 All right, so let's call our meeting to order. We have Rochelle calling in via phone, which is perfectly able to do. Otherwise, we're all present. And so that's that. There's no public hearing today. And now we get to have the announcement by board members of items removed from Consent's agenda. So are there any items that you would like to pull? I just wanted to clarify something on 4.1, which is the Google Minutes. We should probably pull that then. Yeah, we can pull it, but I don't think it's allowed. So let's do that. Let's pull it. We'll correct that one. OK, anything else? Anything not? OK, we'll pull that one item, 4.1. I'm going to abstain from the minutes, item 4.1.1. Otherwise, I'll approve the room. Oh, wait, we're going to do that separately. So I guess I'll make a motion to approve the rest of the Consent's agenda. I'll second. If we have a motion and a second, roll call, please. Director LeHue. Yes. Vice President Lather. Director Jaffe. Yes. Director Christensen. Yes. And President Daniel. Yes. So that's the Consent's agenda, except for the minutes. So we bring that one afterwards. We do that after the all the administrative business. Is there no longer public comment on the Consent's agenda? You can, yeah, you can comment on it. We're not going to pull it, though. OK, well, there are actually some members of the audience here tonight that wanted to pull an agenda item from the Consent's agenda for discussion. At the last meeting, we changed the process, which is shown on the front page of the minutes, the new process. So you have to get a director to pull an item. So people from the public can't. Can you please tell me where on this agenda it says that? First page. I see announcement by board members of items removed from Consent. Under a Consent. It's the fourth sentence in that Consent agenda procedure. A member, a public member, may request that a board member pull an item from the Consent agenda prior to the start of the meeting. I see that now this is new. This is the first time. It would be very helpful for members of the public. It's actually the second time, because we talked about it at the last meeting, which I think missed that part. This is the first meeting that it's been. Well, then may I and other members of the public please comment on some of the Consent, a Consent agenda item before you approve it? Sure. Can I have more time, please? I was verifying procedure. All right, looks like I'm not going to get it. So I'll just go ahead. My name's Becky Steinbruner. I'm here to talk about item 4.10, Altar Drive Trench Pavement Repair Project. I read that that you must, by roll call, vote to approve the actions on this. Altar Drive is in a sorry state of this repair. And I went over that road today, and it's of concern. And so some of the people here are residents and also concerned about that. And I want to point out that there is an improper date on the letter to you from County Public Works. It's dated 2010. I believe that's an incorrect date. So I want to point that out to you. But I want to, above all, ask that you do side to side paving and not just the trench repair. It is evident in Altar Drive in these areas that the trench from former work sank. And that is it was due to public concern that Matt Machado from Public Works did issue you the letter, which I think just has an incorrect date. So again, I want to support the people who depend on that for their roads, the fire agencies who depend on it, that you do side to side paving for any work in that area. Thank you. I'm sorry. I don't know any of the procedures. I just heard that you're going to talk about the street that I live on and also that Mimi and Ken Files. Well, actually, we've already approved that. But you can talk about it if you would like. Yeah, thank you very much. Altar Drive is a long hill that comes down from the freeway and ends, pretty much on our properties. And years ago, there was a swale placed on the road so that the water comes down the hill and pretty much just inundates our properties and fills up the garage and the basement. And we've been speaking with the county for a long time to try to convince them to reconfigure, re-engineer the road so that the water doesn't just come down one side of the road. And I can believe that the sunken trenches makes it worse because it makes it just a spillway that pours down into our properties. And I'm hoping that we can ask for the aid of Soquel Creek Water District as you redo the trenching that we can repave in a way that our properties are saved. Did you want to say something more than that? We have the property next to Mrs. Bakers. And my in-laws own the property from the early 70s. And when the swale was put in on a previous pavement job, it directed the water into three houses right at the bottom of the hill. And they flood in a heavy rain. Our garage gets silt and water, maybe a quarter inch deep. And the Bakers, their backyard, it's a quagmire. And my mother-in-law said that it wasn't this way till the previous pavement job. And the swale comes down all to drive. And rather than follow all to drive, they did almost a right-angled turn. And it goes down this little private lane that we're on. And I just asked that maybe this could be considered if all to drive is paved. We had an engineer come out. I think it was Ellen Baker, I believe, that wrote a letter to the county. And the engineer said the county would not have done this sway in the direction, excuse me, that it now goes. So I just thought I'd bring this up with the possibility of the road being paved. Thank you. Thank you. And just mentioned, the county still owns that property, not us. And the county, you can see in the minutes, the county has sent us a letter asking us to do some work there. And it's still under the county's direction. So it's not our project, really, in some sense. Right. So we've been in touch. Supervisor Friend and County Public Works Director Matt Machado has been in contact with us. We're not a road agency. And this is an option that we'll look at when we get the bids. And we'll bring it back to the board. And we just thank you for your input. And we'll look at that when we get the bids. Well, you can come to the meetings. I mean, everything. The road you're going to. Yeah. Nothing's going to happen until after the bid opening. And then shortly thereafter, we'll bring it to the board for award. Right. So if you look at the agenda for the board, you'll see it come up at some point. If you want to leave us your name and number, we can't promise it because we can't get back to everybody. But we'll try to alert you when that item is up. If you can leave that with Melanie here in the back, name, number, and the subject out the road and all that. OK. We have approval of the minutes. We deferred. And that will occur at the end of the agenda items, the administrative business. So that's when that'll come back. That's how we arrange things. Oh, OK. So oral and written communications. So anyone who wishes to address this on any item, not on tonight's agenda, this would be the time. And you have three minutes. Thank you, Becky Steinbrenner. I would like to address your board on the procedural changes that you have voted upon. I understand that you do want efficient meetings, and everyone does. What I see, though, I mean, you don't ever have a big, I mean, this is a big turnout tonight. So shortening the amount of time that people have to speak to agenda items, I think is somewhat short-sighted and really in the spirit of transparency, which your district prides itself upon, it would be, I think, good to make the public have them allowed to have three minutes. Most people don't take it. I also really would like to ask that because you have instituted new policy here regarding the consent agenda, that when there are major changes like this, that it be explained. It's not up to people who have never been to your meetings before to try to figure out what's going on. Even though I come to your meetings, this is new to me. A simple explanation by the chairman at the beginning of new policy would be very helpful for those who are here for the first time and those who are maybe just not remembering new policy. I also want to say that I think your board owes people the opportunity to come speak and to be able to do so without interruption. And I understand that some speakers are very difficult to listen to. It makes it a very tense moment for everyone when members of the board or the chairman tries to shout someone down. And it actually becomes tense and counterproductive. And I appreciate that it is not always easy to hear and listen to what some people say. But in the spirit of transparency and efficient meetings, I would much prefer as a member of the public that you just allow the person to have their say without trying to interrupt them, without trying to correct them, without trying to argue with them. It only inflates the anger that has brought them to say what they're saying. I guess that's all I want to say. I think you're good people. I think you care. And I think we all have a lot of commonalities here. And what I want to say is that if you give people the chance to speak what they want to say, they'll calm down. And it will be a much better meeting. Thank you. Anyone else wish to address us? President Daniels, if I may make a comment after you. So on the agenda as we have up here, what we tried to do, our aim was, and Emma and I worked together on this, and we're certainly open to feedback, is to make it very accessible to any member of the public, especially people who have not attended the meeting. So under each item, it's well spelled out what a member of the public may expect and how they may approach it. And so if we go down to the other items, this was our intent anyway. So under consent agenda, these items are routine business. One vote's done by the board and how items are pulled, that sort of thing, and the length of time. And then down here for oral and written communications, you actually get up to three minutes and how that works. And then even to go on to down below here. So we've made a concerted effort to put in writing just to help people fall on. We didn't have this before. So we think this is a benefit to the agenda to help a member of the public guide their way through this. We should also mention that in doing these changes, we were following the procedures set by the county, because they do it the same way, and the city of Santa Cruz. So it's not strange. It's, in fact, us kind of following what most of the agencies around here already do, so they do it the same way. And finally, just on this, it really was an effort to encourage more people to comment, because it would curtail some of that acrimonious comment that we've been getting that intimidates people who come to meetings for the first time. But also, this entire procedure is subject to a review after a few months to see how it's been working out for us and for the members of the public. So it's final for now, for sure, but we will be reviewing it to see if it is efficient and efficacious in helping people, helping us all achieve our goals of communication. So we go on next to the reports, of which there are none. And then now we go on to administrative business. So the first thing is an unconditional will serve item 7.1.1. Good evening. It's been a while since we've had a will serve brought to the board. This is bringing, being brought to you because it exceeds 1.0 acre feet. This is an empty lot that is going to be split. And then a duplex added to each site along with an ADU. The applicant has paid the 10% deposit and is ready for your consideration. OK. Any questions of staff? Yes, I have one. Please? I was at, actually, it's probably easily clear. It is easily cleared up. Do you mean my duplex? There's two apartments on the lot split, will be a lot split, and then two apartments on each lot. And then an ADU in addition to that? That's right. So that's why the high volume. It'll be about six living units total. Anything else? Any public comment on this item? See no one. Back to the board. What's your pleasure? I'll move approval. I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Director LeHue? Yes. Vice President Lather? Yes. Director Jackie? Yes. Director Christensen? Yes. And President Daniels? No. And that passes 4 to 1. So that is done. We now move on to item 7.2, which is adopting a resolution authorizing reimbursement. So the district, I'm going to present this item tonight. The district has contracted with Piper Sandler to be our financial advisors, and they are looking at opportunities for debt issuance for us in the coming months. But one of the things they wanted to make sure we could do would be to reimburse ourselves for any expenditures that meet we might incur prior to the debt being issued, one of those being a real property purchase at Chanticleer. So this is simply a reimbursement resolution that authorizes us to reimburse ourselves out of any debt proceeds for any money that we put out now for property purchase. Any questions on this? Raise your hand forward. Seeing none. OK. Any public comment on this item? Thank you. Becky Steinbruner, I do have a question. In the course of the legal action that I've taken against the district for the Pure Water Soquel Project, general manager Ron Duncan did state in a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury that all debt on the project had to be claimed before February 29, 2020, or it would not be eligible for reimbursement. That sworn declaration made the court take the stance that there was a sense of urgency. So I want to remind Mr. Duncan, and I will provide a copy of that legal document to you, that after February 29, according to Mr. Duncan's declaration, no costs for the project can be reimbursed. Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board. Pleasure. I'll move approval. I second. Roll call, please. Director LeHue. Yes. Vice President Lather. Yes. Director Jaffe. Yes. Director Christensen. Yes. And President Daniels. Yes. So now we move on to item 7.3, which is about the purchase of the Chantecler property. Yes, back in May 7, 2019, the board authorized district representative to sign an option purchase for the property. And so we did that about a year ago. And now in that motion or a separate motion, you said if we're going to purchase the property to come back at another time, and that's what we're here to tonight, approve the wording and the terms and the purchase and sales agreement that's attached to the memo in the board packet, direct the authorized district representative, we'd say the board president in this case, to sign the purchase and sale agreement for the real property and then to direct staff to move forward with the associated actions to purchase the property. So that's it. And I shall be glad to answer any questions. Any questions of staff? No. Any public comment on this item? Thank you. Becky Steinbrunner, I just want to make it public information here that this is $3.2 million in rate payer money to buy this piece of land that is not within your service district boundaries for a project that is still under litigation, for a project that had, in my opinion, faulty environmental review and should be reviewed again. I remember December 18, 2018, when you approved the project and certified the EIR, county first district county supervisor John Leopold came to your board that night and asked you not to do that. And one of the tenets that he had that you should have noted was that in his opinion, he felt that you would not be able to declare the cost of the land as part of the project cost. And therefore, very likely, it could not be reimbursed with state money. I would like to make sure that you have verified that. I would like to hear from your counsel the status of the reimbursement for this $3.2 million land purchase. I also did not see in the documentation that the district has done its due diligence before buying this piece of land. It has a long history of both agricultural and industrial use. I saw no evidence that there has been testing for any soil contaminants. There is some sort of a well on the property that is visible from the road. What is the status of that well? Will it be closed? What will the permitting be necessary to handle that? And what about the archaeological survey? That was not able to be done for the draft EIR. Anyone else? I mean none. I'll bring it back to the board. Just a quick comment about the fact that the environmental review was deemed to be thorough and adequate by a judge. So that is all. Did staff want to comment anything? Due diligence has been done. OK. Well then I'll make the motion in all three motions. I'm excited to move forward with the project and this is just another step. I will second those three motions. Roll call please. Director LeHue. Yes. Vice President Lather. Yes. Director Jaffe. Yes. Director Christensen. Yes. And President Daniels. Yes. Thank you. OK. We move on to 7.4. Authorize entering into a design bill for the for the conveyance part of the project. Hi. Good evening. Both Taj and I are going to split providing a quick presentation to you before we open it up for questions. But tonight we're very excited to introduce item 7.4, which is about entering and authorizing a design bill agreement with Garni and Kennedy Jenks for the conveyance project of Pure Water Soquel. So we did create, I think it's about an eight slides or so that we want to just walk through again for the board and in the public and those who may be watching on television. But again the Pure Water Soquel project is a project designed to replenish the groundwater basin, address the critical overdraft, and meet the state mandates of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act as we are one of 21 basins that have been identified as critically overdrafted in California. Part of the project's objectives is to also ensure that we're developing an affordable, reliable, and drought-proof supplemental supply that increases diversification of our water portfolio and it also enhances and addresses climate change. As you can see in this figure on the right, the Pure Water Soquel project is part of the district's community water plan. And that is a long-term plan that was created based upon the community values that we've heard from our customers as well as other community stakeholders. It includes prioritizing water quality, reliability, doing a project that's timely, something that can be scalable, is affordable, and is environmental. The Pure Water Soquel project, as many of you know since we've been evaluating it for many years, is a project that would take secondary, treated effluent from the city of Santa Cruz, treat that water to tertiary levels, convey that water to an advanced water purification facility where it would go through a multi-step process to purify it, and then that water would be sent to injection wells to create a seawater intrusion barrier. The project, now that we are going into construction and implementation, we are procuring and going forward with design and construction with the project being three packages. The first package is the source water treatment at Santa Cruz and at the advanced water purification. So that's considered our treatment project. We also have the conveyance infrastructure project, which is the focus tonight that would convey the water from the treatment sites out to the injection wells. And then the third package is obviously the seawater intrusion prevention wells. This project, Pure Water Soquel, is designed to treat and produce 1,500 acre feet of water for the district. But it is size and scale so that we could upsize the project if needed to meet the Mid County Groundwater Basin's objectives or for other needs in the future. And as you can see on the right, we have been working for some time with many regional stakeholders, including the city of Capitola, the city of Santa Cruz, and also the RTC. I can do this. We're going to tag team. And so tonight, we're talking about the pipeline that travels from the city's wastewater treatment plant down near Lyrit and near Lagoon. It comes up to California Street down Laurel, to Broadway to Frederick, to Soquel Avenue, and then over to Warf Road, making its way past the district's office to Rosedale and Monterey Avenue, and then finally over to Willowbrook and near Cabrillo College for the recharge wells. So tonight, we have a team in front of you. They're actually sitting in the audience. Garni Pacific is a general contractor, and they have subcontracted with Kennedy Janks to help get this part of the project finished, designed, and then built together as a team. I'll back up. The first segment between the wastewater treatment plant and the Chanticleer site is going to actually have two pipelines in the same trench, and that's part of the design effort here. The final blue line going from Chanticleer to Aptos is just a single pipeline. Any questions about that? We did just want to highlight the process in terms of our selection tonight. As you may remember, about a year and a half ago, the district went through a workshop talking about how we would be procuring and designing and constructing the project. And the delivery model that was selected was a progressive design build, which means that we would be procuring a team of a designer and a contractor that would do the work for us, and we would do that in a two-phase process, the first phase being the preliminary design, design, and data collection, and then construction. And so with that model, the district went out and we did a very, I think, a very robust early engagement on the process. This was something that the district wanted to make sure that we had people that were aware of the project, that the project was coming in. So we did conduct quite a few, I think, touch points for people out in the industry that we were doing this project. And as listed in our staff memo, we listed how we had been in contact with over 20 interested firms who were looking at what kind of project the Pure Water Soquel project program would be and what kind of packages we would have. We also held a disadvantaged business enterprise and minority business enterprise open house. We put this project out as an RFQ, RFP process, meaning that we were going to release a request for qualifications. And the district did do that in May when the board approved us to release these RFQ. We posted it not only on the Soquel Creek Water District website, but we also posted it on the California Special District's RFP clearing house. When the board approved releasing the RFP, they also set a review and selection committee. And that committee comprised of the general manager, the engineering manager, the operations and maintenance manager, the special projects communications manager, and two board members, Dr. Lajue and Director Lathar. Okay, I'll do the rest part. Okay, following the release of the RFQ, the district did receive one from Kennedy Janks and Garny. And when we posted the RFQ on the website, we actually had 68 people access the RFQ. So in receiving that statement of qualifications, the district's review team did review it and we shortlisted them to receive the RFP. On August 12th, the district issued that RFP and on October 11th, Garny and Kennedy Janks submitted the proposal for the Progressive Design-Built Services for the Commence Infrastructure Project. Yeah, so the Garny and Kennedy Janks team is a highly qualified team. Garny's been in business since 1961, not a stranger and not new to pipeline work. Most recently, they installed the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, which was a $73 million project, pipeline project, which consisted of 85,000 lineal feet of 36 inch ductile iron pipe and another 13,000 lineal feet of 42 inch PVC pipe. Big scale projects, they're nationwide. I'm confident that they'll be able to get us a pipeline from A to B. Kennedy Janks is also a seasoned design firm. They have worked in the area, they're familiar with the area. They've, their bio says they've designed up to 55 miles of pipeline. So pipelines are also a strong suit for their firm. They of course do other engineering disciplines, but between the two of them, we're gonna, and the district's team, we have a very narrow timeframe to work with and we're anticipating being ready to lay pipe in around October to November of this year. So a lot of work to get done. And that work is outlined in the scope of work that is attached to the board memo attachment one. And there are 14 tasks associated with the scope of work and Garni and KJ, along with the district, we've looked at this scope of work, we've refined it, we've tried to make sure that the level of effort is adequate for each task. It's this phase one is what you're considering tonight and that gets us right up through about construction, start of construction, then what we'll do. So between now and then there's gonna be a lot of project management meetings. They're gonna review all the existing utility drawings from along that stretch. They're gonna conduct geotechnical boardings. They're also gonna be doing potholing throughout the alignment to verify existing utilities. They're gonna conduct hydraulic modeling and surge analysis that will feed into the treatment plant design work along that route. And I have some additional slides. They're gonna be providing cost estimates and giving the district an update as we go on the anticipated cost. They have some permits to obtain as well as the district has to obtain some permits. We're not gonna, we're gonna have public outreach and we're gonna have a website and a phone line in case people are asking questions. They have a way to contact the team. And then of course there's a 30% design, a 60% design leading up through a price that we'll be bringing back to the board. And then there's 100% design package that we also have in the scope of work. So this, what you're approving or considering tonight would get us through about January and then we looked at their proposal when we got it and we did an independent cost analysis and we believe that the level of effort is adequate and it'll get us through this phase. We do like to remind the board that this is a professional services contract and they will be billing at a time materials basis and we'll be looking at all the invoices and working with them to make sure that it is adequately billed. It is an open book accounting so they're gonna share with us and they are entitled to a markup that they've already listed and it's in the agreement and currently that's an 8% overhead and profit markup. And then come October, they're gonna present us with a guaranteed price that they will build the pipeline for and then we'll consider that and bring it to you as a board to approve if you wish and that will be a phase two amendment that will be processed separately. So that'll take a separate approval right now, you're just approving design work. And I should mention that they are gonna give us a price in 90 days after getting started. That's of course gonna be based on what they know now or after 90 days of look getting into it so they'll still need to refine the price and as design gets more refined the price will be more refined. I already talked about the guaranteed price coming in around 60% design and right now the schedule shows construction lasting from October of this year through November 2022. We did establish a milestone so that the first segment gets completed in July of 2022 to make sure that there's no delays in plant startup and then the remainder of the pipeline can follow and be finished substantially completed by October 31st, 2022. I mentioned the 4% overhead and 4% profit that is was listed in their proposal. And if at the time of the guaranteed maximum price the district decides to do a lump sum option which would be less of an open book process then they would give us a discount of 1% on that 8%. And that is something that we can of course discuss as that comes later in the process. Any questions on those slides or we can get through? We just have a few more slides and then we can answer any questions you may have. I think this is the last slide and then we can go to the motions. Just in kind of summary the efforts that Taj mentioned for phase one the cost is just over $5 million. It's $5,058,583 and that price was included in the district's approved 2019-2020 budget. As Taj mentioned we did do an independent cost analysis and also as you know the district was awarded the prop one groundwater grant implementation funds for $50 million. So that will help fund both the design as well as the construction of this conveyance infrastructure project. I just wanted to just point out that this whole progressive design build idea allows a lot of input along the way through the design so that we're happy with part of the process. With how it's looking and how it's coming along and we can have input so that we get the project we want. And I just wanted to, I think it's a good way to go. Yeah, if I may capitalize on that. It is kind of where things are going these days. Matter of fact, the city of Santa Cruz is trying to change its charter so it can do this kind of work also. I wanna quickly introduce the team if you wish to know the faces behind the names. From left to right in the back row we have Sean Summers. He's gonna be our project manager during phase two. Dennis Sanchez is with Kennedy Janks and he's gonna be leading the, with his team leading the design effort. Bill Williams is there. He's the man behind Garny in the Western region and we're fortunate to have him guide this project. He's got over 30 years of experience with this type of project. And Matt Roberts is also on the Garny team. He's been helping us get through phase one up to this point. And in the front is Ron Ablin. He's with Brown and Caldwell and he's been designated the project lead to get us through phase one and maybe even through phase two as needed. So strong team. I think we're ready to succeed and get started. If you guys have any questions, we're able to answer them. Any questions? Bill, it's a big ticket item. Very big ticket item. So the independent cost analysis. You tell me more about that. I can. That was performed by Brown and Caldwell, independent of Kennedy Jenks, independent of Garny and a gentleman by the name of Scott Higbee is based out of Colorado. And he took the task, the scope of work, which is attachment one, and he went through it a lot task by task and basically did it as if Brown and Caldwell was gonna be performing that work. And some tasks were a little higher, some tasks were a little lower, but at the bottom line, we came up with a very comparable price between the two design efforts. And that makes us feel confident that it's a fair effort. There's, it comes down to well over 10,000 hours worth of work. And so it's not just one or two people working on this between now and October. Over 100 sheets on the design. They're cataloging over 600 potholes. And it is a extensive effort in order to have a smooth phase two and not have as many surprises. We're trying to do our homework up front so that we're not on the street longer than we need to. We know what we're gonna get into before we get into it. There will be, of course, underground surprises, but at least for the ones that we know about, we're gonna have a plan before we get there. That led to my question, because yeah, that's a lot of trenching and undergrounding on roads on a lot of major highways through sand crews, traffic areas. Are you gonna focus on the first half, like the wastewater treatment plant to shanticleer as a primary build focus? That's what their schedule shows, and that's the right approach considering the milestone completion date of July 1st, 2022. We don't want that to be holding up startup. There's certain segments in the coastal zone that we'll have to wait until we get the coastal permit, but the majority of that can be done coordinating with the county and the city. And once that's finished, then they can move forward with the purified pipeline, but that is the critical path item for them. I know this is a level of detail that hasn't been decided yet, but I just want to encourage phasing of different segments when it's built to have minimal impact to schools, traffic, et cetera. It's not, there's gonna be an impact, but I think we would do well to minimize that impact. And also outreach to give people plenty of heads up on where their areas is going to be impacted. Yeah, there's a robust outreach program surrounding this, and they've had experience with this down to the houses, neighborhoods sort of thing. Yeah, and they're prepared to do night work. We know there's some areas that we'll be doing night work at. And some areas we'll be possibly looking at trenchless technologies if it gets too complicated to 41st Avenue, we may just go trenchless if we have to. In fact, I noticed that traffic is part of the design process that we're talking about here. It's not just gonna happen later, it's gonna be laid out before they even start, so that's good to see. Yeah, and public works departments in all jurisdictions, we're gonna work closely with them and have encroachment permits and they're gonna be monitoring the construction as it goes and give us feedback if they need anything changed. Yeah, I wouldn't want to minimize this effort. This is a major effort, but this is what water districts and wastewater treatment plant districts do, as part of their services that they provide, they get this done for us and the community and this is, it was a massive kind of effort that got piping throughout the county to provide water to all of us, so it's something that, you know, our own district has some knowledge in this too and they are actively participating in. I had one question, it's kind of extensive, but let me get into it, background for it. The two wettest months of the year here are January and February. And in fact, in January, because of the rains we had in January and December, we were two inches ahead of normal by then. And so far in February, we have had zero rain and the prediction is that the rest of the month we will have zero rain. So February looks like it's gonna be completely dry, which is quite extraordinary. You know, again, you can't say something like that without saying the word climate change. So given that, you know, that's kind of scary to think that things are happening like that. So we today are almost five inches below normal now. And if this continues as the predictions have for the, till the end of the month, that'll put us seven inches below normal. And there's no sign that necessarily when we get into March, it's suddenly gonna start raining again. So, you know, we could even go even further down below. So it gives me thinking about, you know, we've built, we've figured out a project that we can build and then room for expansion. So we could add to more murmur grains and so forth. And I'm wondering about, we have three injection well sites and I'm wondering if we shouldn't be thinking about to possibly maybe be able to expand that perhaps to add a fourth injection site. And it turns out we're gonna be doing another line down Soquel Drive. So the thinking is, wouldn't it be nice when we're putting that new water pipe in there to put another pipe in there, pipe, you know, close it off at both ends but that would then allow us to go down Soquel Drive if we need to and put another injection well along that way. So if we're doing all the work, that would be a nice thing to do now rather than do it later. And so that's my question is, should we be thinking about something like that? Maybe we could learn more about where you're thinking of stubbing out, you're thinking for future. I'm not sure where on Soquel Drive you're anticipating. Well, I don't know. But certainly somewhere further to the east. I mean, our three wells are kind of located fairly close together in the center of our district. And we're hoping that the city put stuff further to the west of our three wells. And so the natural place to think about putting another injection well would be further to the east of our three. So it'd be somewhere down Soquel Drive. Okay. So let me make a suggestion so we can get a better idea. Let's make an appointment. Okay. Can you come in and meet with staff? Sure. That would be awesome. Do that. So it wouldn't have to be complete but I mean to go ahead and put in a pipe along some extent there while we're putting in the Soquel Drive replacement. Were you talking about the cast iron main replacement? Yes. So we're supposed to start that sometime this year maybe. And certain setbacks that we have to meet. Of course. So that would be a separate trench. All right. Yeah. Okay. But still let's range through MRME. We can sit down at least further understand it just to make sure we're not. There's no guarantee we would need that but if we turned out we did need that having done some of that work already could save us a lot. Yeah. That was my question. And of course during that discussion there'll be discussion of whether and the environmental impact report is required. Yes, it would. It would be. Okay. Any other questions? Public comment time. Thank you. We have two minutes. Thank you very much. My name is Becky Steinbrunner. I am the pro-perlitigant for public benefit in this illegal action. And gentlemen I want to let you know that this is not a popular project within the public at all. And so you have to prepare yourself for a lot of resistance and it will come. I would like to follow up with what Chairman Daniel said about the possibility of other expanded injection well sites and remind the board of the Haley-Uldrich hydrology report that Cabrio College had done independently that called your current placement of the three injection wells very curious because it really doesn't fit with what the stated goals are. They're not even in the areas where there has been a problem with seawater intrusion. I also want to point out that this is five point, nearly five point one million dollars. Your rate pairs have already been burdened with an 18% rate increase. And by the time the five years is up that your RAF TELUS consultant has outlined, their rates will go up another 27%. This does not fit your project goal of having affordable water at all. Many people are struggling now and you've heard from them. And you're only raising their rates more. I wanna point out that there has been no discussion of energy incremental uses in this project. There will be inline pipes in all of the conveyance project areas that were not considered thoroughly in the EIR. I also want to point out that there is very little discussion in this contract regarding environmental mitigations. There was no consultation with Department of Fish and Wildlife or the Coastal Commission. Time's up. Can I have one more? No. Direct President Daniels, may I make a couple comments? Sure, please do. So regarding, I think it's best to get the correct information out. Regarding the placement of the wells, they are in the optimal place where seawater intrusion has been shown to occur in the aquifers right along the coast. The geophysical survey done by the Sky Tim people from Denmark and then confirmed by Stanford University shows those wells are kinda in the bullseye area where exactly where we wanna pull them, put them. Not only that, by putting them there, it allows it to prevent seawater intrusion but also pump those wells a little bit more and pump the other wells along the coast creating if you will an iron curtain against seawater intrusion or at least a much better barrier than what we have now. So the placement is actually awesome. As far as affordability, as we have posted on our website and we've shown several times, this is the most affordable project that can get the job done. In fact, the economic study done by the Dr. Haddad and a PhD student at UCSC showed that it's about a one billion dollar positive impact to the community and for every dollar invested in the project, you get nine dollars back. So it's the least expensive and the only one that can get it done and has a positive. As far as energy goes, I'd just like to say that I think this is beautiful in the sense that most of the energy or a large portion of the energy is already spent taking wastewater and treating it to secondary levels and sending it out to the ocean. So we each pay about $800 a year, roughly equivalent to many people's water bills just to have our sewage treated and then to a level that's acceptable. So that level of energy is already embedded. We're just gonna take that and capitalize it and then purify it. So I think that's a real positive. And then on top of that, all the energy used for the project will be green energy. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I also just wanted to mention that the whole Mid County area based on multiple scientific investigations and say that this, to protect the water for the entire basin, this is a necessary project. So. In fact, if it wasn't for this project, we'd be in violation of the State's Sustainable Groundwater Act. Right. So I would like to make both of these motions. Okay. I'll second. Roll call, please. Director LeHue. Yes. Vice President Lather. Yes. Oh, yes. Director Jaffe. A lot of money, but I think we need to do it. Yes. Director Christensen. I appreciate all the work that went into it. I vote yes. And President Danders. It's needed. Yes. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Folks, we're gonna do all this good work for us. We appreciate that. Yes, thank you. We're counting on you. So we now move to item 7.5, Approved District Staffing Every Organization. Good evening, Board. I'm over here this time. Oh, hi, Tracy. We're presenting to you a proposal to, again, redo some restructuring of our organization. It's something that we are constantly looking at and making sure that we have systems in place and staffing in place that really give us efficiency in efforts. And the proposal that we're presenting to you tonight kind of addresses a couple of items within the special projects and outreach, excuse me, a special project in communications department. So the first two items included in your memo, we took a look at the Public Outreach Coordinator classification and the Communications Program Specialist classification. And we're presenting some changes to each of those. Currently, the Public Outreach Coordinator doesn't coordinate staff. It coordinates an effort of outreach. And we really looked at maybe kind of creating a job family, as the HR term that we use, in order to really put directed efforts forward for our public outreach. We do a great job with public outreach, but structurally, we had two positions that were equal in terms of rate of pay and level of responsibility. Currently, we have a vacancy in our Communications Program Specialist classification. And so with that, we've taken some time in order to figure out what we wanna do with that. And we've really come to the conclusion that it makes a whole lot of sense organizationally to actually take that specialist position and create a lower level position so that we really do have a true job family within the outreach efforts. And so the proposal in that section of the memo is really to revise that communications Program Specialist position. Take it to a lower level. We use some internal comparability to determine that staffing. The coordinator position has implied coordination efforts of lower level staff. And so we included those in the job description for the coordinator. And again, looking at internal comparability, we do have some internal comps that align to what we're proposing to tonight. In addition, we're making a recommendation to make a change to the manager of special programs and communications salary pay grade in terms of, again, looking at the efforts that the district has been making in ramping up towards this building and construction of the Pure Water Soquel Project and the level of responsibility for this position. We've made a recognition that we might be in a position where we're not in compliance with our state equal pay laws. And so taking a look at those obligations as an employer and making equity between two classifications in our management level to meet the equal pay laws standard in the state of California is what we're proposing to have equity with our current engineering manager and the special projects manager. Any questions? Just to comment, I just on the last part of that, I really wanna thank our current special project manager and the level of effort and dedication and energy to be driving this huge project has already gotten us to where we are now. And so I'm just gonna go up front and say I think that's a great idea. Well deserved. I agree. Any two? So, any questions? I think a public comment. Very good question. Okay, public comment please. Seeing none, bring it back to the board. I'd like to make the motions to change the job duties for both the communication specialist and the manager's special projects and communications and also correspondingly change the salaries that are proposed. You can. I think you just did. Roll call please. Director LeHue. Yes. Vice President Lather. Yes. Director Jaffe. Yes. Director Christensen. Yes. And President Daniels. Yes, thank you. Okay, we're now gonna go into two closed sessions. Any public comment on those closed sessions? President Daniels, we still have a 4.1 that got moved down to the bottom. Oh, yes. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you. Josh. That's the problem with this new change, isn't it? 4.1, approval of minutes. So I only wanted to let everybody know that the Aqua JPA meets on Monday for two days before the conference begins, which is on a Wednesday. Right. This pattern is the same every year after year, twice a year. And it doesn't, the actual meeting's from 1.30 to 4. That's easy to have. It's an easy meeting to get to if it's in Monterey especially. And in fact, all the committees, certainly most of the committees, certainly the ones that we care about, groundwater, water management and water quality, all meet on Tuesday, and they're free. So you can go and join those discussions and see what you want to gather from it without having to pay for all the conference. Yeah, especially when it's in Monterey, that's the reason I want to bring it up today because it is in Monterey this year, so it's an easy way to catch some of those. Activities, right. Okay. Okay. So I'll move to approve. Okay. I'll second, but we should have a public comment. Yeah, public comment on this. See no one. Back to the board. So we have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Director Liu. Abstain, I was not here. Vice President Lather. Yes. Director Jaffe. Yes. Director Christensen. Yes. And President Daniels. Yes. So that passes and now, we can go to our closed sessions. Two closed sessions. Anyone wants to speak on this? Thank you. My name is Becky Steinbrunner. I'm the appellant in case H047733. That is the new case number that has been assigned to the appeal of the Pure Water SoCal project and against SoCal Creek Water District for the public benefit. I'm not the only one. And I want to make that very clear. I am not the only one. The Sixth District Court of Appeal last week formally accepted the transfer of the case, the appeal that was first lodged with the Santa Cruz Superior Court of Public Division and was later reclassified and sent to the Court of Appeal in San Jose for consideration and they did accept that. So that will be moving forward. Your counsel in Riverside did ask for calendar preference and that was also granted. I do have to let you know that I may be facing some surgery and so that I may need to ask for an extension of time. But I mostly want to speak a little bit to the issues at hand. I am appealing it because I was barred by Judge Schmall from being able to pursue a leave to amend my complaint to correct things and add information. And because of that denial, I was not allowed to argue things such as growth inducing. The Ambeg and Santa Cruz County Housing Element both state that the limiting growth factor in this county has been infrastructure, notably water. And also the discussion of energy was not allowed. There are many other issues and Twin Lakes Injection Well will be directly upstream from your own production well and small private water companies. Thank you. Mr. Haddad's cost benefit. Well, talking about falls, the person we're just, we're hurrying from did amend her thing. She was allowed one amendment. She was not allowed a second amendment. And so that is the case. All right, so we move to a closed session now. Thank you.