly. I'm sorry to generate another question. Is there annual funding on this or does it come sort of every X number of years and we're just in another cycle? Right. It's by cycle. So they don't have, they don't necessarily do it every year, but there is the potential for them to offer more funding the next year. It sounds like Tim Carson was saying that it's unlikely at this point that they're going to extend it again, but we don't know. So I mean, I think they get money when the budget surplus gets really big and it's not so big now, unfortunately. Yeah, I mean, I think the key comment that I wanted to make sure I understood, so I read through everything and also for the community is, you know, this isn't a statutory mandate. This is as it states in the resolution more of a framework that we're all sort of agreed to certain principles. I think those principles that are exposed are, you know, very, very worthwhile. And so, you know, for that reason, if this allows us to get additional funding and we continue doing what we're doing anyway, it seems like a win-win. As I was going through that number, as I was going through your memo, Carly, there was another question I had about being invited to apply. So they're looking for spending money or they saw that we had a need or is this something that we were talking to them about and they said, sure, go ahead and submit and see what happened. Right. So they actually do send out the invitation, I think, to pretty much all the agencies that could potentially have a project that would be eligible for funding. So we were just part of that group and we also participate in the actual group itself. So we obviously were extended the invitation to be a part of that. Yeah, I was trying to go through the story to see how we might do, but I have to admit, I was having a really hard time finding some of the criteria in the documentation. So I don't know if we've done that ourselves or if it's already been baked, but sure. I mean, I think the more grand funding we can get while grand funding is still available, because I don't think it's going to be available forever. We should definitely go and do that. Okay. Thanks, Bob. Jamie, any questions on this? I mean, I don't think so. I think I actually didn't quite understand what the body is that is, if it's not a legally mandated requirement that we have this regional action, is the group also something that is not by regulatory statute, but something that we... Can you just give me a quick understanding of what the group is? Sure. So it's actually a Santa Cruz. It's a regional group, so it's all the agencies within Santa Cruz County. They come together and plan for water reliability and resources, and it's led by the Community Foundation. So this is actually how we received the funding for the water... The report we just completed in the last couple of years, the water supply availability report that Josh had worked on, and the group is just made up of the different agencies being represented, and they bring together what projects are each agency doing and how can we work together? So there's not like staff to the organization or anything. This is just a working committee, essentially, of all of the water agencies and organizations in Santa Cruz County. Exactly. I was getting... I was thinking that this was some kind of a staffed organization that we were also working through, so my mistake. I don't have the answer, Mark. Okay. All right. Thanks. Any questions or comments from the public on this resolution? Or the Integrated Regional Water Management? No? I see none. Carly, would you take a vote on this, please? And this is for the resolution at this point. Funding will come back at a subsequent meeting. Am I correct in that? That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Okay. President Smalley? Yes. Yes. Vice President Hill? Yes. Director Ackerman? Yes. Director Falls? Yes. Director Mayhood? Yes. Question passes. Okay. Moving on then, the next item is 11D, the Department of Water Resources Drought Relief Funding Grant. Thank you. And the Environmental Program Manager will present this item also to the board. All right. So this is another funding opportunity the district is pursuing through the Department of Water Resources or DWR. The Urban Community Drought Relief Funding opened in December and the program has a $3 million minimum award for applicant in a 25% non-state cost share. The district is seeking to submit an application for replacement of five redwood tanks that are currently leaking and undersized with 120,000 gallon bolted steel tanks. The application will also include one polyethylene tank that is undersized and was damaged in the 2020 CCU fires. The total request is for $4.5 million with a $1.5 million cost share or 25%. The district does have budgets for the tanks that are included as part of this funding request. So this would help supplement that and a district representative needs to be assigned by the board as the signatory and point of contact for the funding agreement if awarded. DWR needs documentation in the form of a resolution from the board of directors prior to submitting the application. The district manager has been chosen as the district signatory and will direct communications with DWR to the district's environmental programs manager. I'm happy to answer any other questions or any questions. Okay, questions on this item? Bob? Yeah, I was just curious the justification for this from a drought relief point of view is what? So the justification here is that the tanks are currently leaking so losing water and we're also increasing our drought resiliency through increasing the storage of the tanks. And about how many days of storage do we get with the larger tanks? I believe the total storage at this point of all those six tanks is $160,000 and that would actually up us to $720,000 if we were to increase all those tanks. So X number of days more of storage basically? That's right and I don't have that calculation but that's something we can figure out. And do we have an idea about how much water is currently leaking? How many gallons per minute in total is currently leaking from these six tanks? We're currently working on that because of the storms. I was trying to leave the water quality treatment staff alone but they should be able to give me that information so that is something we'll be developing. Are these kind of metrics going to be required for the application? They are so there are, we do have to show benefits for all these the projects. So that's everything we're going to be putting together. We're getting pretty close with the narrative and now it's really breaking down those numbers. And that will come back to the board? The application? We could potentially bring it back to the board. Ideally we would submit it as soon as possible. Sorry for an information item. I'd like to see the application but it doesn't have to be about obviously we're voting tonight. Okay great thanks. Okay. Gail? No questions. Questions on this Jeff? Okay Jamie? Nope not for me. Okay then Carly I have a couple questions. Will we have a proposal ready by January 31st? Yes so like I said we're really close now with the schedule the budget and the narrative and now it's really just breaking down those benefits. So we have been working on this for the last couple months or about a month and a half since before the holidays. I think it was right before Christmas is when we jumped in. So we should be wrapping it up probably next week and ready to submit. Okay. Okay and then is it expected and I don't think you can necessarily answer this question either Rick or one of the other staff to have all of this work completed by the end of 2026? Yes. Is that four years? Yes. Okay with grants I'm guessing the grants would come out sometime mid this year so three and a half years between planning and construction to be able to get those in place. Okay all right Bob. Keep in mind that some of these tanks are already in various stages of planning anyway. So I think we're yeah we have a little bit of a head start on at least at least three of them if not four so yeah I think there shouldn't be any problem with them. Okay all right well given that I'd like to make the motion that the board adopt the resolution for this drought relief funding in a point of the district manager to be the signatory representative for this and the point of contact for this drought relief funding solicitation. Mark if I may make a couple of housekeeping clerical applications for this the date of the date of the resolution assuming the motion that you just made passes will be January 19th and this resolution does not require the president's signature so that can be stricken from the resolution. Okay good thank you. I second it. Okay thank you Gail. So before we do that any comments from members of the public on this item I see none so I think we can go ahead with the vote. President Smalley. Yes. President Hill. Yes. Director Ackman. Yes. Director Falls. Yes. Director Mayhood. Yes. Motion passes. Okay moving on then the next item our board committee appointments for 2023. I will take this one since it was in my court responsibilities. I didn't develop a formal memo but there is a memo that I submitted to Holly and is attached to the agenda with my proposed appointments for committee members for board representatives to be on the various committees and for those that haven't seen this or haven't read it I will go ahead and read through the list for the administration committee Ackman and Hill for the budget and finance committee Mayhood and Hill for engineering and environmental Smalley and Falls for the Lompeco assessment district Ackman for the Santa Margarita groundwater association Mayhood and Falls with the alternate of Smalley. In the memo I also made the suggestion or proposal that the board select the committee chair persons for admin budget and finance and engineering and environmental but it was pointed out to me by Holly that that doesn't follow with what the board policy manual currently says. So first let's discuss the committee assignments. Anybody has any comments on those or if board is prepared to agree with my recommendations. Jeff. Okay. Bob. Yeah no no comments. Okay. Yeah. Yeah I'll just go ahead and move that we adopt the committee assignments for board members that are listed in the memo from the board president written on January 19th. Okay thank you for that motion. Do we have a second for that. Okay. Well then I will continue to solicit the Jamie any comments on this. No comments but I'm just wondering how Lake Boulevard is doing and all of the rain if I'm headed out to Lompeco. We will let Rick update you with that information prior to needing to leave for Lompeco whenever that does occur four months or eight months out. It's usually the Zianzi fire hall. Oh okay. Okay. Given that I believe that we're then tabling the second half of my proposed selection of committee chairs and let the committees do that as we have done in the past I personally it doesn't it's it seemed to me to be a bit odd as a new committee member when I was with the public to be selecting a committee chair from somebody that I had no idea who these two people were as board members on the committee but I understand that's the board policy if I want to change that that's another issue discuss that later. So just a personal thought on that one. Before I come back to Bob I want to hear from the public to see if anybody from the public has any comments on this. Seeing none then no comment Bob. I see you. Well I was just going to say Mark you have every right to bring the board policy manual to the board for discussion. The annual review is due anyway. I understand that and we can talk about it then but no. Okay. All right. Holly will you take a vote on this? President Smalley. Yes. Vice President Hill. Yes. Director Ackman. Yes. Director Falls. Yes. Director Mayhood. Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Moving on then. The consent agenda. Does anybody wish to comment on that one set of minutes from the board meeting? I just since since you're especially since you're new to chair chairing I just wanted to point out that in order to comment on it first it's got to be pulled but somebody are pulling it. Okay. Thank you for that. Does anybody want to pull those minutes? Seeing none hearing none. Do I have to go out to the public for that also? I think if they had raised their hand if they'd raised their hand we could entertain it but since nobody did we can just move on and it's deemed deemed approved. Okay. Thank you for that. Okay. District reports. We haven't listed as a district manager's report. I have nothing. Okay. Thank you. Department status reports. Let's see what questions we have on any of these. Bob you want to start? No questions. Okay. Jeff? No questions. Gail? No questions. Jamie? Nope. No questions. Okay. I have one for Josh slash Rick. What about the status of getting reimbursements from DWR going for the work that we're doing on Brackenbrae and for Springs? Have we submitted anything on that yet? Josh I think I'll let Josh answer that because I think we have submitted. He's been working with Bannister. The answer is no. We have not submitted anything because we still don't have the agreement in place. I have been working with ironically Joshua Bannister at DWR pretty regularly trying to get this thing done and I don't want to say they're slow walking yet but it is certainly taking far longer than I would have anticipated and that's all I'm going to say on that. Okay. Do you need any assistance with this? I don't think so at this point. I've been working with Rick and just at this point it's a case of we need to get them exactly the thing they want with the words and exactly the order they want and then we can get it signed. With the right boxes checked and the other ones not checked? Correct. Okay. Okay. We'll leave it at that then. With that then I believe we can adjourn this portion of the open session. The board has some further discussion for the closed session that we need to discuss and we will reconvene or report back to the general public at the close of that at the conclusion of that closed session meeting if we've taken any actions on that or not. Rick? I check with you and counsel if Holly needs to come back or not. We will need to because it's we can't stay with certainty that there won't be a report out of closed session so we need to reconvene and well I guess you know if what you're asking Rick is could we just do it without Holly and then give her the information afterwards I think that's possible. Yeah that was that is my question so she doesn't have to stick at the office and wait for us to come back okay release her to go home. Okay thank you Rick. I'm free to go Holly. We just need the zoom link you know the zoom meeting to remain active. Hey Eric. I need to make sure that you can stay until they come back from their closed session. Hi Holly. Yes. That's quite all right I'll be here. Okay so that's that's great then he will wait for you to return. Okay thank you. Okay to the general public that's set in on this thank you for attending. This portion of the meeting is now adjourned. We have nothing to report on any of the three closed session items this evening. Without objections I'd like to adjourn this meeting for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District. 9 0 6 p.m. Good night everyone. Okay night. Thanks.