 Call our board meeting to order. One of our directors is not present, Rochelle. And so otherwise, the four of us are here. We have, that's the roll call. We have one public hearing on declaration of water shortage stage. I'm going to start off with a presentation, short presentation here. Oops, oops, wrong one. Yeah, that works. OK, well that's weird. So I'd like to give a little bit of background on the district's water shortage contingency plan. And that's really our rulebook for determining whether to declare water supply shortage and what level of curtailment goes along with that and also what actions that are needed to achieve those curtailment targets. Our plan is included as attachment one to the memo tonight. But I just want to give a quick run through of how it works. And the purpose of it is to conserve available water supply and to protect and preserve public health, welfare, and safety during short and long term water supply shortages. It's a key component of our five year urban water management plan submittal. And so it was last updated in 2016 as part of our 2015 urban plan. Every year, following the end of the water year on March 31, we take a look at the plan in relation to the triggers and ask the board to make a declaration about a shortage stage if one is needed. So the water shortage contingency plan has a couple shortage types and some trigger conditions. And we're really focusing on the items that are highlighted. So for shortage types, we're looking at long term due to drought, contamination, or failure of critical infrastructure, and long term due to groundwater overdraft. And then the trigger conditions that we're looking at tonight are really number two and three. So presence of a groundwater emergency, which is indicative of the condition or the health of our groundwater basin, and our five year rainfall totals. Those are the current water year, so October 1 through March 31, and then the four prior full years, October 1 through September 30. And the plan has basically five supply shortage stages. We are always in a stage zero at a minimum, which is our baseline water conservation and water waste enforcement. So you can see there that the curtailment levels range from 5% up to 50%. And those are compared to a 2013 baseline. That was our pre-drought statewide drought year. This gives a little glimpse into where we've been. And you can see that in the last six years, we've been in some sort of shortage. It's a tongue twister. Starting in 2012 and the last four years, we've been in a stage three with a 25% curtailment target. And stage three rates in the last year as well. So the emergency rates are needed to account for the decrease in the consumption and revenue associated with each stage and curtailment target. And they're also needed to cover the costs of implementing the actions to achieve those curtailment levels. At a minimum, the district has to cover its fixed operating costs, which remain the same for the most part, whether we're pumping at 2013 levels or current levels now, which are a lot less. So the trigger conditions that we're looking at, the first is the health of the basin. And in 2014, in response to the overdraft that we've had and the seawater intrusion, the board declared a groundwater emergency. Since that time, the basin's been designated as critically overdrafted by the State Department of Water Resources. We recently conducted the Sky Tim study, which was reported on at the last board meeting, as well as one of the recent MGA meetings. And that study shows that we have seawater not only at both ends of the service area, which we knew about, on shore, but it's very close to the shore in between those two points. We have had some good news in that the big reductions in pumping and the conservation that our customers have done since 2013 has resulted in the water levels in some of the wells improving. But we are still seeing a number of wells that are still below protective elevation. So that's an upshot of all the water saving. The other trigger condition that we are focusing on is the five-year rainfall totals. And those are tied to predicted groundwater recharge. We look at five years because rain falling in one year may take many to several years to reach down into the aquifer levels from which we're pumping, which are pretty deep. And when we look at those alone, we land in a stage two, which is what we were thinking when we came to the board last month with an update. So nothing changed there. This shows the five-year rainfall totals. And so you can see the current year. We've gotten 16.17 inches and significantly below average. And the average there is represented by that dotted line. And so we take those five-year, the prior four full years, and we build on that looking at the current rainfall year. And so this chart shows what we really needed to come out of a stage three. I'm going to graphically show this. It's a little easier to follow. So you can see here this is the current year building on the four prior years. And rainfall below the blue line is indicative of a stage three based on rainfall alone. Rainfall below the red line is indicative of a stage two. And the green line represents, if you exceed that, you're in a stage one. So you can see there that we had a really low rainfall up until, oops, going back here, until February. Early March is when we really crossed the line between a three and to a two. And we never exceeded the red line. So we're about an inch and a half, I think, short of that red line. In, I guess, a snapshot here, summary, based on the groundwater emergency trigger condition, there's a basis for the board to declare a continued stage three with a 25% curtailment. And based on the five-year rainfall trigger condition, there's a basis for declaring a stage two with a 15% curtailment. So that leaves with the possible board actions for tonight. And I'm going to stop there. OK, any questions? I do have a question. You do. Go ahead. I just, I know these were based on the previous criteria. And we did the best we could. And it was better than based on just surface water conditions. But when will we be reevaluating that criteria for future years? I just brought that up. And in that, is there a way to consider not just amount of rainfall, but temperature and pattern of rainfall and estimation of recharge? Yeah, so I know that came up last year and maybe even the year before. And we were waiting on the groundwater model to be completed. That's really a key part in doing something different than what we already have and reevaluating those trigger conditions. And so we've talked about that. And how could we structure it differently? We could look at well levels, protective well levels. So I think given that it'll need to be updated again for the 2020 urban plan in 2021, we could wait until then. Or once the model is fully developed, we could reevaluate that. And if you want us to. The protective levels probably make the most sense. Yeah, and that's, I think, what Pismo Beach area does. They have a plan that's based on well levels. So we could take a look at their plan. Thank you. Any other questions? Carla? Yeah, I wanted to. Well, in the past, it seems if rainfall was the primary criterion for setting these stages of triggers, I guess you call them. And I just was wondering, we've had Dr. Daniels' research, the hydrogeology of this entire basin research. And we have had models on the Stanford climate change models. And so we know a lot more about the evapotranspiration and how that's going to change. And I really think we need to take all of those factors into making a decision on tonight. And I think the last time this came up, we did have a, I think, on the basis of that, I proposed a stage four, actually. There was a bare justification for that, according to rainfall. But I still think the threat is there. And I'm not tonight promoting or proposing getting extreme. But I think we still have a concerning issue with the other criteria that you just discussed. I think we should do a complete revaluation as soon as we have more solid information. I had one question myself. It was the stages since 2012, that diagram that you had up that one there. I know we have these water use reduction targets. But what is this reduction against? For example, it could be against the previous year. It could be against. And if you do it against the previous year, if you start off with 100 gallons, by now you didn't be down to 19 gallons because it's continually reducing more and more and more and more. Since 2013, again, is our baseline year. And that was pre-drought. I don't have any production charts going back that far. I think they're somewhere else in the packet. So we're really comparing ourself against our 2013 production. And I believe we're currently 22% below our 2013. So we're not actually asking our customers to do a lot? To do much more. And almost hold the line, but maybe a little bit more. Yeah. And we tied that 25% to a 50 gallon per person per day usage guideline to give people something to aim for and something realistic that they can work with. And we've seen it come back up to about 55 GPCD. So we're still in a good spot. People are still saving a lot of water, but it is creeping back up. We should probably put that detail in the ump when we redo it, what the goal really is. And it might change over time if the baseline might shift. Well, yeah, it appeared that we were going to go right past the 50 gallons per person per day at some point. And then it stopped in that great year of rainfall last year. Yeah, that was 50 over 50 inches of rainfall last year. Since this is a public hearing, I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wish to address us on this item? This is the time. Good evening. My name is Becky Steinbruner. I live in Aptos, and I'm a customer of PureSource. I depend on the Purisma offer for my family's drinking water, too. I want to thank you for the report, and I want to urge your board to be conservative in what you do tonight in determining what stage of water curtailment that you approve. I just want to remind you that, and I don't have to do this, I know, but even Governor Brown's last year proclaiming that the drought was over caused all of the area's water usage to go up an average of 12%. And with the rains that we had last winter, that didn't help. And now with the article in Sunday's Sentinel saying that the groundwater levels have risen to historic highs in some areas, I think it's going to be a tricky balance of really educating the public about what the groundwater overdraft issues are and that conservation is good and must be held steady. So I think to relax your stage of curtailment will send a message to the public that they don't have to worry so much anymore, and usage will go up further. I want to just point out that in, well, first of all, in Ms. Flock's report, it didn't talk about the ramble study and that it was really just a snapshot of the seawater, freshwater interface location. But I also want to point out that in 2014, Dr. Rosemary Knight's work from Stanford University was another snapshot from an earlier time, and it has been confusing to me why her snapshot and the ramble snapshot are not really being incorporated into the hydrometrics theoretical model to give us a better idea of how things are moving one way or the other. And I also want to point out that in Sunday's article, there was no mention of the Water Demand Offset Program that your district has been very aggressive in maintaining and that that has been your answer to continually approving more supply and more demand on the overdrafted aquifer, the Aptos Village Project, for example, being a huge increase. And so those are my comments. And again, I just want to urge you to be conservative. I know you will be very thoughtful in what you do. And please encourage people to continue conserving. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. My name is Valerie Webb, and I live in Capitola. And I just have a couple questions. First of all, I'm gathering that you folks set the rules for when we go into different stages. It's not a statewide mandate that we're following. Is that correct? That's correct. That was something I didn't know. Another question I had reading over the packet is, in all these meetings, I've never caught, what is the budget year you folks run on? What's the fiscal year here? July 1. July 1, OK. So one of my concerns was if you did happen to go to a stage two, what would happen to the budget? Because I know that that's always a concern, and money doesn't grow on trees for anybody. So I appreciate, as well as I can, you guys know so much more than I do. The tension that you're working under of constantly, not wanting to constantly berate people, save, save, save, but also having a greater awareness than probably anybody else in the community of the dangers that we are facing. I feel like there's going to be attention when you announce whatever you do. I think if I were a betting woman, I would bet that you're going to stay in a stage three. But I think there will be attention, because I think for most of us who don't know as much, we just look at rainfall and go, well, rainfall's at stage two. What do we do? And so I think the tension in my encouragement for you guys, because I do care, and I think I agree with Becky, we should probably be conservative, because this is a big, big old problem on our hands. But I think I would encourage you to really work on the reach out to the community part, because it's starting to feel like none of us controls the rain, but it is starting to feel a little bit like not even when we get the rain, we're going to give you guys a break, because now we're depending on the stage three money, and it's just not going to work out for you, which can be demoralizing, we know, for people. Let's go, I've got money, screw it. I'll use the water and pay the rates and not care anymore. So my encouragement will be on that, especially if you do decide to stay in a stage three to really work to reach out, because we need everybody on our side if this is going to come out well and future generations are going to get to live here. So thank you guys very much, you do a great job. Thank you. Anyone else? Hello, you all. My name is Sam Farrington. I live in Rio del Mar. I just wanted to make a few comments on looking for the new source of water. I'm so glad to see progress. The idea of the exchange with Santa Cruz sounds extremely good to me. If Santa Cruz will play fair with everybody, that might be a question. I think the seawater from Moss Landing, I would question that. It's very complex seawater conversion. I did a project at Moss Landing 50 years ago doing a seawater evaporator and trying to get that online and reliable. It was not an easy task. We didn't have the technology then that we do now. So I would think very seriously about that. Also with the seawater, you have to be careful because whales poop in the ocean. And we don't want that. The other thing I would say is that the re-processed water, I think is really a good way to go. And SoCal Creek Water District can operate and control that themselves without others interfering and wanting their share back and forth. And also, I'm very glad to see that the conservation program is working. The last little flyer that came out with a billing indicated that it was doing very well. Do you have another minute? Does that give me one minute? One more minute. Thank you very much. I won't ask for anybody else's time. I'll try and get this short and sweet. And I think SoCal Creek Water District is doing a very good job. And I'm very pleased to be connected to it. So, very much in favor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Let's move our passes on to Shelly Fox. And you may read it if you like. Thank you so much. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to us? I'll move we close the public hearing. Second. We'll motion a second to close the public hearing. All in favor. Aye. Aye. That's unanimous. Okay. Well, I didn't ask any questions. The presentation I thought was very clear. And I could see how the public would be confused with the rainfall criteria being different than the other criteria. But to me, it all boils down to the most important piece of information that we've received since I've been on the board, which is 15 years, is the location of the freshwater seawater interface. Is it far offshore? In which case we have plenty of time before we have to build up the water levels onshore to keep it off? Or is it close to shore? And it's very close to shore. As a matter of fact, we don't even know if just exactly where it is, it could be a foot offshore. It could be a few hundred feet offshore, but we know it's not much farther offshore than that. So to me, because of that, I think we wanna keep with a stage three. Because the message is that we still do need to conserve to protect ourselves from seawater intrusion. And another couple of comments is that this rainfall was a vast improvement to look at an average rainfall, or cumulative rainfall over many years, or up to five years. But that's not exact, because you can have the same rainfall and different amounts of water going into the aquifer recharging it. So that's a potential improvement if we were gonna stick with rainfall. I agree that since seawater intrusion is what we're trying to fight, that a criteria that incorporates what our water levels are near the coast would make sense. And I did read the article in the Sentinel, and I thought it was overall very good. It was a little, it was clear to me, but I'm not sure it was clear to everyone that there are multiple reasons for the water levels going up. But one of the key reasons, in addition to the fact that there's less usage, is that, and I think, Ron, you were quoted on this, is that allowed us to move our pumping away from the coast, so it allowed the wells to recover near the coast. So in a way, it's an artificial increase in water levels, so it doesn't reassure me. Is that a motion? I'll make the motion, yeah. I'll second it, then. Okay. Actually, there's several motions in this roll call, right? Yes, but for the resolution and the declarer, stage three, I think you were saying. Yeah, so that the first there's, perhaps what you should do it is, what should we do? The motions that are just the RNA first and then do the roll call motion. As you wish, that would be fine, those are simple. So I'll make the first three motions, the third motion to declare a water shortage stage in Kirtelmentar again and adopt emergency rates for stage three. Okay, I'll second. As discussion, I'd like to mention a little bit of what we've already had discussed or questioned. Some references have been made to the newspaper article and could we have up that five year rainfall graph as some of you probably know that about four or five years ago we did do a groundwater model. It was PRMS and that allowed us to determine that you're partly where our protective levels were. And it's interesting, it showed very directly that the difference between recharge and that is a better way to know what's happening to us than just rainfall. The difference is not linear. So if you double the rainfall, you don't double the recharge. In fact, it's more like three or four times. So when you get rainfall, it increases, the recharge increases dramatically upwards and more so the other way. And in fact, as you can see, we have about 30 inches on average of our rainfall. But when it gets down below 20 inches, we get essentially zero recharge. So it means this year, 16.7, we essentially have gotten zero recharge because we just didn't get enough rainfall to overcome a lot of the other losses. And a lot of folks don't realize 67% of the rainfall we get on average evaporates. And that's the rain hitting trees and just evaporating right off the trees and never hitting the ground. You probably walked under a tree during a rainstorm and notice it's dry under the tree, but it's wet outside. And you probably thought, well, the rain just hasn't gotten down here yet. But no, it never gets down there because much of it that hits the tree or a bush or even grass leaves evaporates and never is seen. So most of the rainfall we get here evaporates for that way and other ways. And that you can tell via this model we have and that would be a good way to do this. It's also sensitive to temperature. So every time the temperature goes up a degree, evaporation increases by 4%. So instead of 66%, it gets to 70%. If it's only just one degree warmer. And so climate change and so forth, that could be in the future a very important part of our lossage. So we have it and that same PRMS is being used in our brand new groundwater model. So we'll be able to continue that. And actually, we could run that every year and tell us with the rainfall we get and the patterns we get. And the pattern is important too. Example, if you had 36 inches of rainfall on average, but one year it was every day you get a 10th of an inch. That would be just enough to get the ground wet and it would all evaporate. And it means you would get zero recharge even though it'd be well above average. And similarly, if you got all 36 inches in one day of the year, you'd have a horrendous storm going out to the water and it would all come down and most of it wouldn't get into the ground because the ground only has a capacity to take in a certain amount. And the rest just runs off. So you get huge runoff, great floods and you wouldn't get much recharge. And so the pattern is important too. And this model would tell us all those things. So that would be a good way to do that in the future. So, enough for me. What is the one thing to, this is the one last, you're correct, everyone who mentioned the ramble model on the freshwater interface, the science is in on that. We do know that and the districts recently set up in our previous meeting room, an educational center for anyone who doesn't really know about that yet. And it will be updated to reflect the results of that current study. And I'd urge everyone to talk about it and tell people to go check that out because it is part of the outreach to let people know what's happening with the groundwater. And so it will be, it is providing for updates. So it's very important to let other people know if you know, if you heard some things and not rely entirely always on Santa Cruz Sentinel. Check with the district occasionally too. Yeah, I was gonna also mention you, why do the groundwater levels seem better this year compared to past? And it's because of that 51.11 inches. So you think, okay, well, that's like 60% higher than normal. But that because of this nonlinear relationship means it was at least double the amount of recharge we get in an average year, maybe two and a half times. So that alone could cause the groundwater levels to come up because you're getting so much extra recharge. And even though the water molecules take a long time to get from the surface down to where we actually are pumping, the pressure, which is what we move and measure, that happens very quickly. That happens within a matter of a few days. So that's what we're actually seeing is that all that rainfall we got, much of it went into the ground and that extra amount added to the ground showed up at our pumping wells quite quickly. And the scary thing is that when you get a year like this, that means that fairly quickly you're gonna see the fact that we didn't get much recharge this year. So, okay, anything else? Well, there's one more motion, so. And we need to vote on the first one. I know, but go ahead, no. Okay, so we have some motions and a second on that. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? And there's one more motion that requires your roll call. Yes. You wanna make that? Sure, I'll admit that we repeal the old resolution and adopt the new resolution with the stage three. Okay. I'll second that. Roll call, please. Dr. Lajillo. Yes. Dr. Jaffee. Yes. Dr. Christensen. Yes. And President Vance. Okay, I think we're done with this. We now have the consent agenda. If there's anything, directors or the public would like to remove from the consent agenda. I do. Pardon? I do have two things. Okay. I'd like to talk about the production reports 3.4. Okay. And I need to remove 3.3 because I'm gonna abstain on that, accuse myself. Okay. Anything else? 3.3. 3.3 and 3.4 pulled. Anything else, anybody? No. No, I wanted to pull the production reports also. Okay. Anyone in the public? Okay. And I'll move approval of the remaining consent agenda items. I'll second that. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? That's unanimous. Okay, 3.3. I'm just gonna recuse myself from this because there's an item with the US Geological Survey. Okay, all right. Okay. I'll make the motion that we do that item. March warrants. They are bills. I'll second that. Okay. That's a good idea. All in favor? Aye. Aye. And. Just change yourself. Recuse myself. Okay. So that's that one. 3.4, production reports. Did you wanna start? Oh, I just wanted to note that the increase, the increase in water demand is creeping up just as we previously discussed and it's all in the production report. It's not serious, but if it kept along on that trend, then we'd be getting into going back to the old water demand levels that we had that started to get us into this problem. Okay, and I wanted to ask some questions about the figure on page 29 of 144, the residential consumption in production compared to 2013. So the first question I had was about, there's a note saying production includes imports and excludes exports. So that would be say if there's an emergency that occurs where we export water to Santa Cruz or central or someplace, then that's not included in here. Be pretty minor, but I just. Right, that's right. The numbers that are included in here are the ones that we report monthly to the state. And so it's kind of a snapshot of each system. So if we exported water to Santa Cruz, then they would have had to include that as part of their supply. Gotcha. So it wouldn't be counted twice. So it's a zero sum, yeah. Okay. And then the other question I had was the residential consumption. So it's gallons per capita per day. So is that just taken by the entire water usage? Are the entire production divided by the number of people or does it separate out businesses from residential? Yes, it separates out businesses and also unaccounted for water and water losses and water that the district uses, so. Yeah, well it's a very interesting graph. And it's really startling on just how low the water usage is per capita, especially in the winter months that people are doing a lot. I think it's also interesting that the winter months haven't gone up nearly as fast as the summer months have gone up. Right. Well you have to keep in mind like even last year, summer started fairly early in the season compared to 10 years ago, say, or something like that. When the rain and fog would continue until actual summer. And this year was headed the same way, very dry and then we've had this late winter, well spring rains. But it does clearly show that 2000, the winter 2017, 18, or 18 it would be fall winter is different than 16 and 17 and that there has been an increase where the per capita has gone from somewhere in the range of 40 gallons per day to up more like 45, so people are using more water. And it could partly be because of temperatures. Yeah, I like the, I like the figure. Anything else we want to say about this? I don't think this is an item we need to approve just for information only. So that being done, we can just move on. Okay, sure. Thank you, Becky Steinbrenner. I was a little confused I guess by the consent agenda. I thought the chairman's question to the public was do you want anything pulled off of this? I didn't realize that that was also the time to comment on the consent agenda. Can I make a brief comment on an item in the consent agenda? Okay, but in the future you have to pull it in order to talk about it, that's the same with us. Okay, I didn't understand that, I'm sorry and thank you for clarifying that. Okay. It's confusing, yeah. I just want to make a comment on the, where are the minutes from last meeting? That usually they are here. And also on the March. For sure, yeah, they'll be on the next meeting. Okay, thank you. And on the warrants, I just want to again publicly point out that, I mean the total for the Pure Water SoCal Project is almost $95,000. And that's a lot of money to spend when your EIRs not even in and again the board is saying you haven't made up your mind what you're going to do. I also want to point out that in the warrants there's a payment to John Madonna Construction who was the County, Santa Cruz County Public Works contractor for the Aptos Village area road improvements. And I see here almost $38,000 that the district has paid to that contractor, that on top of the $41,000 that was paid out last time. So that's a lot of money, $79,000 for the construction road improvements in the Aptos Village project that are being funded by ratepayers. And that really should have been funded by the developers under their, the fees developer fees covering the impacts of all of their development. And finally, I do have a, not finally, but I have a question about the task one assessment of steady state assumptions for hydrometrics for $13,872. That's not very clear to the public what that means. So some explanation of that would be very helpful. MNS engineering looks like it's getting a lot of money also for the granite way well, which I have observed. There are a couple of new buckets kind of hidden behind the pipes there. So I'm watching that. And sadly, and finally, I wanna say that I did see the redwood trees being taken down at your district office today. And I'm assuming that's what the $5,000 tree trimming to Lewis Tree Service was for. I was sad to see them go. Thank you. So are we, it was unfortunate. Okay, well, I can mention the thing about the baseline. That's part of the groundwater model. You always look at a model and say, okay, what happens if nothing changes? And that's the baseline. And you would like to say, okay, what happens if you have climate change? Okay, that's not something over and above the baseline. What happens if we bring in water from Santa Cruz? That's above the baseline. So we're looking at all these various changes. If this changes, what happens? If that changes, what happens? And they're all relative to doing nothing, which is the baseline. That's what that's all about. And if you like, I can comment on the other two items. The paving, that's a right away issue. That's our responsibility to pay for that in Aptos Village. And the funding toward the Purewater Soquel, that should be all covered under the, or mostly covered under the grant funding over our $2 million that we've been awarded. So it doesn't come out of the customer's pocket. All right, so we move on to the oral communications. This is items not on tonight's agenda. Anyone wish to address us on that? My name's Robert Lay. I live in Aptos. I've been doing some deep data diving and I'm here to try and convince you that there's enough water available right now. And hopefully to convince you to think of the San Lorenzo River as its English translation, the St. Lawrence River, because that's kind of how much water is available. I heard about the flows in the river from Jerry Paul, as a matter of fact, and how during high flow times, a lot of water went up to sea. So I evaluated the flows over the last 50 years at the Felton Diversion, and that's the top box on page one that you have in front of you. You can work through it. I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on it. All it was was, what can we get with one Ranny collector, data cubic feet for a second or more flow? And that's what's in that box over the last 50 years and 20 years. As you know, flow graphs from the San Lorenzo show huge peaks and huge steep fall-offs. So there are lots of very big days. Andy Fisher at UCSC tells us that that's gonna get worse, that the flows are gonna get higher and maybe even steeper as the storms become more concentrated, but larger. So my thought was maybe some of that could be harvested, particularly if the spikes are gonna get bigger, maybe we could get a lot of water out of there. So what I hear you saying is, well, that's nice, but this is a dry year, right? So how about 2018, water year 2018? Rain falls about half of normal. Water restrictions are on the table for everybody. So what are the data show for this year? If you turn to page two, which is the flip side of what I gave you, you'll see that I took the San Lorenzo river flows, which is the big graph you see on the first page. Those are all up to date as of yesterday. We're gonna harvest only when flows remain over 39 cubic feet per second. We're gonna harvest at 20 million gallons a day with one collector or 40 million gallons a day with two collectors. The other stuff on there shows you other harvest rates and so forth. Already this year, you could have harvested 1.38 million gallons of water. Already in a low rainfall year, I see Dr. Daniels shaking his head, no. So even in a relatively dry year, which this is, the St. Lawrence can easily supply all of your needs. Any questions? I'm happy to answer them. And I'll leave you with a little teaser number, which is 4.892. If you wanna know what that is, let me know. What, comments? Yeah, the thing that everyone who looks at the St. Lawrence river forgets to include is water rights. We have no water rights to that river. So we can't take a drop out of it. Correct, but Santa Cruz can. They can take it from themselves. And they can then give you North Coast water since it's fun to walk. We do have an agreement with them that they can give us, and that's the 300 acre feet. I understand. I'm just saying the water's there. Yes, and. Great, so I mean, it needs to come from them. So hopefully you've given this data to them. But to give you an idea of the situation, they have a water, it would require water rights change to be able to give us any water out of that or the lock. And they have had a water rights application into the state board for 12 years now. They're gonna have to solve the fish problem first. They're gonna have to do an EIR, then they're gonna have to go to the state board and get a water rights change. And until they manage to get all that stuff done, we can't take any of it. And who knows how long it'll take. That's one of the things that we're looking at with the city, but it hasn't happened yet. And who knows when it'll happen. It's complicated. And we are proceeding. We spent several hundred thousand already on the taking the North Coast water because their water is surface water. Our pipes have never seen surface water. And we don't want the thing to happen that happened to Flint, Michigan, which is you put a new source of water in there and that causes stuff that's in the pipes and so forth to become moving and it ends up in the water supply. And so we are still investigating that. We're hoping to get a report out of that probably next month. And if that's all good, then we'll be ready next winter to start taking that. So that's the situation. I know there's a lot of potential there, but until those improvements get made, we can't take any of it. So we'll see. Thank you for putting the time in. Yeah. Very clear presentation. Right. And I second what President Daniels says is that Santa Cruz is the gatekeeper. Yeah. And once it's available, we're interested because you know, the 300 acre feet we're getting, they're charging us what, like double the cost of pumping out of the ground, but that's cheaper than any other source. And so it behooves us to take it. And so if it was there and available today, that's what we would take because it'd be cheaper and easier. And if it was safe. And safe. Yeah. On the terms we have. Right. I'd like to also add that Santa Cruz city itself has used this as a more complex problem than this too. They are actively modeling. They've been working on this thing themselves too because they really need to find a solution to their water shortages that occur in the surface water. And they have too much surface water and then they find themselves in a drought situation and they need to bank some water. So they're motivated, but the fact that it hasn't happened yet is because they find it very complex modeling problem themselves. So. In fact, in a few minutes, I'm gonna report on their meeting they had Tuesday night on that. And another place to present this is the Mid County Groundwater Agency. Thank you. Becky Steinbrenner. I really appreciate Mr. Lay's very diligent and thorough work too. And I really appreciate that the district has taken the initiative and foresight to do the bench test for the pipe loop pipe studies and would also encourage the district to go ahead with the closed system study and not wait for the results of the bench test. Again, being conservative because why wait? Let's get this moving. The district's claim is that you're looking for the most timely solution to finding a supplemental source. And I also agree with Mr. Lay that the North Coast Stream is really a source that needs to be looked at more carefully. And again, I wanna thank you for your conservative efforts to really look at the pipe corrosion in compatibilities. I would like you to also look at increasing the size of the inner tie that already exists between Soquel Creek Water District and the city of Santa Cruz. Increasing the size of that inner tie to at least three million gallons per day, six million gallons per day would be better so that you could take advantage of these flashy storms that are predicted to come in with the climate change models that we're all seeing. I would also like to encourage you to, I know you already buy water from Central Water District, but they are in a superb area for groundwater recharge according to Dr. Andy Fisher's work. And they have water that they are happy to sell you and it's a lot cheaper than what you produce it for. And I know the inner tie already exists there too. SB 623 is hurtling along and everyone agrees that the real intent of that is to get money for consolidation. I want to think, I want to ask you to consider consolidation with Santa Cruz City. I'm seeing that happen at the LAFCO meetings between the fire agencies. If your district consolidated with Santa Cruz City, the water rights issue of the San Lorenzo River would be a moot point. No, it wouldn't. As I understand it, it would, but I would be happy to talk with you more. And I also, in closing, want to just point out that I did send all of the board members and I thought Ms. Reese, communication from Dr. Rosemary Knight about the 3D video of her Skytown work in the Marina area and it is fabulous and I want to encourage the district to use that technology for the Rambo work. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Thomas Dunbaugh and I live in Aptos, a great area. Sometime ago, there was a piece in your publication, What's on Tap, about two transparency awards that you received. When trying to find proof of the water saving at the village project, you have signs all around the fence there that says that this project has saved water in the community and that project has earned offset credits. But the evidence proved to be about as transparent as a slate chalkboard. Replacing a single toilet can produce a four-page record, but all the work at Cabrillo College claimed by Swanson produced one page stating how many toilets and urinals they replaced. Up there and that page was signed by a Swanson foreman. Employees at the college did not corroborate Swanson's claims, casting doubt that all the work had been done or if indeed any of it has claimed. I think it is incumbent on the district to provide concrete evidence of all of this claims by Swanson. And if there is no proof available, the credits granted to Swanson, the offset credits granted to Swanson, be withdrawn. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, my name is Randa Solak. I'm also a customer of yours. I want to just say positive things tonight. I really want to, and Carla's going, oh, thank God. I want to commend you for your increased attention to transfers. It's been noticeable. I spoke to Jessica York a couple of days ago and she's really helped with her a couple of articles showing what is possible in this district. And I think it shows the public that the district is really looking broadly at what might happen. She doesn't get everything right, but she's pretty good, I think, enough to say that she brought in some ideas about climate change. She brought in some ideas about the intertire. I think she's doing a good job. And now I think the public is much more aware of the transfer of possibilities. They don't know, I mean, we all learn from you, the distinction between the North Coast water and the San Lorenzo waters. And we know that there's a lot of water available, but it depends on the city. The city thinks that you're the gatekeeper. You think that they're the gatekeeper. We know all that stuff is going on, but the city is willing to get water over here and you seem willing to accept it. So I think that's a difference in the less, maybe four or five months that the public is much more aware of this. I didn't like to hear very much from the article that the saltwater intrusion is right at Potbelly Beach, which I live right on top of. So that was a little scary and I think it's good. The scariness is good to keep people's attention focused. Maybe in the next article that you give her information for, you could talk about groundwater modeling. So people have an understanding of all that rain, just exactly what you're saying, Bruce. It doesn't all go into the recharge. I also have an idea for offset credits. Maybe since the offset credits look like all the toilets are bought and all the rest, maybe the bigger intertie could be, maybe offset money could go toward the bigger intertie between the two districts with a view toward what might happen when all the rights get settled out. And also about Soquel collectors. Collectors, anyway, I'm gonna come back and talk to you about 6.2, the stuff that's going at Soquel High because I have a grand kid there and I have some ideas about that. The last thing is I just would urge you to speed up the chemistry tests. I see Taj isn't here right now, but anything that you can do simultaneously would really be great with a real clear aim of trying to get some water started this winter. So thanks, I was positive, right? Thank you. Can I ask just one question about 6.2? Do I have to sit through all the rest of the stuff? I just want to make two sentence comment on Soquel High School. I'll be glad to do it after these are done. Yeah, we try and keep those things associated with the agenda item, sorry. Okay, thanks. Thank you. Anyone else? Hi, I'm Jerry Paul. Thanks for the opportunity. And I want to second what people before me have said about let's get these water transfers going. There's a lot of water there. And also I want to say thank you for your increased attention and understanding of water transfers. I know you'd go for it if the roadblocks weren't in the way. And I believe your heart is in the right place. And of course, you'd love to have water that's 10 or 15 times cheaper. And that's what this is. I also want to honor Director Daniels and others for speech earlier tonight about rainfall, evaporation, runoff, serious problems. And they're part of the study. No matter where the water comes from in the transfer, whether it's recycling wastewater or whether it comes from the river, same problem with the part that comes from the rain originally. Inluse stream water transfers from Santa Cruz offer more water than pure water soquel does. So, and at vastly less cost, and they start sooner, and they use a lot less energy. Start sooner? Yeah, they can start this December if the chemical tests and the pipe loop tests are done expeditiously, perhaps in parallel. And it's better to do two tests in parallel at one of which wound up not being needed and just so you can start sooner because the water is here in December. Only about one sixth of the water which is sitting in the Loch Lomond Reservoir right now as we speak is what pure water soquel supplies in a year. One sixth. If we open the pipes, the inner tie and the Loch Lomond, felt in the Loch Lomond pipe, and the other, there's four things all together. Two pipes well and water rights. If we did that, you get 2.4 times more water than that which very quickly would go way ahead of the curve where you're worrying about rainfall and water supply. Be much better to get it from the river with big pipes. So, I would like to encourage you to really advocate the big pipes. In fact, make a specific offer to Santa Cruz that if they get the big pipes in by date certain, you'll pay for them. Right now, you're faced with paying 65 or 70 million capital costs plus finance costs plus excess operating costs for pure water soquel. Total of maybe over 100 million whereas water transfers are almost free, the ones that start this December and ones with the big pipes cost maybe another 30 million to fatten the pipes. That's much cheaper than the 100 million. You save 70 million. So, please make them an offer and it'll also get in the news and you might get more action from them. That's what you expressed, you wanted. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Saying no one? Any director comments? Oh yeah, we'll have a couple, I just have a couple of items. Another thing in the paper today, Sunday was a report on the surprise disaster in Santa Rosa as a result of the fire, the disastrous Tubbs fire. It destroyed a neighborhood, the Fountain Grove neighborhood and it was leaving, I think 350 homes were destroyed but 13 survived. They started reporting toxic water in their water system and so it led the fire department to investigate and the entire, it just underscores how important, I mean, how serious a disaster is when a disaster really strikes. So it was 350 homes, five miles of piping in this one neighborhood destroyed. It's $43 million to replace just the piping in this neighborhood in at least two years. So that stopped that rebuilding but one of the things I wanted to note about it is that they had polyvinyl chloride piping, it melted, the fire was so intense and it leached carcinogens into the pipe, that's really what closed it down but the disaster that was exacerbated by a decrease in water pressure that sucked the water out of the burning houses, pipes and into the water system in general. So it's just, this is clearly a disaster but it does reflect how much of the work in the district is maintenance of these pipes and it's expensive and it's part of the actual service of providing safe water to the houses, our houses. So it was just very disheartening because they've had enough trouble and then I also wanted to report that I went to a meeting because one part of our possible source of supply is saltwater desalinated water down at Moss Landing and an oceanographer down from Israel gave a report on what is known about the environmental effects of saltwater plants and it turns out that not that much has been reported over 50, 60 years since desal plants began in this one area in the southeastern part of the Mediterranean Sea where 70% of all seawater is desalinated, all the plants, that's the highest concentration so they should have had a lot of experience with environmental and biological effects of the water and they did, there were some things that were a little disquieting in terms of the Marine Canyon, Monterey Canyon and that was that the constitution of the brine that goes out is critical and the known effects that they did report was a rise in salinity, temperature, heavy metals actually very frequently because of and depending on the anti-scaling devices that are used to keep the water flowing that could cause increased turbidity that could affect biologic populations so anyway, but there was a very little thing so it's very important to pay attention to the EIR when it comes out for that particular plant too because there isn't really that much out there, so. That's it. Okay, there was one thing I wanted to mention which was there was a meeting on Tuesday night last Tuesday, sounds like it happens every year it happened last year, it's a joint meeting of their water commission and the council and it started off looking at the current situation so they had graphs of the rainfall they had graphs of the water flow in the San Lorenzo and things like that, they even had a temperature measuring the illustration and basically they have decided to, this year was not a great year currently it's, what's the term? Extreme dry hydra, it's the driest they have they think it's gonna eventually get up into merely the dry range but they've pretty much decided it's not gonna get up into the normal range so they did a stage one declaration on Tuesday night and interestingly they said that the immediately preceding weekend is when the reservoir finally spilled filled up so much that it went over the top of the reservoir and for those who've looked at the contract the arrangement between us and the city for this water transfer this up to 300 acre feet one of the requirements there's two requirements that are of interest one is that either the reservoir is spilling or they feel very certain that it is about to spill so the fact that it hadn't spilled until that weekend and then another requirement is that they are not under any stage restriction so that means that this year we might have gotten all of two days worth of rainfall sent to us through the pipes so that gives you some idea that this has not been an extreme drought like it was in 2014 but even this year was low enough that we basically would have gotten nothing through the pipes to speak of the next part of the meeting was talking about their long range plans about what they're doing and as you may know this is all gauged on the WASAC the water supply advisory committee which met for a couple of years and came up with this plan and they're following very strictly on that plan until now both the commission and there's several members in the commission who were on the WASAC and the council itself so they're staying to that strictly and there are three parts to that one is the transfer second is recycled water and third is desal and they reported on all of those one interesting thing about this is that there are very specific requirements about what debt data they need to get on all three of those in order to make a decision and they will not make the decision until the end of year 2020 so that's two and a half years from now so they're not gonna do anything they may solve the water thing with the fish and what's it called? Habitat Conservation HCP, yeah the Habitat Conservation they may, if they can they've been doing that for years now trying to solve that but they may do the HCP but they won't do the the plans and the new water rights things until they make that decision at the end of 2020 so that's gonna happen at least past then and knowing the way the state board works on water rights once they get that motion of doing the EIR for it and that's a requirement they first have to do an EIR they then have to submit an application and then the state board has hearings and sits around and thinks about it and makes a decision so that process won't happen fast so I'll say that the people who want us to increase the size of the pipe there'll be plenty of time to increase the size of the pipe we'll know a year or two ahead of time when that might actually happen so it's not an emergency it's not quick and there'll be a lot of lead time for that if and where it happens and for the things they're looking at I'll start the back end a diesel so that that would be a plan to put diesel kind of like we were doing with them what four or five years ago now it would be done in Santa Cruz they have plans for the where they would run the pipes and where they would have the intake and where they'd have the outfall and so forth so it's basically taking the EIR they looked at it and they've made some changes to it some things have improved the big problem is that since we were looking at it the state board has come along and made new requirements there's an ocean plan amendment they've done that has to be followed and basically pretty much to build one now you have to do subsurface intakes so the plan we had of doing free ocean things is just for example Orange County's been trying to get an exception to that for the last two years and I think they haven't made much in the way of progress on that so you basically have to prove that scientifically an open ocean intake works and a subsurface does not work and that's very hard and so the city is very skeptical that the diesel is even possible second they're looking at recycled water and mainly what they're looking at there is just using title 22 the tertiary stage water to do irrigation and the projects they've actually decided to do are there's a park right there by the sewage plant and they will use tertiary water to water that park the grass in the park and then the second part of that is they'll take water and send it up Bay Street to the university and then they'll use that on their playing fields and so they're not actually looking at using purified water which is a problem because all of this is predicated on them getting 1.2 billion gallons of water a year during a drought that's what they have estimated during a severe drought they would need so spending a little bit of irrigation water doesn't even get that close and they admit it themselves so the only thing they're left with then is the transfer idea and they're working with us I mean we can't fault them I mean they're taking part with the pipe loot studies we're doing they're paying half the cost of it and it's hundreds of thousands of dollars we're spending on all this stuff to get ready for this and this city's right there with us and because they see that if these other two things fail the only thing that works with them really is to work with us on the transfer idea and so that's where they are right now and with San Lorenzo Valley too and with San Lorenzo Valley too yeah and so yeah right with Scotts Valley or San Lorenzo Valley and but the problem with theirs they don't even have a pipe going to them yet and so that would require EIR and funds and so forth so they weren't even talking much about that I mean clearly if they do the transfer thing we would be first because we already have the pipe you know the 1.X million gallon pipe is already connected and so the current thing is that they would only then be able to give us water in the winter time if they have this XS and they would charge us for it and but it's cheaper than anything else we could get so that's why we're doing it ask me afterwards or send me an email or something so I'd be glad to talk to you afterwards I think it's probably online this presentation and so you can get a copy and look at the things they set out but it basically you know there's still continuing to pursue this but it's gonna be several years before they even make a decision in fact one of the things they discussed is that the groundwater the sustainable groundwater agency has to get a plan in by January of 2020 by state requirements but they won't even make a decision about which of these three things they're gonna do till the end of 2020 so it's gonna make it difficult for them to participate fully in some of those agency things but so there was no resolution as to how they're gonna manage that but there certainly continue with their studies they have multiple consultants hired looking to all three of them coming up with the data about how much is it gonna cost when can they get it done all kinds of other different things and that's how they'll make the choice of which one of these three to follow I don't know about this year they were saying that it only spilled that previous weekend and then now they're under water restriction so I don't know what they said I don't know either but yeah last year they would have been glad to give us water but and by the way we're doing all these loop studies and so forth not because we want to but because the state requires us to after Flint, Michigan and even was it Fresno has some problems like this too the state is very leery of changing water sources so anytime you change a water source instead of using this water you use that water you have to go off and do all these studies and prove that it's not gonna cause a problem that's the way we stand all right let's move on we've got other things to do board calendar, shai planning calendar yes 5.1 right so yeah just a couple things so Aqua that meeting is May 8th, 9th and 10th we haven't heard any response for attendance except from Bob Basso he will be attending the legislative session thank you for that however we do have a meeting on the 9th with the bureau up there and so staff will definitely attend that meeting we may not attend Aqua either unless some board members were interested okay we got one the hotels on site have filled up already so we'll have to lodge off site but let's converse on that and then if there's anybody else on the board who would like to attend with President Daniels and staff to the May 9th meeting with the Bureau of Preclamation let us know too something we do twice a year just to develop the relationship let's see oh yeah also on Wednesday April 25th from 5 to 8 is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan advisory group meeting at the sheriff's station my understanding is Director Jaffe won't be there I'm giving a presentation you're giving a presentation at another event with my day job with your day job can't make all these meetings I don't remember if we had an alternate or not for that I don't think we do okay okay well I will definitely be there and sometimes I know other board members show up because it's a public meeting for that too and then last but not least the budget workshop coming up on May 1st right before our next board meeting from 5 to 7 just a reminder that food will be provided we'll provide you the same thing you got last time at our community water plan event which was from Zameen's unless you let Karen know differently we'll get you the exact same thing food-wise and if you do have an interest in Aqua or again or attending the May 9th meeting with the state and the feds please contact me and I see President Daniels is interested so we'll converse thank you any questions about the calendar staff or directors or public okay we go on to 5 to special board assignments yeah nothing to report there just some minor updates shown in red underline on the rate evaluation I think most people are apprised of that it's ongoing had a nice public advisory committee on that one too and that's it unless there's any questions any questions directors public okay we move on to 5 to 3 organization wide comprehensive report were there any questions on the conservation customer service field right up yes Tom yes under see the WDO program and the stormwater what page is this this is page 73 it's the first page it just said you'll bring the analysis to the board when it is complete and then also that seascape golf course indicated they plan to send a letter of interest in my just question is just do you have an estimated time on the first item we did talk with Georgina at hydrometrics and she anticipates completing the second task that we've asked them to do next week and so we have that tentatively on the schedule for the second meeting board meeting in May bringing that back with an update okay and then the golf course we need to circle back with them because we have not gotten the letter that they indicated they would be providing so we'll follow up with them and see where that is but they did note that they were they were going to be sending that to us another question and a comment on the next page on page 74 under new water service application process second bullet trying to coordinate with the county it's just once again I'm just do we have any kind of time frame they said county would get back to us yeah and we have not heard back from them today I did follow up with an email and asked them what the status was on they were going to go back and take a look at some options which included either adding us to their electronic permit review cycle or providing the applicant the development project applicant and the district with some sort of notification and then we would be able to follow up with that customer so those were the two options that we talked about and where they landed I'm not sure so we're working on that okay my last comment was just on on page 77 just information about the leak alerts from master meter yes I was just going to say that's great I mean the fact that they can get instantaneous information is huge for a leak alert so thanks for following up on those and that if you have a mobile application yeah yes you can get it right away get it as well so unfortunately that's a lot of the features that the yes system has unfortunate for them but good for all of our customers I have one thing I wanted to bring up which is on 74 that you mentioned we have the WTO at the bottom and then you flip the page to 75 and we have the basically the conservation activities and there's one thing there the toilet rebate in the past toilet rebate was conservation now it's actually part of the WTO and so to lump it in to me seems wrong because it looks like you know this is stuff we're actually conserving but this is actually offset to new development so I think it should be on the previous page with the okay we can separate that out and put it with the WTO anything else hi good evening on our status for we have several items but I'll try to highlight just a few then I want to draw your attention to we are finishing up the Cornwell tank project this the exterior was finished on Monday so that's an update there we should be filling that tank on Monday week from yesterday and getting it back in service it does it will play a big part if we do isolate a small zone in our district sub area one for the surface water test pilot program we're continuing to push forward with designing the cast iron main replacement along Soquel Drive that's a stretch between Cabrillo College and State Park that'll be included in the next fiscal year's budget that's a four point one million dollar project but a very leak prone stretch that we've documented very well and when it does break it's high pressure and it's a larger main so it's a pretty significant leak I guess earlier in the meeting there was some comments made by a member of the public indicating commenting on the county's work in the right of way and how that may not shouldn't have been paid for by the district but there are two projects here that we we are a guest in the county's right of way and so we there's a new one here Main Street they're planning some new sidewalk curb and gutter and we have to move our infrastructure the situation in Aptos Village was there putting in a by bus turnout and our water main needed to be relocated so that is typical we've done that in the past and I just wanted to point out it again for the surface water update last month I did provide a briefing for the board of presentation we're having our our coordination meeting tomorrow so I don't really have much more but as you know the the testing continues and it'll continue through next month and we'll report out on that in May or June probably next month we'll give you another update the last thing I want to say is that you know the economy is doing much better and our staff is in charge of overseeing all the remodels as well as will serves that come to you what you don't see are all the remodels the those services already have those addresses already have domestic service so they don't they're not required to go through the Watered Man Offset program or get a will serve letter but they are required to put in fire services and so just this in in this current state we have 14 active developments that are getting fire services and in this last quarter we had four of them that we had to oversee during construction and completed so each one of those is handled through contracting and inspecting and coordinating with that so we see an uptick in the economy any questions questions I don't have anything to add at this time if you have any questions looks like not thank you special projects I'm still on vacation I guess that's the first thing I was out on vacation for two weeks just got back on Monday so the walls the outreach team did fill in this part of the report I'll just add two things actually three things as you know we have a monthly article in the Times publishing group this month Dr. Daniels wrote an article on climate change I would like to extend that offer to other board members if you're interested in ever writing a piece it is a once a month article that you can contact me on and we can work on getting you guys folded into it otherwise staff typically does write the article in terms of the community water plan and the pure water soquel project in the last week and a half our title 16 federal feasibility study was approved so that is a big milestone for us in December January we had the state one approved this is the federal one which now opens the door for us to apply for title 16 money under the new win at process so the next step in terms of that process is that our project and soquel Creek Water District will be included in a letter of findings to Congress and then once that's approved then we will be eligible to apply for the next funding cycle and in terms of the draft EIR ESA has been diligently working on the second admin draft that was received by staff this week so we still are at this point on scheduled to have the draft EIR released to the public this summer and the last thing to report on as part of the title 16 federal feasibility study we did do some additional pilot work that was recommended from the NWRI the National Water Research Institute to do some further analysis on that secondary effluent for tertiary treatment so the skid was delivered a couple weeks ago it's been installed we're just waiting for a pump and then we'll start conducting a three-month pilot study there at the wastewater treatment plant and we've been coordinating with the public works department very well they've been doing the heavy lift of setting that setting the treatment pilot plant up we had a coordination call today and they're ready to go so it's exciting could I just ask so what can you clarify again what that's gonna test yeah that just helps us for additional pre-design work the Santa Cruz wastewater treatment facility does treat to a secondary plus but that's with a trickling filter system so we do have some data that we could call from Marina that's another facility that does that but it just helps us better understand that's a key component when we do design work on getting that water prepared from going from secondary to tertiary the ROUV step is is better to find once you know what the water is treating to tertiary treating to tertiary my Melanie are you testing different filters to see what provides the best value and that sort of thing okay so it's an open platform pilot test unit so we'll be able to test three different skids finance please so I just wanted to touch base real quick and assure the board that I am continuing to monitor the state efforts towards water affordability I did participate in the web streaming that they had on April 5th on their water affordability symposium and I just gave you kind of a brief update on kind of the direction they're they're heading with that and I'll continue to monitor and if you any progress they're making on that on that front I also wanted to let you know that we are participating in a pilot program on financial sustainability through the government finance officers association where there are only 27 agencies nationwide that are participating all of them municipalities and counties we're the only water district we're the only special district we're the only non municipality or county that's participating and it's really using that common pool theory to look at long-term financial planning as opposed to short-term budget planning and really getting ourselves on a financially sustainable track so we'll be continuing to roll that out work on that over the next couple of years and then I just gave you some brief updates on on some of the projects that we're working on thank you that sounds great human race sources I just want to make special note in my presentation or in my report that there will be a week of celebration on May 7th through the 11th and we will be celebrating public employee public service employees and we have a series of events that we plan on having that week to really celebrate our staff and make sure that they know that we appreciate the good work that we do we'll also be pushing some information out to our public so that they understand the detail of the work that you guys have been talking about tonight that are that our employees do and and what we should be celebrating during that week so stay tuned you'll be getting some information from human resources thanks general manager please just one thing to report on I see Larry Freeman out there who's a member on our public advisory committee is one of our members of the public and he is the one that alerted us to the opening with the state grant guidelines that suggested modifications that we met with the state and they did they modified and not only increased a grant from one to two million dollars but opened the door for many more well thank you for that and we've taken that philosophy to heart now to the federal level they've opened the door also for suggestions so last week in conjunction with some other agencies but on behalf of the district we submitted a comment letter regarding their guidelines and showing how they may be modified in a way which meets their main objective and also would benefit our agency and other agencies like ours and we think overall just make the grading point process for grant applications much fair across the board everybody so we hope to have some success with that to keep you updated good anyone in the public wish to address this item this report thank you Becky Steinbrunner I am really happy that your staff is meeting with the Santa Cruz County Planning Department because there's been a huge disconnect between the planning and land use issues and and water issues and I'm I'm very happy to see that you've met with Mr. Guinea and Mr. Martin Heaney and that you're you're trying to work this out because it's a problem thank you good work I also want to point out in the discussion about the AMI meters for the Aptos Village project that and I submitted some late correspondence about this but the state of New Mexico has banned them AMI from utility use in the state and I think it would be wise of your board to look at that I did forward you information and that was sent to me by Arthur Furstenberg I discourage this use in the public I think there are people who are very sensitive to it and I think it's getting to be a cumulative damage to not only people but to the environment notably the the honey bees and our pollinators and and we don't know what else so I think I would appreciate putting the brakes on AMI meters in your district and I also want to point out regarding meters in the Aptos Village project that in reading the minutes for the March 20th meeting that when you had the public caring for the variants for the Rancho Del Mar shopping center sub meters it was pointed out in the minutes for that action that the Aptos Village also got this variance but will not have to pay the monthly service charge for the master meters Rancho Del Mar does but Aptos Village does not and it was stated in the minutes that the reason Rancho Del Mar has to pay that is to accommodate staff time to calculate any discrepancies with the sub meters in the master meters I don't think this is fair and I think that I would really like an explanation about why Aptos Village is getting that concession. I also want to point out to you in the discussion about water service applications Aptos Village plan currently under construction and there's work that you would put pipes under the road tracks to Parade Street as I'm reading it there is legal action on the horizon for that and that crossing may not happen because of legal action so I just want to give you that alert it's not my legal action I want to make that clear but there is legal action by the property owners in that area thank you. Anyone else see no one let's move on to 5.4 the Finance Administrative Services Committee meeting summary and I'm just here to answer any questions you might have about our meeting on April 9th. Good. It's not a minor a minor correction that said they're under the minutes it said public members and it's really public attendance I guess. Okay I'll make sure we know that thank you. All right. You want to public on this one. Okay we go to 5.5 which is public outreach committee. Yeah we discussed a few things at the meeting and being the board members like to comment that'd be great but I'll just point out that one of the things that we have seen other agencies do and thought we may investigate is the idea of a citizens water Academy program. Actually Capitola does something similar here for the city and we participate in that and tell citizens about you know that our services in and they learn all about the other city services but for us it'd be a way to engage the public there are members out there who want to know more and just go over maybe a year meet once a month and that sort of thing and then they can also become ambassadors if they wish or just share what they what they learn about the agency so public outreach has taken that task on to evaluate it further. I know the city of Sancres had a water school or university or something they called it so anyone who had a fine could get out of the fine by going to water school. Right. That's a great idea to get people to learn more that maybe they don't want to but they don't want to pay money so worth considering public. No. Okay. Public outreach that was that one five six the water resources committee. Nothing to report out there unless you have any questions directors public. No. Okay. District counsel. There's nothing new in the cases. None of them come down or changed but two things. One is that. We still are part of this jam pipe. Legit litigation and there was quite a move by one of the firms that was the litigation firm to withdraw and then there was a possibility that the other firm withdraw and the case would go away and receive notice today that the one that was reporting or proposing to withdraw has changed their mind and so they're going to go ahead and participate and there's a damage. Hearing in October. So that may well at least give an indication of where things are going in in that regard. Okay. And questions. No. Okay. Thank you. Oh yeah. The other thing was that the John Cole case the rate case hearing on that has now been set for the twenty fourth which is next week. We'll serve letters please. We have to we'll serve letters tonight for you to look at there. One thing I want to point out is item six point one point two has already been seen by the board last September. The reason we brought it back is the developer wanted to make a change to the to the proposed project and the change resulted in an increase in water use and water demand offset. So we felt even though this is a redevelopment of an existing site that that has a significant water use currently. So even though the revised proposal is less than the current use we felt we should bring it back to you. If you can give us a nod we would not likely do that if the development changed and reduced water demand offset. Okay. So these two projects I'm willing to answer any questions if you wish. If you have any questions. Public Becky Steinbrenner again I just want to encourage you to say no. Thank you President Daniels for your consistent vote of no for increased demand on an overdrafted aquifer. Thank you. Okay. So we have two items. I'll just point out before I make my motion that with the water demand offset program we're not having an increased demand on the system or I wouldn't be approving them either. But I will make the motions. I'll second it. Motion second. All in favor. I oppose. That passes. Okay. Six point two approval of a water wise garden grant. Yes we have an application tonight for a water wise garden landscape makeover from SoCal High School and in particular it's from the natural resources and agriculture class and the teacher Tom Bentley. They are proposing to replace about 550 square feet of existing turf in the upper campus around this parking island that's shown here in the memo and to replace that with water wise landscape and to use students to use it as an educational experience for the students that will be performing the site preparation and also the other benefits of the project include there's a lot of high visibility in addition to saving the water and the student interaction and they're also planning to certify the landscape as a Monterey Bay friendly landscape and to have signage to that effect and so they're asking for a $2,000 grant. We budget for up to five of those this year so we had a total of $10,000 for this grant and none have been granted yet to date so there's plenty of funding left and we're also combining the replacement with a community workshop that is going to be happening on Saturday May 12th from 10 to one so the public can come and get involved in that and learn all about how to do it and assist with that effort so with that in mind. Any questions? I have just one. Sounds like a wonderful project and 150 students involved highly visible but my my only question is on the the sign it says Monterey this is page 108 of 144. It says Monterey Bay friendly landscape. It'll be certified as that in a sign denoting that will be put in place. Will there be any sign noting that this is a water wise project from SoCal Creek? Yeah I believe there's some additional signage and in addition to the Monterey Bay friendly but in order to become Monterey Bay friendly certified you have to do things that save water as part of your project. No I'm very supportive of it. I would like to vote for this but I'd like to to put a a condition that there be a sign saying that this is you know something with SoCal Creek on it that's that's there as well. Okay I was gonna ask if we're gonna have signage there about the various plants that are there so that people can learn from it directly. Yeah I'm not certain about that. I do know that signage is very expensive because it has to be anchored and be able to withstand weather and and other things. I'm not exactly certain of the signage. I just had one question originally they were going to do the whole island and then they changed it you happen to know why. I think a lot of it had to do with cost utilities that are co-located in that area. There is a large tree there so I think they just decided to scale it back to start with in that it might they might be able to expand it in the future so kind of bite off a small chunk to start with. Any public comment? A grand kid going to school there. A second grand kid and he's in the gardening class. Mateo is loving it and so many when I did gardening as part of my teaching so many of the kids were so drawn in who are not otherwise academic it's the perfect chance to teach them about water conservation and it doesn't cost much at all to make little plant signs the way they do at the Arboretum you know stick around for which I think is a good idea so I really hope that you support Mr. Bentley's project and if you have more money for that I have an idea for more money for that. I would like to see it tied into teaching the students about cistern possibilities about rainwater conservation from that from that building. The whole Soquel okay so I heard Bobby Markowitz talk a few years ago specifically about Soquel High two group of parents who were angry about turf and what he said was that there's enough rain runoff in normal years from Soquel High to do all their irrigation this would be a great tie-in for those students to learn that not only that central area everybody passes that area so it's a really visible place but that would be a good tie-in with the workshop that they're going to have in conjunction with it to let both parents and students understand that they could be doing water collecting right then and if there is some extra money from your you know fund maybe Mr. Bentley would like to do a second stage of this and go on to teaching the students about that and possibly actually collecting water from Soquel roof so I think it's a great idea um I think that the identifying that is a good idea too because parents are always looking to see what they can plant right and students in this case are so enthusiastic about not only this class but the idea that they're at the cutting edge of things that they take it home to their parents and say look this is how you do water wise growing so thank you very much I hope you find it. Thank you. Does our rebate for rain collection apply to only residences? No, it applies to everybody. So there's a rebate. Yeah. Thank you. Becky Steinberg I thank you for working with schools it's always a good project and as Randa said it it keeps on giving to the future and really engages a lot of kids. I've worked on a number of school gardens in the times that my kids have been at different schools and um the signage is critical but it doesn't have to be expensive we I did a butterfly garden and it was expensive but what can be done is just laminated signs because initially that's when the real interest is there and you can always put signs in later but once you get people's attention with a new planting a new change just laminated signs are great um and I think it would also be great as Randa said to tie in some recharge opportunities with that I don't know what the soils are like they're probably in a parking lot it's not the best of recharge but just focusing on that possibility as a learning moment can be great and I really want to thank you for supporting the school. Thank you. I'd like to make the motion that we grant the funding for two thousand dollars and that uh that'd be contingent on you being assigned indicating our involvement with the project. Second. The motion is second. All in favor. High. High. Post. That's unanimous. Great. And could you can please communicate to them the ideas that were presented here and I for one would be receptive to additional money you know it seems like you're granting additional money for a different stage to this because it seems like this is really a lot of you know bang for the buck with 150 students and such high visibility. Okay we go on to six three professional consultant services. Sure thank you Anup if you want to come to the podium I'll go ahead and just say a couple things to kind of set this up and and then introduce Anup Shah from Brown and Caldwell who will be giving a short presentation. The item 6.3 is an addendum to the scope of work to the professional services contract we have with Brown and Caldwell. Brown and Caldwell was hired in 2015 to help support Soquel Creek Water District's evaluation efforts of the Pure Water Soquel project and with their support over the years they have provided an extension of staff specifically to the technical services and technical evaluation to support the studies and the environmental analysis that we're doing with the Pure Water Soquel project. Back in January I think that was January 23rd the board had a workshop and it was really focused on the community water plan and everything encompassing under the umbrella of the supplemental water supply options and so the way that Ron has kind of established oversight of the multifaceted program components in that is by department managers so Pure Water Soquel efforts are are under me stormwater captures under Shelley, Christine and Taj have been doing the heavy lift on the river water transfer project and at that January 23rd meeting we came and we gave an update we prepared this big schedule we recognize that there were a lot of a lot of things happening all at once and some things are at high levels and some levels are at more refined details and so as we came out of that workshop we really did start to identify what are our gaps going forward for budget planning as well as just for implementation of our community water plan and with that we started talking with Brown and Caldwell Moore and Sonny Wang who has been the technical advisor under the BC team was like you know I really feel it's it's time that you guys look at looking at the community water plan as a program that needs to be managed very similar to what the city of Santa Cruz recently did when they hired HDR for a lot of their CIP projects and so for about the last month we've been in some coordination and discussions with Anup Shah from BC he's out of their San Jose office and he is this is what he has done I do have a little bio I do want to say because I want you guys to understand and know a little bit about Anup he is the managing business consultant based out of Brown and Caldwell San Jose office and he brings 15 years of experience to the water industry he is focused on project management and the and as a project manager who has led various large multidisciplinary design teams and can deliver complex engineering programs currently he is the client advisor on a conjunctive water use program in the Santa Margarita River basin what I liked about Anup's qualifications when Sunny first introduced him to us was that I think he can look at things both in a big picture as well as small and I think that's what the community water plan needs so we've been working especially Taj and Ron while I was on vacation and developing this scope that we're proposing today it is to develop a framework for us to manage the programs and recognizing that we have a small staff one thing I did want to note and then I'm going to turn it over to Anup is that you know we are in this nice space with some additional funding through the Prop 1 planning grant and as an item in that grant there is a task specific to project management so we have put in this item as a potential item to be funded if the board approves it so I'm going to turn it over to Anup and then we're both here for question and answer thank you Melanie good evening thank you for the opportunity as Melanie mentioned this particular item agenda item talks about the project management information system but it really is to set up the framework to support the community water plan and develop that further and what you'll notice in your agenda there are three specific tasks we have identified but all these tasks are really doing is to support the staff in continuing to look at the community water plan as it develops and really augment them with either the technical reviews on as needed program support and while all of those activities are ongoing also to develop a project management information system a framework and and it also in conjunction work with developing a robust schedule that looks at every single critical decision items and get ahead of critical milestones so let me walk through that real quick as Melanie mentioned a community water plan is a multifaceted plan it includes water conservation ground water recharge but even within the supplemental water supply options we have four potential options from pure water so cal to river transfers whether it's short-term river transfer or the long-term San Lorenzo river aspect even the cell is still under consideration as we heard in the discussion today and potential storm water capture now all of these facets especially under supplemental water supply option can have its own project life cycle so as as the community water plan develops further each one of these facets take for example the river water transfer once that project starts going further we are already talking about the potential permitting issue potential environmental issues public involvement program management if when it gets into the execution aspect there's a critical component about the schedule management that we are talking about and a more important aspect more tangible aspect is about the funding getting ahead of the funding regulation so all these programs or the project options what it tends to do is it becomes an information overload as Melanie mentioned staff here is limited they already have a fairly full portfolio on their own and when you start talking about these options and their project life cycles it can be overwhelming so what we are talking about through project management information system is just to build a framework that allows for managing the information better it gives us an idea to better manage the information flow that's coming through get better manage the schedule better manage even the reporting to the board and the public at large and and what it was down to is distilling some of this information through various dashboards or outreach what we have you know all it is project management information system is not anything fancy it really needs to be the right size for the SOCal people talk about project management system as an out-of-the-box system something more like you may have heard e-builder or primavera p6 those are on subscription basis could be fairly expensive on per license basis the benefits of out-of-the-box system could be it can be deployed quickly and once the program is done you remove the subscription the costs go away but the the challenge with those kind of systems is there's no residual value you invest a lot of this money as if you are paying rent for building up that framework to manage information and and report out but as soon as you remove the subscription there's nothing left of it versus a custom developed solution is has a lot of residual value in terms of you can retain a lot of that institutional knowledge investment into it it can be leveraged for a lot of the other activities that's already happening within the engineering department for example if you develop a project management PMIS that can support the CIP program even the execution of projects here that can be done so what we are planning to do is we want to work through we will work through different scenarios with the staff and figure out what is the right solution we looked at similar setup similar situation at different programs different cities one example is from Lake Oswego ticket program in Oregon a similar size program and there it was a custom developed PMIS whereas some of the larger programs tend to be more out-of-the-box what we are suggesting is we'll conduct a needs assessment workshop with the staff and understand what are the current processes based on the needs assessment we want to understand really just get a better view of overall landscape understand where the needs are acknowledge the the gaps and then talk about how to build the PMIS based on the needs there's an intermediate step in between about the the processes and the workflows that's the challenging piece and we'll talk about that in just a moment once the needs are established once those prioritized plans are done then we'll go into the implementation phase and all it is is setting up the business processes and functionalities that support the development of community water plan it's a really an options agnostic it's just a framework to get a better discipline in decision-making and that can lead to or support along with is just a detailed schedule and wanted to talk about the specific thing on the schedule piece you may have seen this the schedule snapshot on the left of the screen that's a very macro level schedule what ends up happening is as as we move forward we need to get ahead of some of the critical deadline and i'll give you a quick example on funding opportunities and how that cascades in from the board standpoint we'd like to entertain different funding opportunities well the deadline for the funding window when it opens is is fixed and we need to work backwards from it what information what are the gaps and in order to address those gaps what decisions needed to be made from the board and in order to for board to make that decision what information you need that staff needs to get ready prepared for so we will be helping and supporting staff in getting a better handle on the schedule and put that out there on the PMIS so really this this task we are talking about is is agnostic of what options you move forward with it just supports overall community water program it supports pure water soquel it supports it will support water conservation efforts it will support stormwater capture and river transfer with that i'll leave it up to open it up for questions and any other information i can provide um so my first question is just so how does this compare to the other options of continuing as we are you know because since it's expensive or having another staff member to do this because this is only going to be a part-time person in a computer program so just looking at those two different options sure um so part of the the program expertise maybe think about and this was a similar issue at santa cruz as well um the the level of experience and expertise we bring based on the lot of other programs to bring that kind of a program manager finding recruiting and retaining that kind of employee or staff that's generally a challenge ends up being significantly more cost than to establish a system and just bringing as needed support from the program team so that happens to be one aspect and the second aspect is this platform that we are talking about that has a residual value it's extends far beyond the program's life cycle it can support and bring efficiencies even day-to-day operations at the district in implementing project and in pressure projects thank you tracy also wants to add something you don't mind me stepping in hi um from a human from a human resources perspective you know we do take a look at at staffing needs and sometimes um certain projects certain limitations of of things that we're doing within the district we do look at the differences between bringing staff on versus um a consultant work this definitely does fall in line with consultant type work um because it would be establishing something that we don't currently have um we probably would be dealing with the maintenance of that from an ongoing perspective bringing somebody on board as we all know have some long-term costs and liabilities for the district and so those are things that we weigh when we're considering these types of options so thank you thank you both any other questions well i was you know it seemed like the um the at least from how the district functions the budget process and the uh is integral to the whole community water plan too and i was wondering where that fit into how that was organized because i didn't hear it mentioned so that's that's great so um i have a couple of slides if uh i can talk about that example project from leak oswego but the idea is uh we begin with aspect of what is the end game or what is the desired outcome on the long run and a lot of these PMIS systems can support project funding request the forms that the staff would start with through a approval process and that framework that workflow supports not only just the program but even annual process of budgeting at the at the district so that's an efficiency that can be levered even after the program and if i answer to your question that so let me quickly see if this answers so these are a few extra slides from this reference project at the lake oswego um there the two agencies were working together in delivering about 175 million dollar program and there the reporting requirements were pretty stringent given that the funding requirements from different uh funding sources that had a significantly higher reporting requirements not only that they had a very active public engagement and public demanded the level of reporting so they put together this PMIS from the reporting and dashboard standpoint so this is what the interface looks like but in the background of this is a framework that supports project information as funding requests come for different projects in what phase of execution they are and after the program was completed right now this program is done they're using the same framework for annual budget planning so if taj was working on a particular project to bring it forward for the board on funding request that system would be that information would be submitted in the system and put together the cip on an annual basis these are different viewpoints about how different projects are moving forward what the invoices look like what is the status of the project so this is sort of the what goes behind on the on the PMIS framework so i'm sorry no actually i don't understand how how it's different than what we're already doing the processes that we go through uh remember going over this with you in the past the different project timelines and budgetary questions were factored into that too is that just a graphic purely graphic thing or was it right so programmatic so i think it's a combination of things i think from the pure water soak hell project we've been able to do it at that kind of higher level that that graphic on the left that was done in powerpoint um and it has very high level things we're getting to a point with some of our projects specifically with the projects within the projects that just like oh my god options within options projects within projects and we're all doing it kind of within our own silos and then when there's an update we either have a uh committee meeting or we have a workshop or we have these meetings wrong tasks so everybody give us summary report we all put it together and then we kind of put it away and then the next two months we update it this is going to be a living document for a program that is living the community water plan it has a lot of components and we're all kind of managing it into our little own silos based on the time that we have when we're doing our day-to-day stuff plus being managers of staff and we're we're deficient on it it's you know we've recognized that it's something that um is hard for us to manage and that's why we've we've reached out to this so i think become more successful in this in keeping track of things and things are all moving and they're moving at different paces and for the example you know in january for the surface water transfer project that's a separate schedule that has a schedule that was created by wasac that isn't maintained that we kind of kind of on chicken scratch have kind of moved it moved things around based on where they are with their stuff but still a lot of it's moving and unknown and we just really need to kind of pull the schedule together which would be in microsoft projects which we have and utilize a computer system with microsoft share point that the district has just kind of um yes but brought on with our new microsoft 365 conversion but these are tools that you know they have there you can do everything with it and and without some training and knowledge or maybe especially of the of the team who we already have on board has something that they can say you know we developed all of this we did 90 percent of the legwork with these other agencies and we can help you kind of get everything together that that's where we are with with our community water park and if i may add a few extra things that's a great summary even from the planning standpoint but you know what's coming down the pike is if you think about viffia for example so if district were to get viffia funding viffia has a significantly higher level of reporting requirements and we are not you know staff is not subjected to that level of reporting just now but that's coming so what this does is establish the framework to allow for a much simpler and easier time in terms of the reporting aspect the same thing happens in terms of if there are projects that are done in conjunction with city of santa cruz how is that funding allocation is done as different projects get executed that reporting aspect would just become significantly difficult and more demanding on staff's time and that's where this the efficiency of this system would come in and not to put the cart before before the horse but a significant chunk of this pmis is also from the project execution standpoint having a a common set of standard that applies to all projects so you have the assets when you acquire them they are consistent from the standard standpoint that you can then later on manage so a system like this would make it easier to apply the common standard right now the staff or the district is not attuned to delivering a program of this size it's coming so this is setting up the foundation to get ready for all those requirements and i'll chime in i i used one of the out of the box ones when i was a consultant and we've gotten to that stage now with the multiple projects that we go that we have going on primavera is the one we used and we see that it's too complex i mean you can miss one little thing and it can trip you up down the road significantly so an investment like this what we're talking about can easily save you just on one item from tripping or missing something timing maybe missing another river transfer because we forgot to do x or y or something like that so you know in my previous life as a consultant this was status quo at at where we're in the point where we're at with the complexity in the level of what we're dealing with well i've got a few things that come to my mind i mean a project management system is such a generic piece of software i mean everything from you know launching a rocket to mars and you know putting a new highway or you know anything does this so i can't see why spending 120 thousand dollars to investigate these i mean for example what does brown and call will use for their software for this i'm sure you do project management right right so we have a custom developed system are our own internal our projects are more service delivery but are we ours are too aren't they you're building infrastructure we don't build infrastructure but yeah all right but you know point well taken i think what we have done is more of our internal custom developed system some of the larger firms they tend to have bigger box system out of the box similar to oracle jd edwards things like that the question really and boils down to what is the right system there's solution for everything but what is needed really for district we don't need to over complicate things that don't need to be that's a crux of well that's that was another issue i have is that you're doing the needs analysis is nice that tells you what you need now yeah but we probably not going to want to do this and then throw it away in a couple years and then go we would like a system that works not for just the projects we're working on now but the projects we're going to work on for the next couple of decades maybe that we don't even know what those are so you concentrate on a needs analysis of just what we're doing now is not sufficient and in which case you know the fact that this is fairly generic if we were to get a system that fairly powerful and generic then it should be able to do not just what we're doing today but what we're going to be doing in 20 years which we don't know what they are but this is powerful enough to be modified to deal with those that that's exactly right i think the systems that the acquisition aspect of how the project gets thought about how it's funding is required and how it gets executed i think those fundamentals remain the same so this is a lot of we can set up the system which is very scalable and keeping it simple in a way that matches district space and needs and a lot seems to be made out of this distinction between out of the box and custom and for out of the box there's there seem to be a lot made of the fact that a subscription and i think pretty much every software package we buy we also buy a subscription because you know that's the updates and the maintenance and and bug fixes and all that stuff and and usually we make sure that the software is flexible enough to meet our needs not just now but going on so again that's not something new and i'm i'm completely leery of doing a custom develop system because if you're really developing a pms buy yourself um that software development that's expensive that's complex i mean we're not a soft developer that's like saying we should design our own cars and build our own trucks and and cell phones we shouldn't buy we should design our own cell phones and build you know you get down that road you end up so we should as much as possible not do custom things but instead buy something off the shelf since it's so generic and let me clarify that so that's an excellent observation and a very good point i think it's a misnomer in a way so what the out of the box system is like primavera or e-builder when you bring it out it has the acquisition module it has the standards module it has the construction management module invoice management module you flip a switch and you have all those modules ready it's their workflow it's the box that you wrap your hands around and you take it all or you not take it you know at all it's a binary selection and a lot of those systems the subscription basis each login would be twelve thousand dollars or thirteen thousand dollars a year per login so however many stakeholders you bring in into the system that's what the subscription i was talking about the custom developed aspect that's the misnomer i want to clarify it's like SharePoint for example we can leverage a current invoice management system if we have a SoCal to talk to another component of a SharePoint aspect so we are doing the bridging of the data to make sure that the visibility is across those two systems what i what i refer to custom developed is to make sure that we collect out of the box bits and pieces that we already have but make them talk to each other and follow a certain workflow that's what the customer was referring to we are not doing the coding we are not doing the custom develop in that uh true sense if uh if that makes sense okay but you know yeah we are not we are not soft developer either uh we want to avoid that okay anyone in the public wishes to address us on this item can i just add a question out there as well just because i please do i wasn't i think that i think the task in itself although it's called program management information system the system part the electronic user interface um the the SharePoint which which right now what we're using with SharePoint the district as you know we have Dropbox and we have moved a lot of the stuff that we do with um outside consultants to a SharePoint site but it's kind of right now just a generic Dropbox we would help utilize some of these existing tools that are in SharePoint um to to project manage the community water plan so you know one of the things that Anup and i talked about it's not just the for for what this effort is it isn't just launching this interface this share this enhanced SharePoint it's development of a program schedule a robust program schedule using Microsoft projects which isn't in here because we already have that license it's about meeting and doing some workshops with probably the the standing committee or with staff and really identifying what are the key milestones of each of these things to better understand how they all interplay not just with where a push pin is in terms of this is a fun this is a fun this is a funding opportunity do we want to go for the 20 million or 40 million this is what we need this is all part of that and i think that was um maybe a little bit lost with the focus of the SharePoint system but if you look at the tasks and you see the needs assessment i i totally get what you're saying um president daniels we would identify what are the components right now that we really need to focus on because most of our programs under the community water plan are in the planning and evaluation and initiation phase but there are other components and hopefully we this will have a life it will at least have a life of five to seven years for the community water plan evaluation and implementation if it goes that far for projects to to be built but it also i feel and one of the reasons why we picked SharePoint is because it's a system already it can it can be phased in for cip projects the procurement the design the bid the construction the bid docs and and keeping all of that that we already do right now but but could be in this program and i know that engineering may want to look at that and then again i think because it was a is a great opportunity for us to be able to have this funded through the prop one grant it was really kind of a win-win for us to really try to to wrap our hands around and leverage not just the pure water soquel components but all of the community water plan components within it so so i i think um going back to tom's initial question you answered it but i'd like our staff to answer it you know what does it look like with this versus just going staying the course that we're on now what what's the what's the difference i think i'll speak to it yeah because i come from a perspective of getting to see it all go on i mean they all do but you know a little different lens um we're gonna make a mistake we've been lucky to go this far this long this hard without something to tie it all together without it's not just you know it's not software development it's like an upset it this is just pulling the systems together and so they can integrate a little bit but it's also the expertise that you know they've been through this a couple times and uh we rely heavily on that some of the pitfalls and the guidance that's provided um so in a nutshell i mean we wouldn't bring it to you if we didn't think it provided our customers value value even even that was provided by grant we still wouldn't do that because we want to leverage the grant i mean we want the grant money to be put to the best use possible but um i would say that uh we're very liable to make mistakes probably more than one that would be much more costly than this short and i don't think hiring uh another staff person at this time is a way to go we hired one for a two-year stint seeing if that needed to be extended so we have that option um but that recruitment was hard yeah that recruitment was hard it's hard recruiting right now but you don't get the bench that they're gonna bring i mean it's not just a noop up here he's got you know he picks up the phone he's got i don't know how many people you got but you got a lot of people you can call and that's the that's also part of the value and then you talked about the horse before the cart and again to staff with the pure water soquel project we're in an eir process we have no project until that um until the eir is is evaluated and possibly certified so is this putting the the cart before the horse having this type of management are we going to be doing things that um are not necessary if we end up with no pure water soquel project or with no i'll take a crack at that again no i i i think um it's a long road to get to an eir and we've got other uh projects that we're evaluating too so it's this is this is not the end of the road this is the process part of the of the whole thing and that's what we're squaring the midst to whether it's a eir uh doing um the stuff all the work that's going on now with uh the river exchange project there's a lot going on with stormwater it's it's not the end result it certainly can be used for construction management and that sort of thing but it's to get down the road seeing what combination what options are the best and uh doing that in the most sufficient way possible without um making mistakes that cost time money or you know and people um i don't know anything about this share point system that you talked about so i don't know what its capabilities are and its experience sounds like it's kind of certainly new to us um but have we talked to other water agencies particularly those that have bureau grants and have to do bureau reporting and have state grants and have to state reporting and blah blah blah and something that we know i mean we i don't want to share a point is capable of doing what we're doing but you know we're going to stumble around trying to make it work but maybe we could get experience from someone else who's already been there and done it and can tell us this works this doesn't and that that's precisely the kind of information i just had one example of leko so we go tiggered but what we would be doing is we'll be bringing a lot of the examples as i mentioned every pmis very generic term gets developed based on the needs of that agency uh and their program so we'll be bringing uh four or five different options in that needs assessment workshop and then talk through different order what makes right sense for soquel not just this program but even long term as we talked about beyond the program and from that we'll make a determination or help you make determination what's the right solution okay any other questions becky and anyone else in the public thank you becky steinbrunner i have a question in reading this addendum to original scope of work it says the 119,105 dollars would be just to support this type of work through the end of the fiscal year so that's what two and a half months of work and then it goes on if proved in next year's budget ongoing program management efforts will also be carried into the next year so how much would that cost i just i just last night went to the central water district board meeting and um it's a stark contrast what i see quite frankly what i see here um i mean they're putting in a new main system on valentia and ralph is out there directing traffic and christine their manager is on the tractor and they're working their absolute hearts out to do the best they can and keep the costs down for their rate payers and so i have a concern i'm not a rate payer but i have a concern for them because i know many of them are on fixed incomes and it's already very difficult to pay their water bills having just had a 17 and a half percent increase in rates and i um really question this and i'm not questioning the abilities of your staff i think your staff is great and they work hard and i've seen some terrific reports come up on the screen before you and and i really appreciate their hard work um i just think this is a lot of money and i also know that um sb 623 which i have been told off on the side is gonna happen because governor brown wants it to happen um that in the money that you have to collect from your rate payers there is money for administrative and reporting work which i don't know if that's part of the future reporting that um your consultant here is talking about but um i also just want to say that the mid county groundwater agency struggles with this too and they actually use the regional water management foundation locally mr tim karson does all that and the county of santa cruz also does that they have given over management of their complex grants to the regional water management foundation to help them manage and so i would applaud your um putting the brakes on this for now at least until the end of the fiscal year and really thinking about it and keep the cost of your water down for your rate payers thank you okay i'm you know i so just a quick clarification on that comment i think um the work we are talking about for this fiscal year it actually gets started in this fiscal year it continues into the next fiscal year so it's not just for this two months it's the process that gets started and then continues forward the idea was the needs assessment workshop and a couple of uh staff input for what is the current status what is the future status all those meetings will happen in the next two months but the integration of the system implementation of the system that will continue on throughout the program yeah and i'll just reiterate it we always look through the customer lens make no doubt about that and it's also about the value i mean besides this being grant funded federal um state grant uh so no cost to our our rate payers it's beyond that it's it again goes back to what is going to provide the best value to our customers in that and this is one of those tools again leading to protection in the aquifer and providing the best service so we wouldn't recommend it unless we thought it was doing that and i just um it's hard like maybe for me to just have this you know presented without some comparison alternatives of how we would manage things you know otherwise and i've asked the question and you've given a good answer and i understand you want to be efficient and we need to not make mistakes as we move forward on all these important project possible projects and and so um it's just just i'm just expressing i understand the need now better but i also but i don't feel like i really understand if this is the only only way to do it i'm sure you're concerned well again i'll just say there there are many ways to attack it we could go along with the way we're doing it but i i in my heart feel that uh we will make a mistake or either we'll lose people um this is i think the most cost-effective approach to handling the complexity of what we got going on and keep insanity um the whole bit i mean well partly i'm concerned about what we're buying into i mean the comments we're right i mean task one is the needs analysis i can see us funding that because we we need to know what we're doing and then implementation phase one and there's no discussion about phase two or phase three i mean is that at the end or is we buying ourselves into a multi-year multi-zillion dollar and to say that this is grant funded doesn't mean you know we forget about that because we don't use that grant funded for this we'll be using it for something else that we need to do so correct and then ongoing program that so there's three tasks mentioned and yeah i think a new poll respond go ahead so the the reason why we talked or broke it up into implementation phase one or phase two or what may be phase three is right now where we are in the overall community water plan we are into different options evaluation what we would call a master planning phase we don't have a set project that we are executing there's no need for design standards or construction management modules so to speak or workflow when we do have a defined project that we are ready to construct that's when we will talk about implemented phase two where we need to have a workflow around how do we manage design or coordinate design from multiple consultants who are working on the different aspects or construction management those might be later down the road district doesn't need to spend money on those modules right now what really the implementation phase the immediate need might be to manage the schedule to make sure that we are looking ahead and not missing funding opportunities so let me talk about this aspect getting a better handle on the overall schedule as it applies to EIR as it applies to defining enough project so that you can apply for VIFI so you can apply for different grants I think that's the aspect we are talking about and and that's what you know think about the scenario over here on the funding opportunities what is that deadline what are the gaps what does staff need to bring it in front of the board to make the decision and when I think that's the phase one that's the most critical need for the community water plan right now and once the the projects are selected then we'll talk about design management construction management procurement of the contractors and so and so forth so that's the distinction between the two I think what has been a little bit confusing here is this comes across as a heavy on the software solution but really it's more about program management support and staff augmentation that is what we are going forward we are right now along with the staff augmentation we're just setting up the framework that will enable you to make the decision earlier today the discussion was river water transfer we want to have the water available by December of next year or winter of next year well how is that going to be possible we need to have the systems in place the background framework that as soon as that is possible we are able to execute those projects or be ready so that's all we are talking about I have one comment after you well I'm looking at task 1.2 and I see $57,000 not to exceed amount has been used for implementing PMI PMIS functionalities on SharePoint platform in phase one and I don't think it's until we do the needs analysis we don't know what functionality we need and I think until we do some investigation we're not even sure that SharePoint is the right platform to build it on in the first place so we're I think the thing I would like to see do is just task 1.1 let's do the needs analysis let's get some idea of what functionality we need let's also do some research and figure out what platform is the right platform to build this on and then we'll know what task 1.2 should be and I mean rather than jumping into $112,000 right off to that when I mean so this is clearly just a wild ass guess of how much to spend on phase two you're right it is and I think it was is not I wouldn't say it's a wild ass guess but I do think that what it says here is correct we did not know what we would need so for it says for budgeting purposes it was allocated to be a not to exceed and typically with our consultant contracts we only pay for what we decide on it so part of the efforts is the needs assessment workshop Anup and his team we're going to meet with with staff and the stakeholders identify what was the best platform for us to use recommend that and then we would implement that if it's too fast and the board it would like to be part of that for us to come back I'm I'm fine with it with that so you'd be fine with a motion to approve phase take that's 1.1 I would say if we wanted to do it in that phased approach I would like I would like to do task 1.1 with some 1.3 because I do feel that there's a lot of information gathering especially on some of the other components BC has has a lot of knowledge on the pure water soquel they need a little bit more knowledge efforts to be to be garnered from the other community water plan components so that they can do that kind of assessment and build that schedule and president Daniels if I may that was precisely the thought process we were into is we wanted to provide some tangible outcome when we just do the needs assessment we were forcing a question about what does all that do what is the next phase what do you do with that information and we used some of the recently completed project and looked at what is the worst case scenario in terms of if you wanted to let's say implement schedule module and the decision making module what would that cost be and that's where the that assumption comes in but you're absolutely right I think the first phase is to do the needs assessment provide some staff support we wanted to give you something more tangible you know what does that actual end product look like yeah I just want to see if I'm assessing the situation correctly and I like I actually we're kind of we all like I think pretty much that idea of like a stepwise thing but if I'm hearing you correctly and I'm like we've had other projects managed by other consultants like getting a well done at the polo fields and so forth like managing where our staff I think we have an amazing staff but I just get this feeling and tell me if I'm not correct that you're putting in a lot of extra hours to keep things rolling as well as they are but that that can't go on forever trying to manage all these things and be realistic I think that's correct I also think it is we're starting to enter a dimension as good as our staff is and they are good the knowledge we need outside outside knowledge the the district our customers will benefit on a cost per dollar spent by the experience brought in from them and support and so my last question would be then if we just wanted to do like 1.1 and 1.3 what would be an amount not to exceed for some project management and their numbers for all three phases so the third one's more it's 30 it's 30 30,000 yeah that's 1.1 the first one's 31 so the 61,000 okay I'd be okay with that yeah so part part of what's difficult about this is that we don't know what the next steps are going to be nobody does and part of it we don't know how much help we're going to be in the future too it would help me to have information about that to to you know decide how far to go along the road don't want to go partway along the road and be you know not know what's coming up ahead so I I hear very clearly that our staff is telling us that they need help with this that it's going to be good for our customers if if we if we get the help and I'm supportive of it but I'd like you know I'd like to see a roadmap as part of that need assessment as much as possible and part of that roadmap is just the cost involved and I'd like to see alternatives as well that's been brought up several times so when this need assessment you know happens you know what's the direction to go that's that we think it's the preferred direction and what are these other possible directions to go and that would help me decide how far to go along this road because I'm I'm right now I'm thinking about a review that I did on this for a project I was asked to do a review of a project and on whether it should be funded or not and I thought it was a fantastic project but it was I I told the people who are going to fund it that it's going to cost five to ten times more than what they're asking for if it's done you know if it goes the the way it's going to go and I want to know that type of information on the advantages with going you know with the consultant route and and what the other possibilities are so I think that's similar to to what to what I've heard are you the same yeah I mean I'm I'm generally supportive I've been yeah I've been in the position of having to sort out all kinds of deadlines and funding and budgeting and things like that mesh it all together and make sure you don't miss a key point and so I'm really sympathetic to that and I but I just don't know whether this is even enough to do that if it's what you need so I would be in favor of implementing phase one and then 1.3 that's strongly about that and and then just play it by ear on the all right so so if and I think as well we need to not just do a needs analysis we need to do a resource analysis I mean I don't imagine SharePoint has a thing in there to do a reporting for the bureau grants but there might be some software out there that already does that yeah and and already might know that and consulting health and that sort of thing so that that has been in the works in the background we just okay we're bringing it to you one step at a time but so go ahead no no I think you're gonna we're gonna say yeah we've all also been in the position of getting stuck with a bunch of software that we could it couldn't make useful yeah I think the software thing we overplayed that maybe misrepresented that in the memo it really is that's a that's a part of it that's just like the the basic skeleton we're talking framing are you know the the outside structure of the house the windows and that sort of thing and the flooring but here we just need that the software it's just a minor part of that it's just like the the pony wall on a house it's the experience of the builders coming in so I mean I can I can it's getting close to nine so am I correct in hearing the board is interested in and us pursuing 1.1 and 1.3 and then seeing where that evolves and if a board member wants to be part of that I think that would be awesome but we we would is that what I'm hearing I was like let me see if I can frame it as a motion that we that we do proceed with 1.1 and 1.3 with an amount not to exceed 61,000 whatever okay 62,000 with a report back to the board entire board at that point so that we can see where that's gone and what the options are for the next steps great right I'll second it oh yeah I'll second it okay great we have a motion we have a second all in favor aye opposed that's unanimous okay thank you all right thank you okay and thank you staff yeah that's almost there it's getting late yep item 6.4 board direction regarding meeting officials in washington this is yours Ron yep yep so in that vein trying to do right by our customers and obtain grant funding for the community water plan and you know like I mentioned earlier and it's noted in the memo we've been successful you know dollar invested is yielded multiple dollars in return and the future looks even brighter that's on the state level and we've had some success on the federal level you know they the Bureau of Reclamation showed you know a sign of faith with $150,000 grant for the feasibility study saying hey change your state's feasibility study so it's it resonates with the Bureau in terms of grant funding and we did that and it's just accepted as Melanie mentioned however that's just the first step and we've met with the staff up in Sacramento the Bureau staff they gave us very poignant direction on what we need to to do to go further we've had a previous Bureau grant way back so we've had some experience with them I administered that grant it was on the conservation side of things but still it gave us a lot of insight to them and basically what we think would yield the best value is going to DC and this is not just coming from us but various input from Bureau staff and others go to DC meet with various representatives there we have a person there that'll help us with that and then I'd like to actually make a dim them to this motion here potentially not only DC but look at stopping in Denver on the way back if that's feasible because the people who actually administer the grants usually and make some of the large decisions I say not minister but make some of the major decisions on that are located in Denver for the Bureau of Rec so if we can arrange that we'd like to stop on the way back and do that too and meet with them give them a greater understanding of of the various projects that we have going on being evaluated in the community water plan so the the at the timing and the logistics is there what we're asking for tonight is if up to two board members would be interested and if you want to do this go approve this item going back to DC with probably two members of staff maybe another person also we'll have to see maybe a member of one of our partner agencies also express interest today and meet with those officials and then potentially stop back in DC and and I mean in in Denver and then come back here so we're asking for approval of that of that and then also direction on two board members of the two board members if they might be interested in and going with us and at the agenda review this week both Tom and myself expressed interest in going which i think might be effective but if the others want to put their names forward we can talk about all that I I see the value in it unfortunately my schedule doesn't allow me to go does your schedule allow you to go and do you uh yeah it depends on but uh I could attest to the efficacy if I did run it I ran into and had a long conversation with a woman who's uh worked with some small coastal southern coastal water systems south of us but central and that they needed a water project and they needed to go that's what they did they just started but it didn't it wasn't it didn't accomplish what they needed in one visit though I have to warn you it took them about three visits no and and that's a great point thank you director christensen we we it did work it did work at establishing the connection actually making to be able to make the case in person uh was very effective I know pvw may did the same thing yeah they had multiple trips with multiple people going back east yeah in a case and they got about 25 million over numerous years so you're right it we and I and I I 49 million anyway um a large sum that was beneficial um but this isn't a one and done I would envision at least one other trip probably one other trip and uh roughly a year later so uh there'd be opportunities to you know to go again um and I think it would be necessary actually though sometimes if you get shut out you know well we tried but don't no need to go back next year right right until we can play it by ear but the they the direction we got they kind of laid it out and they said okay this is two trips one now one basically a year later and in between um if you can get to Denver that's that's a benefit too and this is yeah and it's it's work especially as we go into washington dc in summertime yeah pretty intense so the way it would work is if you designate two people who want to go with us what we would do then immediately tomorrow uh probably Karen would sit could sit down a doodle poll on the best times I've laid out some dates that are not uh been a good they're not good and then um we would get the ball rolling well personally I think they would most appreciate the president and vice president going because that's something that they they don't know who we are but that's the title that couldn't press so I'm good yeah um I I see it I see the advantage with that um and I think perhaps um if there's a follow-up trip having different people sure absolutely there could be an advantage to that as well yeah get to meet the whole crew and maybe even a backup if if right if I get if Carla was willing to just on this trip in case something happens or a schedule doesn't work that would be good because this is gonna be that's what I was gonna say in the time frame might be a little um challenging logistically are you willing to be a backup oh yeah and possibly Rochelle too we'll make the motion um oh sure yeah thanks for speaking up kind of getting carried away yeah yeah I want to go to DC too um Becky Steinbrunner didn't your district hire a consultant to speak on your behalf in Washington DC wasn't it like 45 000 a contract for a consultant in Washington DC where are they why can't they do this for you and what about Skype what I mean I I see the value in in going to places when there are projects you really need to see that are working and question the technical aspects of but if it's just going to basically glad hand somebody I think um I think we need to look at more cost effective ways such as Skype I think we need to look at um things that are just as effective and don't use um don't spew out greenhouse gases and uh are real savings to your ratepayers so um that's that's my take on this I'm not one of your ratepayers but again I see this is a big expense and you've already hired consultants in Washington DC as I understood it to do this very kind of work thank you I just I was gonna say I mean I'm only going on the advice of others that this is an effective way I don't I don't really want to go to Washington DC personally I I want to go if it's effective to get funds for the district so that the ratepayers don't have to pay as much and it was exactly a consultant that we hired in Washington who's suggesting this is the thing you need to do yeah among others we've had um we've consulted with various um people have paying grants people who provide grants yeah these grants so and it's our Washington representative who's going to set this up and arrange the actual meetings and and go along with us but right so anyone else yeah so I'll second it well I've made a motion so to to approve two directors and staff to meet with federal representatives in Washington DC and in Denver if that can be arranged in the same trip and the the president and vice president being the first of being the directors to go and Carly being the backup an alternate yeah okay I will second that all in favor aye aye opposed I think that's unanimous okay we go to 6.5 well I'm going to make it a little easy on the board tonight at this late hour as the memo is presented by the human resources office on a district organizational and staffing review of the operations unit in the O&M department the memo is presented actually has recommendations for motions and I am going to indicate that I'm going to pull my recommendation for board action tonight this will be an informational item only so you don't have to make any decisions tonight on this one but I do want to provide this information to the board because I will be bringing it back we wanted to make sure that we had adequate time for our staff groups our employee groups to take a look at this information and be able to have an opportunity to discuss that yeah so with this late hour just a quick overview of this informational item the human resources department did conduct an organizational staffing review specifically a classification study of the equipment mechanic position within the district the last time that this job description had been revised was in 2005 obviously we needed to make some updates to that specific job description we also did a deep study actually the study the classification study for the equipment mechanic was initiated even before i got to the district four years ago the the study was initiated it was shelled it was brought back we took a long time looking at the equipment mechanic position because there was a lot of detail and some changes that had gone on with that and as a result of that study we made the determination that the district really does have a need to maintain the equipment mechanic as part of its classification plan but we in recognition of actually what's been happening over a period of time and some gradual changes in the position held by the current equipment mechanic it was determined that a secondary classification within the job class family of mechanic of equipment utilities mechanic really warranted consideration and so you see that new job description proposed within the memo of equipment utilities mechanic that position really has evolved over time to not only manage our fleet of equipment and district vehicles but our current equipment mechanic Dave Patton really does spend a lot of his time in working on our some of our distribution system components including our pumps he really is has become an expert in generators and we have grown our fleet of generators and he actually has has kind of full scope responsibility for doing some of the load testing of the the generators to make sure that they're available for us when we need them and so with that in recognition of the work that he's been doing we are proposing to create a new job classification of the equipment utilities mechanic and maintain the existing equipment mechanic we are proposing that the current incumbent Dave Patton be promoted into that new classification as equipment utilities mechanic we also took a look at the structure of the the reporting structure of that particular position in recognition through that classification study that so much of Dave's work right now actually is working very closely with our operations supervisor right now the equipment mechanic is a direct report to the operations and maintenance manager and so through that process we really kind of took a hard look at that reporting structure also in light of the fact that we have a pending retirement in the operation supervisor position we recognize that maybe now would be the opportune time to make some changes to the operation supervisor position in regards to the equipment mechanic classification and the the the reporting structure of that to prepare ourselves for recruitment we didn't want to make a bunch of changes to a job description and then maybe change them in a couple three months when we're ready to start a recruitment so we are proposing some changes to the operation supervisor job classification the mid-management management unit as well through that process we looked at certifications and recognize that right now are the the we have two supervisors in the operations and management department we have our field crew supervisor and we have our operations supervisor we recognize that there's an inconsistency in the distribution certification for both of those supervisors which didn't really make sense to us in the analysis process and so we're looking at providing equity to that certification for both of those supervisors so that's the information that's presented and it will come back to the board just the reason you want to maintain the the original equipment mechanic yes is probably because i'm guessing because when this employee retires you might be able to it might need to just hire a mechanic that doesn't necessarily have those skills yeah it's presented in the memo the equipment mechanic actually would create a level if need be in the future if we needed to recruit as we know our fleet is expanding our equipment is expanding our distribution system is expanding in order to meet the needs of the district and so if we have the need in the future to recruit that provides that job family movement a bigger pool of recruiting recruitment candidates more than likely would be at the equipment mechanic level and just as we've seen with our own employee the growth within that knowledge and skill in our utility um could be served by having that a higher level position to grow into yeah this was just sent to staff we wanted to present it this person has written several times about the same subject of storm water and i believe we've responded letting them know that um that we are pursuing that's one of our portfolio projects if you want us to respond again we'll be glad to otherwise i don't need to do it again i would say okay so we're done with that and then we will go we will go to a closed session with two items items 8.1 and 8.2