 So we will convene the meeting and have roll call. Director Smallman. Here. Director Pulse. Here. Director Swan. Here. President Henry. Here. Okay. Are there any additions or deletions to the agenda? The staff doesn't know. Okay. So oral communications. You may have five minutes to talk about things pertaining to our area or jurisdiction that's not on the agenda. Chris. Chris put her hand up first. Ladies first. Okay, Rick. I'll let you talk. Thank you. Good evening. I recently received a notification from the county of Santa Cruz of a meeting of the integrated pest management group. On its April 30th agenda is an item for applying for an exemption to use glyphosate on the Felton library site. This exemption should be denied. The water department should do all it can to stop this use. The water department granted the Felton library an easement from its curvy property about two years ago. Our district has banned the use of glyphosate on district properties. Thank you. The water district should have some legal authority to prevent the county and library from using a banned pesticide on property we now allow them to use. If you had a neighbor that you gave the use of some land and they went ahead and used a known probable human carcinogen on that property, you probably wouldn't consider them a good neighbor. I like libraries and I like good neighbors. They should stop trying to get an exemption to use glyphosate or any other poisons at the Felton library. This is not on a roadside or a remote watershed. This is in downtown Felton, a nature discovery park next to Bull Creek where the library is inviting children to come and explore. It boggles the mind that anyone would want to clean up an area for a nature educational park by putting poisonous poisons on that same area. This is not the right message for our community. Thank you. Thank you. Chris, did you want to say something? I didn't. Thank you. He took all your words. I support what he said. Okay. Anybody else? Yes, sir. You. You? Yeah. I'm a really terrible public speaker. So I took the time to write everything down and clocked it two minutes and 45 seconds thinking it would be through. So excuse me for reading while I talk. As a parent and an environmentalist, I'm pro-education. But education, even of the environment and of our watershed calls clearly under the purview of schools or could be done by community groups such as the Valley Women's Club. If the Valley Women's Club apparently is so concerned about education, why don't they spend a bit of the millions they get for free from taxpayers on this? The fact is ratepayers should only be billed for costs related to providing them water. That's easy to understand. I applaud the directors for standing strong for ratepayers' rights to keep costs down. And I mean that. I think a lot of people will appreciate that. Everybody will. And that brings me to Director Margaret Bruce, whom I watched, I gassed at a time of debt and crisis district give away over 14,000 of ratepayers' dollars to her old friends at Ecology Action for simply a one-day seminar on how to save water. Those 14,000 bucks could have went to more low-flow toilets for hundreds of ratepayers instead with very measurable effect. But this so-called educational seminar for $14,000 gifted to Ecology Action had no real measurable effect, and only a few folks attended. I asked the board to not repeat Margaret Bruce's freebie giveaways of the past. You are a water district, not a school district, and not a bank. That's obvious. Some people want you to do the work of the school district. Has anyone noticed the weather seemed a bit queer today? Does that mean, saying that mean I'm homophobic? Absolutely not. Just look in Webster's Dictionary, which I've brought. The word queer means unusual, questionable, or suspicious as its primary definition. Another fact is the word gay in Webster's Dictionary means, as its primary definition, keenly alive or exuberant. So, from the facts of what happened regarding Director Smallman, it's clear that he was prodded by someone saying something intentionally provocative in its stupidity and illegality. Some rude guy claiming he had a whole bunch of toxic glyphosate to sell. I'd say calling that provocatory a jerk would have been a more accurate reply from Mr. Smallman. I immediately set, immediately after that, a set of sore losers jumped on their bandwagon together so artificially offended by one mildly slang word which many kids use at school these days. Then they attacked the very director who has been the longest supporter of cutting waste and improving this district. It is clear to many that these nitpickers are just looking for any slight imperfection to attempt striking at the integrity of this board's commitment to represent the ratepayers. In the words of a famous wise man with the initials JC, let him who is without sin cast a first stone. So who here has never used a slang word in their life and who here has never regretted using the wrong word in their life? I don't think anybody has. So really, these are people throwing stones that shouldn't be throwing stones. Mr. Smallman was such a small thing. Mr. Smallman and these directors are doing their best at correcting previous waste and on improving our district for the ratepayers. The results are showing this, and this is what's important. I suggest the critics of one mild slang word which was sincerely apologized for a few times already, stop being sore losers, and start being helpful instead of deliberately destructive. Directors, please don't be distracted and keep up the great work. Thanks. Anybody else? So I won't be even quite as long as Nick was. Good evening. I have been told that Chair Henry submitted a complaint to the employer of a member of the public because of this person's communications with others during the period of time in which Director Smallman was facing criticism regarding his recent speech that resulted in censure. My understanding is that Chair Henry accused this member of the public of being divisive and disrespectful and suggested that they need a training. Although I'm not in possession of a copy of that communication, I feel it is unlikely that I can obtain one, I believe that my understanding is accurate. And Chair Henry, if I'm inaccurate in any way, please correct me, correct my understanding when I'm done speaking. I bring this up because I do not know if the other directors, staff, or the general public know about this, but I feel they should. If I were in the shoes of this person, I would believe this complaint and be intended to be punitive. I'd also see it as a warning to curb my future participation in the public process that my opinion might be at odds with that of the current board president. No member of the public should have to even consider that their participation in public discourse could result in a possible threat to their livelihood by the complaint being submitted to their employer. I hope the board will choose a time to have a public's discussion of this matter and implement appropriate measures so it is not repeated. Anyone? I'll ask a clarifying question on that. Okay. I understood. Were you saying that that complaint was lodged against the employee of the district or just a member of the public? That it was against their employer? If the complaint was against that employee, the complaint was submitted to their employer. Okay, gotcha. Thank you. Anybody else? Yeah. Hi, Mark. My feeling is I think we talked about this in our old meeting down in Felton. Probably should have a workshop on appropriate communication styles. And I gave you a reference to a consultant to do that. We have the information. I think that should be sufficient. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Okay. Yeah. Hi, my name is Peter Lange. I live in Boulder Creek. I was on the board in 1994-96 and I have followed what's going on and this is my first opportunity to congratulate the new board members. It was a hard fought. It wasn't fair, but you won anyway. And I'd like to say thank you for serving. It's a big commitment, takes a lot of time and it really interferes with your personal life. I hope everyone in the audience realizes you all have a good heart and you're all trying to do something for the community and you should be treated with respect and dignity, so thank you very much. Anyone else? Yeah. Just real quick. The chair doesn't mind one of the public comments in regard to the use of the district property in Felton. I did make some contact today with the county and is looking into that whole situation. I'll bring something back to the full board at the next meeting report. It's my understanding that the Glycephate has already been used on the property but I'm not sure if it's been a district property or not. But I will bring a report back to the board. Thank you. Excuse me, do we know when it was used? I didn't have any information. It was, he thought it was already used in the DAB method and this was just a report on what was down. But it's through the county the library has several different county agencies working and so I'm trying to narrow it down to make sure it gets proper information. It's not even sure if it was used on district property or not but it'll probably go also to the environmental committee going back to the full board. But isn't that library safe? Just to get why? I do believe they're removing vegetation as part of the property project quite a note to the fact. I don't know about Frenchburg but I don't really have all the particulars except this one with the board know that we're looking into it and we will bring something back. Great, thanks. Anyone else? I do have a comment but you're going to be addressing the letters and I'll have a little bit of time regarding do you mean the board, the resignation? Right. So I think my comments were true. Or the letter to the to the paper and the whole issue? E? Okay. Okay. Yeah, alright. Okay. There's no other comments. Let's go on to unfinished business USDA loan. Okay. So for those of you who don't know me, my name is Thirsten Flombe. I am an engineer with Liar Systems Consulting and we have been helping the district with the USDA loan application process. So today I am here just to give an update on the current status of the loan, where we're at, next steps to schedule and answer any questions that you may have on the wrap of it now. So in this presentation I'd like to go over on the background of how we've gotten to where we have been. We've gotten to a few of these that have been various questions so I wanted to make sure that I had budget numbers for you, current status, schedule, all of these have been asked for in prior meetings. So right now today we're going to go over budget, budget, next steps, and last to schedule for completion. So this process started back in August of 2017 and at that time WSE was asked to look into different loan options for the district. And the district was trying to figure out the best way to pay for some projects. There was a large DIP of this and so we were tasked with an on-call as needed contract to take a look and we evaluated SRF loans, we reviewed whether smaller agency loans and came to the determination that the best thing for the district was actually to pursue a USDA loan. So the next steps then were we actually met with USDA to determine eligibility and the district met the requirements not for grants but for loans. So we re-evaluated that along with other types of programs still it was determined to be the best path forward. At the time then we took it to the board and they approved pursuing an application process in November of 2017. At that time, as was presented then staff chose projects that were highly rated on the CIP list for a total construction process of $5 million. It is important to note that it was $5 million on the CIP list for those cost estimates that were on the CIP. They were previously done so they were a few years old at that point. So, at that point excuse me, so at that point we started off with a package with USDA started the loan application and the preliminary engineering report which for those of you who are here at that meeting is the big report that outlines the whole process does alternative analysis cost estimates how you're basically going to complete the entire loan package and we chose multiple projects for this. Well, in that year USDA had a surplus of money and was expediting loan application process projects and so there ended up being a very expedited environmental compliance deadline because in order to complete your loan application process national environmental regulations had to be done so NEPA had to be complete. You could finish SQL later but you had to finish NEPA and so that revised our project list so we had to choose different projects that were not as environmentally complex in order to be able to meet those regulatory requirements. So along with staff we looked at projects and we came up with still high prioritized projects that were in the same ballpark of five million we revised all the construction costs into current costs because the construction environment has changed dramatically since those original costs were done and our new construction costs we chose projects that totaled 5.5 million and that number is important because later I want to go over the loan costs and how we're at the number we're at now so remember construction costs was originally 5.5 million so last year we were really rushing to try to get this done by the end of September and due to last minute fish and wildlife requirements we were going back and forth and back and forth we missed that deadline. Not a huge deal because they were on a rolling acceptance so we just kept going well because we were wrapping up our environmental it got submitted and we went back and forth with the USDA and we did our revisions and everything they asked for and finally it was actually accepted on December 21st now that day is very important because it was the day that the federal government shut down and so USDA rushed it through that morning and it was a very okay here you go here's your letter of conditions and here we go we just didn't hear back because the USDA shut down and so we knew that we were accepted because the formal acceptance was this issuance of the letter of conditions however I didn't have an email that said yes we have everything in line so I think that it has come back to the board to say yes we had the loan which is true but we didn't have that formal piece of writing that I wanted to come and say yes everything is locked in I can tell you the 100% certainty that everything is as it says and today I can absolutely say that and it is valid as of December 21st so you have a e-mail now? Yes and I kind of film conversations what's the date on the e-mail? it wasn't until they reopened back up to go back and find it but whenever they opened back up I had a call in that day to make sure that we were everything was good and it was which budget year is this going to? so this will still be in this budget this year so we were trying to jam it in by the end of the federal year that was the end of the federal year so we didn't get that much so we jammed everything in we changed our projects to get it in so we're in the next year's budget yes however it would have been prolonged had we kept those original and some of the environmental was very complex and the percentage oh yes so that's the important thing the 4% was locked in at 40 years had it waited until January it would have gone up or it could have gone down the interest rates are still so the information we have from us days it's not calculated the same way that we think interest rates are so as it breaks this quarter it has increased so right now that rate is locked in and the good news is there are no pre-payment penalties so if the district decides to make the decision to pay this loan off early there's no penalty for that and at this point all environmental has been completed so both NEPA and SUICA would have been done before construction but all the environmental is now done so next I wanted to go over the project budget so that everybody understands where the dollars are actually going so the construction cost again is approximately 5.5 million these are the project costs these are dictated by USDA these are not numbers they basically have a chart that says okay you have to have this percentage for all these different portions the reality is is that lands and right away most of these are already in public right of way there may be some cost savings here or some money that won't actually be spent they have 80,000 legal fees that may not be reached so some of this is the whole thing is dictated on what percentage that USDA says that these percentages have to go into this number including all the engineering fees yes so the total that USDA based on our construction cost the total that USDA approves you for is 8.8 million you do not have to borrow 8.8 million if your numbers come in lower you can just borrow whatever you like so the next steps that we are at is right now we are completing the engineering agreement between USDA and the district and they have specific formats on big documents and contracts with engineering firms and so we have to make sure that everything meets their formatting so we are in the process of working with USDA on that they also have to approve all of your designs and all of your contracts and so a lot of that is just formatting they want to see specific things they want to make sure that things are done efficiently and that we actually are doing what we said we would do in the application package so that's all it's very smooth going forward are there requirements for engineering from the USDA consistent with what we would normally do as a district are they more dramatically more I would say no they use a very common form of big documents which is they're the two most common used ones and so they want it a specific way and then they've got specific language that they would strike out and work with this they also require it by American clause so American steel American products and they've got very specific language that has to go into the big documents but it's the case you insert it in is there anything about e-verify or anything like that I don't know that one on the top of my head can I get that information for you so it is and there are monitoring requirements during construction to make sure that you are actually meeting those requirements most of them are things that the district does like prevailing wage things like that so you just actually have to check and verify the monitoring but that would be the same as any grant or loan program that's not different just for us so we have to meet all their requirements and last we are required within the terms of the loan to meet a five-year construction schedule all the products need to be done in five years and although we have multiple projects in this loan package all the projects have to be completed before the district gets reimbursed so that is important because I want to go to the next slide here is the schedule that district staff and I have worked on and as you'll notice it's not five years and there is a reason for that which I'd like to outline so the way that we so I've looked at this and I said okay we have five years starting in December that we have to get this done but there are some following factors here and with recent experience we've had a little bit of trouble getting competitive and multiple bids on projects we've had a little bit of trouble getting a lot of firms proposing on RFPs and so I was thinking you know if we can make these into larger packages that are biddable and so for instance a mile of pipe is a good it's achievable by contracting for a contractor you get the dollar signs up a little bit you'll get more bids and more competitive bids so by combining some of these packages it's really important and you'll get a better product but also there's potential to save money there as well the other thing that goes along with this is that every time you put on an RFP every time you go through a bid process it's staff time it's money it costs the district money to go through these processes having one pre-con meeting versus four pre-con meetings or five pre-con meetings will definitely save time and money and you'll get some efficiency there so we can put this out so swim take has already been designed there are some changes that need to be done to the design because it was done prior to the district pursuing a USDA contract so there's some formatting and some minor changes that need to be done to the design they should be somewhat minimal and the consultant that originally designed the tank should be the one to make those changes because he has to sign and stamp them and then it will go back out to bid so that will have to be done in the format of the USDA projects so we can get that done relatively soon that project should be completed in summer of 2020 next we put together the one pipeline that is about a mile long into one package and it is a larger diameter pipeline and goes through multiple places so it is more expensive than the other one and there's good reason for that but if we can do that as one project it's a good size project and then last if we go and combine all the other four pipelines it equals out to approximately a mile of pipe and we'll get better prices on that in no way does this say that you can't use the same design firm or the same contractor it just means that if we stick to this schedule we'll be done in approximately three years and after talking with finance it seems like there's potential to save some money on the interim interest that the district would be borrowing if we can complete this sooner because then we can apply for funds to be reimbursed by USDA sooner so all in all with this schedule staff has been really supportive and really helpful and I went through multiple iterations of how do we mix and match to try to get the most efficient and cost conservative projects out there this is the schedule that makes the most sense to us so if we can stick to this we'll hit it in three years however all the projects have to be done by December of 2023 in order to reimbursed by USDA Is it possible to do two and three concurrently? Yeah, the short answer is yes as long as you have enough staff to support those projects all at the same time so for instance if you as long as you have internally enough support Absolutely That's going to push us because in two there's a considerable amount of interface with existing district customers and so forth and that's what usually district staff handles when we start working with our customers we don't like consultants and contractors we like to face the district out there so contract two is definitely going to have a lot of interface How many hookups on it? What are going to be changed? There's probably a good 50 and on the other That's hard to say without I hate to you members without they all have hookups but the line zone is going to be more difficult could also have existing distribution laterals and so forth Right It's more of a distribution system where the other ones don't have quite as much Let's say it can't be done but you're starting to really stretch out but there's still fixing ways to operate the distribution system Some of what we can handle but not too much of one kind especially with all the other projects These are not the only projects going on The Long Pico projects and other different projects that we're interfacing with The shorter the time period the less we have to pay an interest on the bridge line Yeah that was what I was trying to aim to do in this and this Stephanie felt because you are actually borrowing money from the interim but she doesn't think that you need to borrow all of it as an interim so it actually will take some cash flow from the district just to move forward so I wanted to make sure that this was reasonable from a financial standpoint for the district and she felt that this was doable So that is the last slide I have This is an informational item only so there's no recommended action but I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have So these These three projects No problem These three projects comprised of USA These are all separate loans Are they all the USA for one, two, three? All one loan package of pipeline and construction of the tank so pipelines have not been designed they need to be designed and constructed Swim tank 1.8 million Wine is approximately 2.7 Swim tank I remember we approved a contract for the foundation for the swim tank We haven't done anything on the swim tank we did it How many gallons is this one tank? The new tank will be roughly 65,000 gallons 65,000 dollars for 1.8 million dollars That one point that includes all your costs that includes everything million dollars That includes all of your expenses So we are not the design consultant Thomas Okay but it includes the design consultants WSE The design was already done 1.8 million, 2.7 million and one is construction cost Okay and then we are going to do the line zone pipe for 2.7 million dollars 1 mile pipe What size pipe is that? So it's big We are guessing at 12 inches to be confirmed during design California Drive Sequoia Avenue Hillside pipe 1 million 1 mile pipe total So those have not been designed yet so it will be confirmed during design but are expected to be approximately 6 or 8 inches So that 1 million does that include construction costs? That's only construction costs You have to have those numbers up that comes to the construction cost Okay so all these 1, 2, 3 is the USDA AOL major working on There are 6 projects in that Okay We have made it through So at this point WSE is helping to program the NIH but that is our minimal right now And this is from 2019 to the end 2021, September of 2021 It does actually end for that blindness And this is all the stuff that you are working on This is my recommendation on a design and construction schedule for the district and it is in conjunction with SAF I am helping to move this forward and make sure that this is a successful program for the district But WSE does not have design contracts for this We have a program management some budget left over in scope for program management But you will go out with our piece for design and many bids for contractors This is separate You're going to say something I thought you were going to say something You don't have anything to say? No, it was just a presentation Her firm did the application on the USDA Right, I know that Part of it is coming to the end and she is giving you an update How much money have we spent so far on the USDA portion? On getting the application? Your activities on the USDA portion was the total amount we spent The original contracts were $270 but some of that is environmental Including environmental I'm going to ballpark this I would have to check actual numbers for you If I remember correctly from invoicing, I think we've spent $210 We came in significantly under budget on the original application process The reason for that was because we expected a lot of back and forth with the USDA which we did end up with more but we didn't make that from the deadline So through December we came in significantly under budget so we made agreement with the district to program manage with what was left of the budget to get you guys to the point where you're ready to go out for the rest of these things for additional services to the district So what will that wind up being Oh, I think the total contract was $270 Including, and that also includes the environmental sub-consult that includes all of it Any questions from the public out there? Ed? How much under budget was for the USDA? I figure about $90,000 And you want $90,000 more now? Or did you use that $90,000 for something else? No, there's still budget left in the contract We did a change where to use a portion of that to facilitate moving this forward, for example coming up with it to program manage So you came out of $270,000, you came out $90,000 lower and then you used that to do this up here? There's still money left in the budget That's $90,000 Just a second, I'm sorry Who's talking about this? I'm getting two words Two people talking So I'm concerned is So you still have to make a contract or an RFP for the engineering services WSC is not going to do that You don't have this $1.5 million for engineering services Use your estimate here You've already done some of that work The preliminary engineering report is already part of that cost Yes So part of that cost How much is that? The total Well the preliminary engineering report It was part of the larger scope So it was part of that $270,000 This number though is just dictated by USDA It's a lot of cost estimate from WSC to say how much engineering fees actually come to So that's just a percentage dictated by USDA That $1.5 million is a number dictated by USDA Alright So WSC has two different contracts I understand that once for the USDA loan and rights for on-call engineering services If I remember correctly the first $60,000 that we entered into was for getting loans for Longpico and for the district They said they couldn't do that You couldn't get the loans because Longpico was an assessment district and you couldn't put an assessment district in the loan package WSC I'm not sure about that Well I have a recording and I totally agree I'm just not sure about it That was before my time So that original contract did include a portion of that original contract was for researching loans a portion of that went to other on-call projects and the way the scope is... The contract here that we entered into for the $60,000 it doesn't say anything about doing anything on loans at all But you did... I was here when you gave a presentation on the work you've done for the loans and then you said you couldn't get the loans because of complications because one was an assessment and you couldn't mix the assessment with a non-assessment loan You were doing two loans One for Longpico which was an assessment district and one for San Lorenzo Valley I personally did not look into a loan for Longpico Well then someone I think it was the previous manager I think someone lied to us I think we had the research I think we had to chalk it up to the mists of time at this point Our scope was to look for the loan for the district as a whole whether that included Longpico or not was not part of my... So how much is left for the $270,000 that's not spent I I have to go look at my invoices so I will I can get you a serious number but I want to say it's approximately conservatively $50,000, probably $60,000 And what's it going to be used for? That is to help to program manage so to assist the district in hiring design firms to facilitate making sure that monitoring happens to coordinate with USDA There's still a lot of meetings with our nation that has to go on with USDA So this is a process that is going to last the next if we can stick to the other schedule three years And what happens when you run out of that money? Then the district either decides to give us a contract amendment or they decide we can handle it from here They could hire another engineer an engineering firm They could hire another engineering firm Would that be advisable in your estimate? I don't get to have I think we're going to have As we move into the specifications that we will put out on RFB we've got to get to that point So we need to I just have a question about the payment I'm confused about it The district doesn't get refunded until the construction is done The district has to pay up front without loan money So that's actually a great question So the district is going to actually take out an interim loan So right now it's called a bridge loan and so it's backed by USDA but not provided by USDA so they'll have to go out for private funding for an interim amount of time and the expectation that the interest rate will be higher than 4% currently So it's in the district's best interest to get through that interim and pay the interim loan back as quickly as possible and borrow the money from USDA to lower interest rate However the district also has determined that they don't think they need to borrow the entire 8.8 million that some of it can be front loaded with cash reserves and then reimbursed for what the district has and I would defer to district finance to actually give the details on that portion And I know she's looking at different options to finance that But if you just have your first project that you have to pay in April or May then you only have to borrow that much money You don't have to borrow the full amount, right? It's all projects So but you just borrow a smaller amount and then you have to borrow a larger amount Without understanding exactly how the bridge loan terms are I can't speak to that I think she withdraws off of the bridge loan but I don't want to speak to her I'm pretty sure she can It'll be back Yeah, thank you for your presentation by the way Regarding the engineering fees of $1,056,000 we have this was dictated as you say by USDA The engineering fees you have a preliminary engineering report What percentage of that $1,056,000 and also I think you got a percentage I don't, I have to go I can get you that information That would be very valuable We'd like to correlate that with what has been spent on what percentage of this budget This increment We can get that information to you I also would caveat that though that this is just a straight percentage that USDA says we're reserving this and we're going to say that we're approving you for this loan amount it doesn't mean that you actually are going to spend those or that your contracts are going to come anywhere near to what they say So I really am hesitant to say this is your estimated engineering cost because I personally don't think it's going to be exactly this I understand but this is kind of off the back you know I'll do the back end here I'm trying to get a feel for the ratios that you have in the budget here when you say the environmental report is already completed so that's done right but we need to know what it actually caused and also the design has not been done yet or at least two of those contracts for the pipelines it's not been done Also construction administration we need a percentage for that and residential project representation these all need to kind of be detailed out a little bit even if they're guesstimations One other thing, you have a a contingency of $828,000 is that for cost overruns that are in anticipated so that's also a guesstimation at this point or based on the 10% of the total budget So you have $60,000 still in the kitty under your original $270,000 plus or minus $5,000 correct? Okay, so the interim loan the interim bridge loan is $516,000 estimated that's coming to you one, two, three, four the fourth one down $516,000 interim interest is that for the bridge or both the bridge and the FDA USDA loan? That's the bridge only Also, one other question during your prioritization of the five projects did you estimate this based on number of people served first, for example USDA contract number three affects 300 residents in my particular on-play whereas the swimming tank rather lion only affects 50 households, correct? So none of these that 300 customers? Well, hold on a second the projects were selected for a couple different criteria one is design the ease of design complicated ones were designed with sand hills and those type of things were taken off the list so none of these projects were picked on the age of the system the amount at least we have in the area the amount of people that will feed 100% of our customers pass through throughout the whole district as it moves to other treatment plants in conjunctive use and to move south and north so it's a very high priority project they were picked for multiple reasons and they're all high up on the priority list and they all have their reasons for replacement I see the sand hills and residential streets that you outlined in the contract number three that's correct but all the work is done in the pavement and so the environmental consultant looked at that and it didn't require the sand hills because it's done in the region I'm not referring to the environmental I'm talking about a number of cookups being served there's a significant amount of people being served in the sand hills by their owners of that pipeline so I'm just wondering the order was based on the criteria first the highest priority I'd like to have a re-enraging of what those priorities were you gave me a few of them and the heen road pipeline is to replace a piece of pipeline that is in the sand hills that's above ground that cannot be realistically repaired it's over the years it has to be buried and now because of the ground movement in that area it's above ground very fragile pipeline okay so why not just cap it off we need it we need to move water from one end it's still being used all these are still being used all these are a high priority for one reason or another can I ask that were you asking what the priority was for the projects that were chosen or was it taken by USDA based on environmental concerns I see I have a question when that 1,500,000 for engineering does USDA really know how much it costs to do anything in this area I'm going to try to answer your question USDA uses averages they do they do projects in multiple regions and so the percentage that they come up with are averages of multiple districts and multiple projects could be higher could be higher yeah it's probably not going to be lower all of the costs that are in here are planning level costs so for example when you get to design a lion's own pipeline the design engineer is going to come up with a better engineer's estimate because by then you're going to have the pipe diameter and material and alignment set and so you'll have much better these are planning level costs and this is what was required for USDA and we had to update them because the other ones were so outdated that it was a significant difference they were different enough that I was very uncomfortable submitting those numbers and so as part of the process but it's at planning level numbers and we did take into consideration our experience even recently in conversations with staff with what bits have been coming in like and I personally know how difficult it's been to get contractors up here so we took that into consideration that's what's fun about bundling projects it makes sense the smaller projects they're not getting better so everybody's trying unique I want you to get multiple betters are there substantial barriers to contractors starting businesses in California because you would think that with that much business around people would be flooding in from Oregon and Nevada there are multiple reasons why getting contractors is difficult everywhere in California I can just say from my company's experience all of our worst-same problems the fires made it worse because every contractor is crazy and the Santa Cruz Mountains have some of the roads are extremely difficult there are some significant unique barriers in this area that are overcomeable but it still makes it difficult and more costly to construct Virgil and you had your hand up Thank you This has been a very good you've prompted a very good discussion I thank everybody for their cooperation on your USDA estimates here how restrictive are those categories are there penalties if you go over in one and not in another so it's still slushy within 8.8 million dollars it's just that they're going to be criticizing or slapping their hand if you don't actually USDA is one of the best agencies to work with I've worked with them for multiple projects with multiple agencies they want things done their way which is their format but they are not going to unless we did something that was negligent then of course they would come after us they want to see things done in an efficient manner when we have the conversation to say we've bundled these packages I know because I've worked with this engineer before that's how he likes to see things done he likes to see contracts that are going to get good bids and they're going to get multiple bids we're going to get he'll be applauding the fact that if you guys prove that we can combine these packages that will win us points for a lack of a better word they also are luckily they understand that costs change and that all these costs are estimates these are guidelines and the final number even if it came extremely high as long as we had good reason for it you can have a conversation of can we borrow more our goal is not to borrow more but I think having some of these numbers is a benefit because that amount is already approved so there also is the option to take out additional USDA loans in the future if the district decides to pursue that thank you very much good answer okay I live up scenic way where the swim tanks are and I can tell you that many of my friends won't even drive up that road and it is so narrow and so steep as it goes up that it's a switchback road with sharp turns and doing this tank up there which I am all for however we need our road there especially when the land is not totally solid dry and on some of these places it's already sagging where you feel a little weird going down a one lane thing there's a little pullover spot way down there two people meet up it's an ego match sometimes and it's one of the worst roads in the valley according to a lot of people now what happens if those trucks go up there and mess up our road it's a county maintained road do you know how hard it is to get the county to go up there doesn't seem to be the county is afraid of going up there but the fact is is that the person who does the damage is the one that should be responsible right depending the tank is constructable the amount of concrete and equipment for that size tank it's concrete where the foundation is there's retaining walls but on a construction project for a water tank it's a really small project there will be heavy equipment there will be dump trucks there will be concrete trucks but it's not a huge amount I can't picture a decent size concrete truck going around sylvia way at the wide switch back there and then also that last one and also that last stretch between sylvia and woodland where the tanks are is just wide enough for one car only that's a pretty long stretch and that's why that price came in so high traffic control pilot car for some of that that's why that project came so high and you get contractors from out of the area they're even more afraid of those tight narrow roads and so the prices become more my question is who's responsible for damages that they cause but the county isn't really responsible for damages done by other people I disagree with that we're driving normal size with the weight load vehicles and those type of things that's the county's responsibility I think what you're saying is as long as all the equipment meets the standard for that road the county has declared for that road then it's the county's responsibility and if the county has been shall we say deferring maintenance on a road that has those standards for whatever reason and then something happens it's just a responsibility now they may differ if something happens if a culvert caves into a cement truck whether it's a culvert or a cement truck caves a culvert and I don't want to get on the subject for a long time but cement truck's responsibility for its insurance to cover any damages but I don't want to get much into it I understand I don't want to put on the question but I would like to know who in the county would be the contact person to find out what the standards are for you and they have standards for the back roads as far as we they should have standards alright thanks more than I do Tony thank you I just wanted to ask that the 5.5 to the construction budget now wasn't that planned way in the beginning when the project first started so when we first had this conversation with the district in conjunction with district staff the district said we want to look for about $5 million in grants, loans whatever we were eligible for so that was the number we started with so we picked projects from the original CIP with those older construction costs that hit $5 million when things changed we felt that we had already brought to the public and the board that we were aiming for $5 million so we tried to stick to that same number we ended up with fewer projects but my understanding is that these projects were all still very highly ranked and very important projects and then we had to pick the ones that we could actually get done the environmental done that wasn't going to drag out years to be able to meet the obligations I remember that and what dates did you decide on the ones that you now have the projects I would say it's a year ago last spring we figured out the final project list we went through a few iterations so there may have been a presentation that had different projects because those were the ones we were pursuing and then as we got further into environmental it was very obvious that and like LionPipe was a longer, bigger project and we cut a portion of it because we were like okay the environmental on this portion is too complex so let's just do this other portion we'll do the environmental complex as a separate project I know how everything is on skyrocketed so I wanted to make sure that they were updated thank you no problem okay so maybe we could move on here because we've spent quite a bit of time on this you feel like you've been on the graphic page? no I don't because I feel like you guys did questions in the past and I was grateful for the opportunity to come and I feel I hope that I met your expectations on the information you've asked for and now you've seen a clearer picture as to how we got to where we're at now so I achieved that and it was a success for me I think in future presentations as we might have some I think we're going to be more quantitatively focused perhaps and numbers are great in assessing this kind of thing I think that is a bit of a change and so just something to keep in mind for future presentations no problem alright so if Rick doesn't have anything more to say here then we'll move on do you have anything more you want to say on this subject? no I'll give you a chance so we'll move on thank you thank you we'll move on to new business wow it's the USC so Rick do you want to explain that to us? sure in June 2017 the board awarded a non-call as needed engineering contract the WSC engineering which was attached to your packet for not to exceed price of $60,000 the intent was to provide or emergency projects without initiating a request for proposal every time service items covered in the contract for two funding options for front-end documents for the past sample of about 5A portions of the Paris Creek Road pipeline storm damage highway 9 storm damage in Brookdale and they were used for an extension of staff engineering services in November 2017 the board awarded an amendment of $20,000 in order to continue the work as needed including finishing the design of the Paris Creek Road where it failed just outside of town the portion of the Ball Creek Fish Ladder debris removal project which was removing storm damage debris from the fish ladder and design coordination work with Caltrans and contractors for the highway 9 storm damage pipeline repair project and funding support a second amendment was issued in September 2018 for $50,000 in order to design Pico PRVs base standard drawings design trial farm service provide support for the land tank access road rehabilitation projects write a draft and support staff with the very Creek State wastewater treatment facility and also work with staff reviewing outside engineering design criteria for the Valley Gardens golf course possible Valley Gardens golf course service staff is requesting another $90,000 extension to the current on-call contract with WSC engineering for a total contract value of $220,000 to date this contract has been very effective in providing critical engineering services for emergency and high priority projects for the district additional engineering work remains as an on-call need of engineering services the work that remains not included could be standard drawings the revised RFP for land tank access road which is time sensitive right now and also to support the geotechnical investigation and the environmental permitting and design for this Long Pico access road the land access road provide planning specifications support the glenar bridge pipeline which is a pipeline that is located on the south bridge that is leaking just on the shore of the river out over the span that pipe is in a concrete chamber that needs to be replaced which will take engineering plan specifications to be submitted to the county and to the state of California because both Caltrans and the county is right away provide continual management of the state's wastewater treatment facility upgrade we have a meeting scheduled with the creek of states people to go over the RFP that has been put together by WSC for the perhaps enhanced modifications and we have other various projects also we do have our new engineering starting April 15 we are two months behind in the schedule of our new engineering our first engineer that we tried to hire he made it all the way up to the recruitment process all the way up to the selection process and he withdrawed his application so it put us a couple of months behind so we have been using WSC to support those buildings and we will have a transition period with a new engineer once he starts on April 15 to work on transferring some of these responsibilities over to our district engineer he just can't walk in cold and pick up these projects there's a lot to it I don't want to stop the process that we're in right now I want to continue we're making progress on a lot of our projects until the loss of this contract right now for engineering services on call as needed would be a shortfall for the district if we were to go out and put out an RFP and do bidding it'll take several months and we'll lose that time and we'll wind up with an engineering service that's just a basically a rate schedule because we don't have detailed projects and a schedule to get detailed cost so I'm asking the board to consider renewing the contract if the board feels comfortable would like to cut the contract back this is an estimation that Kirsten and I sat and put together I didn't want to go too low I didn't want to have to come back to the board again over and over so there's no one saying we're going to use this amount of money but I'd like to have it so we can move forward especially because we do have a new engineer coming on the transition and if we don't continue this contract I'll have to take up more of the slack and we just don't have the manpower and the staff to continue and we're already two months behind at least out at Bear Creek State with those people trying to get their RFP out and I want to continue moving with that I'll try to entertain any questions so I guess we're just real quick to summarize in 2017 the original contract was $20,000 in September 2018 we did a revision of $50,000 and now in April 2019 we're asking for a revision of $90,000 so the total that we would end up with would be total exposure would be about $220,000 which is about a 40% uplift in what we've already spent which is significant the original contract as I understand it was not bid because it was a small emergency we just need you guys to do something with my understanding and this goes back to prior management I get that so we're sort of dealing with some of the mists of time and legacy of the past as well but as the contract kept getting extended there was no RFP done at that time either all sort of very small incremental things that's correct I think it's important that we keep momentum going there's no question about that from my perspective speaking for myself I don't have any problem with saying this is the number that's needed to cover us during a transition period while you and the new engineering manager put together what that engineering services budget needs to be going forward because I'm sure that our engineer is not going to be able to do everything that's on the plate and so we're going to need to have a hybrid mix of employee time and consultant time but I don't have any feel for what that's going to be I can't tell you exactly what we're going to be able to accomplish until we sit down and roll our sleeves up and with Kirsten's participation and the director of operations participation and move ahead I mean this has been something in this district that's needed for a long time and we're very close to moving in that direction he'll be here we heard from him today he'll be here starting on the 15th it's like 10 days ago I've probably got more work for him that he can do in a year and not even got to the capital assignment plans and all the other fun stuff that we need to do so let me ask specifically WSC be doing anything on standard drawings for per 10 minutes I think I pronounced that right in this transfer that was an original that it's well needed we do need standard drawings but I can hold off on them right revised RFP for lion tank access road rehab project so we're going to talk about maybe hiring somebody for the geotech that's correct could they do the RFP I wouldn't recommend that they do the RFP I mean they're finishing up on their work though the original geotechs that did all the exploration right after they were the on-call so to speak emergency engineers responded they worked for the district for many years and we are real close with their final but when we went out to try to get an RFP there was just too many questions from contractors what are this and what that and we still have to get a scenario down exactly how we're going to make this repair and make a recommendation and Kirsten's work or WFC's work and that again on RFP was important we had several meetings with them and we need to continue with that that's someone representing the district and that's kind of a specialized field how much is that do we think that part of her contract how much is B right revised RFP for long I don't have it broken down that way that's hard to say too yeah without the revised geotech and a project we're not far enough along from the middle because we don't have that contract to continue with that work plans and specifications for Glen Arbor bridge piping all the background data to come up with a test we can do a test order once we have the data that's how you would pass on an RFP as well if you were doing a proposal but without having background data I can't cost it out I mean I'm very uncomfortable going to 220k without having gone through an RFP process at some point I understand the need for work and I don't want to lose any momentum but that's a huge uplift from where we are today well let me cut it in half and then if I were into a problem I'll bring back a more detailed to order or what a discussion I don't that's what would be one of my thoughts I would want the board to say we don't want to continue to fill out the RFP I would rather cut this back cut it in half than work within my budget and if I have issues we'll bring it back to the board by that time if I have issues I'll have the new engineer bring it back to you and I can sit here we could do that I don't think that would impact our workload so to speak at this point I'm sort of done with questions for now Bill? I think it's important to understand what we're talking about here and how this could be a very huge cost aiming measure for our transition of having our own in-house engineering department and construction crew here there's two reasons one the market for contractors we saw in the last bid on the PRB there was hundreds of thousands of dollars of high bids and we weren't having trouble getting bidders we don't have... it's design-filled we don't have to go through the bidding process you're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars here I estimate probably about a million dollars a year that we can save if we can establish that but we're just beginning to do that right now so I mean I'm not one to put a stopper on because we have this these projects right here I don't... because I understand I accept that fact that we haven't got this set up right now but I'm a hardliner we need to get going on this and I want to we need work and I want this new engineer or whatever to get in here and get working and we need work for him to do and I'm not going to accept the excuse that oh well we just don't have this set up right now and stuff like that and so this is real money here I mean this is the kind of value that I think that I bring to this board that we can really save some serious serious money here so you know I'm not going to... you're asking for another 90 grand here we're going to take... there's five million dollars worth of work of that I want this district to do and we'll do it for a lot cheaper and we're going to save end up saving the district a million dollars so I believe that we can do this I mean a lot of the water districts said do, do, do they kind of screw up because they don't have competitive work crews but now these days with the competitive markups we have a job in La Pico we're awarded a job for 498,000 the next bidder was 670,000 and the other one was like 800,000 and we sometimes we get jobs that we've only been and that's just a two week job that job can be done in two weeks so we're talking we're talking 100,000 dollars, 100,000 dollars we can end up saving if we set up this pre-write like Rick said we can get this going the right way that we can do this so I'm going to be a hardliner I'm not going to agree another increasing WSE cost we want to start doing the work that they're doing and so we're paying for it and that way we can save more money more effectively but let's say curses doing a great job and we've got these three contracts right here that I want to see get done under budget I don't want to hear about we need another extra 90 grand or whatever to do it I don't know why this is coming up why do you need an extra 90 grand all of a sudden what's going on I thought you figured this out come on we don't have people do it Bill I'm sorry we don't have any cool stuff come on trying to find engineers is not that easy it's almost as hard to find contractors let's go if you want to stop these projects right now we don't have the engineers I don't I'll tell you until we get our engineer here until we can get up to speed give me about four to six months and then we'll get the RFP out for Bear Creek states I can do that as a director get it get it done I have a question so there's been these different amounts voted on previously and everything would add up to 220,000 or is 220,000 if we give this 90 what will have available I don't quite get it it's 220 220,000 220,000 if we approve the 90 but I mean there's so is this starting from day one haven't we ever spent any of this money yes we spent the 20 and we spent it the 50 now the 50 is gone we spent 60 then 20 then 50 that's 130 alright so now so what we're talking about spending then is 90,000 not 220,000 20,000 I think it's fair I mean the other thing here is I also am very interested in hearing what the engineer has to say is he starts scoping out everything that's on the plate and what he can do what he needs help on I think it's fair to basically say we need X and we're going to come back to the board with Y based on that analysis I mean that's just fair we're still going to need additional help the engineer is not Superman and I can be able to no question we are going to need consultants and hopefully each of those consultants as needed will be big it would be a little more organized instead of we're kind of I picked up this you picked up this we've all picked up different things here and we're trying to get it organized to where we can all understand what we're at on our projects and all of our contacts so for the next two to three months transition period your belief is 45k will cover you to allow you and the engineer to put together what that number needs to be going forward for outside consulting I think so and we can come back and if that doesn't work out in that time period we'll come back at the end of that period would they report? because I definitely don't want the barricade of states to stop those poor people have already waited long enough for relief and the Glen Arbor bridge used to be done and the lion tank access I mean that's just we'll lose two million dollars and then we'll have a mess on our hands and we absolutely don't want to do that that's already a time extension because of the complexity of the work up there that we've received yeah if you just give us the time one time extension already and it's hard even to get these other contractors to schedule our time then does Steve have any questions? the three things that were just mentioned 45,000 do you think oh it's hard for me to stay here and give those prices until we don't sit down it's a guess our guess is as good as good as the next but it'll get us on our way get us on our way and then you have to come back to where I feel like I have ample time I do feel I have ample time to sit down with the new engineering director of operations and to hear and talk and come up with a plan well if we look at 45,000 and we divide by even the maximum rate which I think is 275 for your you know you're still looking at 160 hours that's basically four full weeks and full time work is that reasonable for what we have facing us I mean you won't finish all of those projects with that amount of money but in all fairness you won't finish all those projects because line tank access work will take longer than that just because of how long how long it will actually take so the next time if he came back to I'll be fair that's not going to that's going to be more than a month of our time we don't spend that much even on a high month we're not spending 160 hours and we're not at the top rate I usually try to delegate down in project management I figured I was just using the workspace we are not having full principles work on all of your work it's just not cost effective for anybody I've worked in consulting companies the rain makers make the deal I understand I want to be very clear for everybody's understanding that's not how we're working so it will be more than a month of full time with that amount of money but in all honesty if we came back to you even in two months some of these projects will be midway but that's just because we'll have a better estimate by project and that's what I think ultimately makes me uncomfortable we still have the staff time now to do that kind of work it would be one thing or the other and I didn't want to use C's time to do our project planning out and I knew we were going to engineer I don't want to put a month in I just want to put some pressure on I feel your pressure I really do I have the same thoughts it's been tough it's been tough recruitment okay Steve, do you want to say anything? I think I agree with sort of the compromise it's being discussed improving 45,000 percent but it's continuing to progress and I think it's the right thing to do and discussion at this point other specific questions okay how about the public any questions out there Peter Hi, I'm Peter Lang you know that's my first meeting in months but it seems to me there for the 45,000 or the 90,000 or whatever is there anything on paper where there's been a legitimate estimate of deliverable time table please don't be offended but it looks like the Keystone cops everything's bottoms up and it's Sonic the Hedgehog I don't see it being organized and so therefore it's health or skelter and that's a very expensive way to do business sorry, but that's the way it seems Mark, I agree Mark played it down a little kind of open a little bit I'm concerned what is here compared to our staff our rate what is your lower entry-level engineers if you look in the packet we still have you guys on our 2017 rates so I'll be clear for this contract we have not increased our billing rate since we started this what is your classification on this one I am senior 3 but I project manage so keep in mind I have yes so the senior 3 is 225 that's for a guest actually I'm actually much higher now we have not changed your rates no doubt so for example at the lower end the staff plan or engineer 1 would be 137 on the rates we're getting so that's kind of the range so if we can take those the lower staffing engineering rates for a $5,000 budget we can get some fairly measurable calendar times actually to go I will be clear you cannot have an entry-level engineer do everything without supervision and QA PC work so it can't always be $137 an hour person doing something because they will take longer to do things and they have to move over but we do use them whenever possible to work on your staff who are much more towards the entry-level and they're doing the drafting and designing and our CAD drafter is not at that rate so we do drafting for you guys can I put yours 110 yes so what is the engineer coming in we asked for all the record what is our generally what is our so we have to compare them thank you that would be important to know thank you thank you for not raising a great chance no it's important you guys are an important client to us and I understand that you need to have a conversation like you need to have sorry yeah this may be a question about I understand Christian you did the work on the the what's the name of the place of the process I am the firehouse the child farm you did the on the fire the fire service what is the policy I don't understand does the district charge the developer they charge the developer for the engineering there's both some of it is district some of it is standard will be district but the actual plan itself will be passed back to the customer to the developer same thing with other government yes I just I have a problem because in the Alampeco PRV stations the first design that came out was that humongous 6 by 6 by 10 foot box with all the apartment you know the PRV and the rest of the evolving and all that stuff inside of it and then it had to be changed because those wouldn't fit they were too large so and I think I asked you Rick and I said did we pick up any extra cost because the engineering snafu of designing too big a box there's probably a little bit of cost in there but I don't think we should have paid for that I will answer that she did not design the box the clay valve came out with that standard of that vault size no that was what happened is it got put into the plans at that size and it wasn't caught off the get go by all three of us they gave us that dimension as a design well that's just kind of planning in the way you have to measure things first secondly AWA you're a member of AWA aren't you I understand I believe that AWA has standard drawings that you can purchase probably in CAD form or to then alter to your liking instead of having them designed by an engineer at 220 bucks an hour they have standards but they're written standards I don't believe they have design they may have some standard design but I haven't seen what they offer they have standards we use their standards all the time I know the standards but I'm talking about the standard drawings the actual standard drawings if you want to get standard drawings you just have to go to Long Pico they can I know they're old but they're easy to I just never seen they actually put out they paid $5,000 for a set of standard drawings almost 300 drawings for everything that we put in I mean I even provided to you when you put that HDPE what the standard requirements were for installation we'll look at them we're a member of AWA we have all the standards I'm just not thinking you're seeing it we're not in practice for for a water district I'm just suggesting that would be a cost instead of individually each one being designed Mark? I agree with you the compromise is you approve the $45,000 and we look at the future budget as we have time if you do this incrementally I think that's a wise idea thank you, Bill anybody else? I think that the district is required to have competitive bidding and I think we've been out of compliance for a long time I do understand the reasons that it happened in the first place but like Bob said continuing to do so when there is no longer an emergency and he's not doing a service to customers and I know that RFPs take time and stuff but this is how government agencies operate competitive bidding and looking for cost savings Lou? I understand a lot of the issues that were raised tonight and there's good reasons for the discussion that has gone on but for me it boils down to one fact and that is if we want to make progress on our crumbling infrastructure we need WSC and let me be clear we need them more than they need us and I think Rick is right we don't have the resources yet we're planning on it, we're bringing people on board we're trying to ramp up to where we can do some of the stuff ourselves but we're not there today and if we don't use the resources that we have I don't know where we're going to be but it will probably be where we've been the last 20 years which is not making much progress in infrastructure and it is crumbling and I am concerned so I for one believe we should approve the full 90,000 and just get on with things until we can get to the point where we can start doing things ourselves when you're talking about outsourcing things you have vendors you have subcontractors and you have partners WSC is a partner and thank God we have them or we wouldn't be making the progress we have so let's keep that in mind that the real end goal is to fix our crumbling infrastructure and if we want to make good progress we need somebody's help and right now that only option is WSC Nick Rick had mentioned cutting the 90,000 and 45 and then coming back again and asking for more if you needed it or anything more to come back and ask for the other 45,000 does it? it's the pain of sitting there for 45,000 bucks I'll do it so why not try to save the money and see what we can save instead of giving a big chunk away and figuring that probably we'll cover it but we still might need more let's do it in a smaller segment and see how far we can get with that with the new engineer it's more logical to do part now and ask for more later if needed as needed so my understanding is that even if we did the 90,000 we don't have to spend it that's correct I know you got 90,000 you're going to spend it but I'm just saying that it's it's supposed to be as needed, right? and given that the information that the public and the board has asked and I agree that it's information that we should have that we don't have go to 45,000 and let us move ahead and let us start preparing some of this information and I keep hanging my head on this new engineer before you're doing here and I think you all will see a significant change we have a professional engineer in that department that works on nothing but projects no doubt we'll see a significant change are we sending a posse up there to make sure that he's hog-tied and he doesn't escape out the back door and he's ready to go and I think he's a great tip good is public comment over with? is public comment over with? on this issue I just wanted to also agree that it's not just money, it's investment in time and WSD knows and has helped me so well and I think of how long it would take to start all over again so I agree I think there's a lot of cost saving measures that we can do like the bundling of the contracts and all that stuff and then again it's designed and built and so I'd like to make a motion and this is only not to throw a monthly rent into the progress but to put a little bit of pressure that we create that department so I'd like to make a motion to approve $45,000 and then if we need to come back the next minute for another $45,000 another $5,000 or I'll second the motion the spirit of providing the new engineering manager and our general manager the opportunity to come back with good numbers so we have a motion and a second Director Smallman Director Falls Yes Director Swan Yes President Henry Yes Thank you Okay Thank you Kirsten Thank you Thank you for being here Thank you Kirsten Okay we're going to move on to Item 5B Board Resignation Discussion District Council Nichols is joining us by telephone She'll carry this item through to the Board Can you hear our hopes? Yes I am Can you hear me? We can Okay so I believe most of you know by now that Director Ruth tendered a resignation letter via email last week With this vacancy on the Board the Board has an opportunity to decide if two methods to fill the vacant seat One way the Board can proceed is to make an appointment to fill the vacant Board seat for the remainder of the term that has to be done within 60 days or alternatively the Board could call for an election to be held on the next election date which is in the fall The staff's recommendation is to fill the vacancy by appointment in order to minimize the risk of having difficulty obtaining quorum which could create problems in terms of trying to move the District's business forward So there's two things that staff's recommending tonight I would like to see a motion that declares a vacancy that a vacancy exists on the Board pursuant to Government Code Section 1780 and that directs staff to proceed with posting the notice of vacancy and establish April 24th at 5pm is the closing date time for the receipt of application for those who are interested in filling the Board seat for the remainder of the term So do we need to accept her resignation essentially or how is that? No, there's really no simply by operation of the law that Director Bruce submitted a resignation letter means that there's a vacancy for the Code there's no need to accept the resignation letter April 24th that's the cut-up date No, we haven't decided I had a couple questions Gina if we were to go down the path of waiting for the election which is I guess November we would pay for the cost of that election in November and then we would also pay for the cost of the same basically that now a person would only serve out till the end of the term, correct? 2020? Correct and then we would pay again for election in 2020 so effectively paying twice to fill the seat and do we know how much that cost is about $35,000 $35,000 and that election is even more because you don't have the other agency Yeah, it's I mean, that's a substantial amount of money Okay, great, thank you Well, I feel that we should put it out for people to send in their desire to be on the board and that we then decide through a certain period of time which we have to give them at least 15 days right, but it can be longer than 15 days right, Jane? That's correct, we've suggested April 24th which is more than 15 days from tomorrow simply because that for practical purposes we need the applications to put them in the board packet So that will allow us to get it into the board packet for May 2nd So it really would only be vacant for a month effectively for dealing with quorum and committee assignments That is if you can agree to appoint someone We have to agree Get the real weapons out for that Okay So, is there any comments from the public on this? Yes I'm just wondering what your the basis of your decision would be based on What are you looking for in a board member? Somebody who wants to do the job and has the time I'm not sure that's on the agenda for tonight Yeah Gina, sorry Well, will we know that? Well, we don't So I think the agenda for this meeting was to declare the vacancy to decide which way to go That's correct Whether to fill by election or to fill by call for an election Okay And then there might be a discussion later about what you're looking for I don't think you can have that discussion tonight I don't think we can have that discussion I'll let Gina answer that if she wants to Could that be put on next month's agenda? Uh-huh Gina Gina How I mean Can we really spell out what we want? Or we just put it out there for whoever wants to watch I don't think you can learn that in any way I wouldn't think so The board The board item that's before the board site does include a draft application which suggests which contains fields for information that the board presumably would be interested in and would consider in connecting with applicants So if there are suggestions of different items to put on that application you know different information that should be thought from that would be tonight's discussion Yeah, we have to do that tonight in order to get it out as part of the notice Just to be clear there's no limiting as long as someone is an eligible person there's no limiting who can apply for the job Yeah, there's 17,000 people presumably more or less that could conceivably apply if they wish to We're not limiting that I mean we could tell there was one application and that tells her what was on the board It's in the board packet The application is in the board packet So basically it's your contact information, statement of qualifications Volunteer experience, education and why you're interested The reason, can I explain why I'm asking because last month you did not want someone on the environmental committee because she had a science background Did I misunderstand that? I think that Interesting I wanted to have three out of four people I did say something about science but there were other people that we picked that do have a science background I just didn't understand that I just wanted to clarify it I guess you haven't been beat up by the scientists Honestly, I don't like scientists I didn't say I didn't like scientists especially if they're handsome but hey Get on the board Get on the board and you can do that Alright, I just was confused about that comment and so Alright Any other comments? Peter I'd like to see Peter laying from both of you I'd like to say a lot of time and expense that 35,000 can go to the engineering department if we don't spend it if we don't you don't want an Italian on your board I got a layup anyway Yes, you do Back to the future Anybody else out there laughs are always good Okay, Mark I'd like Tina Nichols, our council's proposal to put out the bid for opening it to the public and then go through the bedding process with the timeframe that she's outlined Bill? It's been the precedent of the water district to appoint someone there hasn't been a special election for a vacant seat since I've been up here that I know of that's 35 years so appointments have been the norm of the day I'm not saying that I'm saying it's a special election Okay, go I think this is the way to go but I just kind of question of rush and I would I think I recommend another two weeks to make the deadline before the agenda goes out so it would be like May 8th Well, that affects committees and it affects the board and yeah, if somebody's sick I think we're good I think we're good with the schedule If the board if you don't have the discussion until mid-May and then you don't make an appointment at the May I think it's 16th board meeting then the opportunity will be lost so essentially if you don't request applications by approximately April 24th or so you're going to end up having only one meeting at which the board could fill the vacancy by appointment before it reverts to the county to decide whether to make an appointment Oh, I thought April 24th was the deadline to get applications in It's a 60 day process There are 60 days So 60 days from, what is it, March 26th So that's May 25th or 26th however we count if we don't have it appointed by then then the county supervisors get We have to have them in by the 24th to make the May 2nd agenda Yeah, I didn't know that I would rather that we need to move you know, quorum is important we don't have a quorum we could lose the day we don't have to call it that Well anyway, if that's said I notice that we want to go with the Are we done with the audience or our rate payers or whoever you are If you've made all the comments you want to make I think the first thing we have to do is declare the vacancy It is a recommendation by motion of the board Make the motion that the board declares a vacancy There's two parts on it So I would like to So Jean, do we need to quote the California government code in the motion? No, that's not necessary I'm just seeking a motion finding that a board seat has become vacant as of March 26 and that you direct staff to proceed with filling the vacancy by appointment and post the notice that they can see with April 24th is the closing date One motion or two motions? Two motions, isn't it? I'll make a motion You can make it all in one I would At some point we're going to need to start writing motions out beforehand Go ahead, Gina, please Can Gina provide the Yes, please Okay, so the which I'm recommending for the motion is that the board finds that an elective office of the board has become vacant as of March 26, 2019 and that you're directing staff to proceed with filling the vacancy by an appointment of the board Now I'm sorry Let me try again This is why I want to written out beforehand That's okay Better you than me Finding that a board seat has become vacant as of March 26, 2019 and directing staff to proceed with filling the vacancy by board appointment and posting the notice of vacancy with April 24th 5 p.m. as the closing dating time for the receipt of applications Okay, I'd like to make a motion that the board acknowledges that the vacancy has been created as of March 26, 2019 Hereby directing staff to go with the appointment process and filing the position the final date for the position of applications deadline as of 4, 24 5 p.m. Can I hear a second? Second Director Smallman Director Falls Director Swan Yes President Henry Yes Motion passes Okay, so Item 5C Committee Appointments Yes, this item is put on the agenda not knowing exactly what the board is going to do forward on the vacancy but I'm seeing that the board is moving forward on the vacancy there may not be a need to change committee appointments at this time but I wanted to put this as a placeholder on the agenda just in case so I'll turn it back over to the board for discussion Well unless we just have one board member on environmental and one board member on on engineering then for this month it's just for one meeting we can do that or Just got to make sure that you keep us informed if for some reason you can't make that meeting so we can notify the rest of the members so we don't have people showing up Right, right we don't want people showing up when the meeting is going to be cancelled I think it's great you put it on here as a management force that's first of all for an election perfect I think we can just move on Does everybody agree with the move on? question so you're saying you're not going to vote on the recommendation for FICI of combining the engineering and environmental not at this time not at this time it's it may happen I don't think that was because well there was a I don't hear about possibly it was possible that it could happen but because a lot of what environmental does the engineer will be doing but also engineering and environmental is hand in hand you can't do engineering without environmental I think for tonight let's but I'm just telling you just real quick the three committees that director Bruce was on was the engineering environmental and she also was a senator to read the ground water I don't know that we can fill that right now I would say we can get by without those being filled for a month yeah alternate didn't come to all the meetings anyway okay great okay so we'll go to 5D it's in the winter of 2017 allowing water treatment plant store tank access roadside experience a large land site that impacted the access road leading up to the line water treatment plant tank site the project is eligible for funding under California's severe winter storms flooding of FEMA 4308 the district hired services and associates to prepare a geotechnical investigation report the report suggests the property is currently suffering from deep seeded complex intermittent seasonal landslide with movement in the areas the report recommends stabilizing a portion of the slope a series of pile walls combined with grading to restore the shoulders of the access road leading the line tank along although the platform supporting the access road would be secured by pile walls the slope and landslide mass will not be stabilized down slope from the retaining walls the slow moving landslide which initially activated in the winter of 2017 has resulted in significant damage to the only access road to the district's land water treatment plant and tank the water tank has a 3.5 million gallon it is our main water tank for the residents of the center of the valley water district the landslide is located between the uppermost road that provides access to the base of the line tank which we refer to as the upper road on the headscarf along Hesse creek located about 200 feet down slope to the east 160 long foot along the drum road we will refer to as the lower road the scope of the services that I am looking for tonight is to review the available geotechnical data in the files of the Heroka-Sunich who has a significant environmental and engineering background of that facility was the original environmental and the original geotechnical firm that did the foundations for both the land water treatment plant and the land water storage tank we need to have some additional engineering analysis and field and laboratory tests need to be performed we need observations of the sections of the drum road so we can see we can drive large drilling rigs trucks this would be a large equipment response that may have issues on the road like we talked earlier that the road may not be able to support and we need an engineering firm to meet and specialize construction engineering contracts to discuss the constructability of the proposed slope improvements and conditions of the drum road leading into the project site the cost of the geotechnical investigation would be approximately $12,740 there would be an additional $12,800 construction work and time materials of an evaluation working with contractors on putting together the RFP for repair the repair is estimated at approximately $2 million repair for this project I was just asking $2 million repair which FEMA is on the hook for a minimum I would say a 50% hopefully we would make the 75% maximum this is the only way in to the storage facility that area has had landslides in the past steep photography we've looked at cutting other roads in and even if we cut another road in and abandon that access road we would still have to stabilize the access road as it is upstream on the small stream over several homes below we couldn't just let the roads get in and down up the creek so we have to stabilize that embankment and we have to restore the road the road is severely damaged now those of you who have seen it it's a 16 foot drop abruptly the road has dropped down over the last two years I'm asking the board to approve a contract in the amount of $35,540 to Herald Construction Associates for geotechnical review and engineer support this line here although the platform supporting the access road would be secured by the secant pile walls the slope and landslide mass will not be stabilized down slope from the lower secant pile retaining wall what does that mean exactly there's two alternatives that came up with it one was culverting the river which is probably the plan that will most stabilize the entire hill site basically you put a culvert in and you backfill all around so the material has no place to go that's what we did earlier back from I think the 79 and 82 type floods we have a large 8 foot down culver on the lower section of the road and we did just that so that's one of the alternatives that we're going to narrow down we don't believe that possibly environmental may take may not make that project constructable basically you're going into a small stream and culvering and in official wildlife and Army Corps of Engineers is involved there's a whole host of environmental regulatory agencies we don't know if they'll allow us to continue to culvert that stream that would be the preferred method because the other walls would still keep creeping and go below and be a final repair so it may be a combination of two check walls going up with the scant walls going up the mountain side and combination of culverts that's what still needs to be determined which one of these two projects are we going to look at our design for I'm still a little confused though if we put in the wall to support the road then it could still keep sliding that's correct that's correct that's kind of my thoughts but we're looking at what's constructable up there can we get equipment up in to put those walls in it's my understanding that it's drill rigs to put those these are deep walls that are going to be very difficult to get up there because of the size of them I haven't seen them but they tell me they're horrendous in size I imagine it was easier to do things in 79 and 80 we could put a culvert in and back it dug it all out a couple keyways any permits very little NCR triple paper to rip it off and was the outcome any different do you think? it was repair there's a lot of new there's not a lot of new but there's a lot of regulatory agencies that will be coming following this project I thought that the culvert plan that was hauling in hauling too much that's what they did in 1982 but the last time we talked about this because you said I guess it was drilled in place retaining walls like stair staff or whatever but the other words how deep was it? I mean how deep is the slide a heroic consensus must have been found out by now how deep is the slide below the 45 to 65 so the spheres usually are going to be like 45 plus 30 into the bedrock 75 foot to 90 foot 100 foot after all that first study what's changed why do they need another 35 grand it's not really done we can get an RFP for repairs and contractors who came down to the area a lot of them from up north were more questions we didn't have a thorough enough report to answer the questions where we could bid on a project so this $35,000 is going to be we'll get us an RFP an RFP stage for going there and do repairs request for proposal but you'll choose between the cover or combination of the both right and hopefully we'll have multiple projects that will work that we can get out and try to get the best cost so we have to come up I'd like to fit on the conservative side we'd have to come up to 50% on the FEMA money just to be conservative but certain things will be not allowed on the FEMA depends on how the scope will work the FEMA out there to include there's going to be substantial work on the roadway there's a couple corners coming up on Highway 236 that is debatable that we can make the truck around are we going to have to widen those they're on the county road but still if we have to do that that would mean that it would be on the district's responsibility to do that we built the tank and those roadways supposedly are huge I hope the regulatory agencies understand that this 3.5 million gallons serves an enormous number of human beings the whole Santa Rosa Valley and our human facility let's let's make sure that I just hope that they have some flexibility in light of that and then a lot of people won't understand why can't we just move the treatment plan or move the tank and that we're stuck there by elevation and by where the streams come in and where our insulator pipelines of multiple sources come in we just can't move that side the best thing we can hope is for a different access in a lot of it's unstable there's a lot of water on that ground it's on the Empire Grave Mountain there's issues how about our tank treatment plan? our tank treatment plan are south they've been evaluated by the geotech engineers at this point in time there's no movement towards the tanks or the treatment plan hopefully there's not a hundred and fifty for a deep slide okay any comments from the public here and the regulatory agencies on the environmental design we are talking to them right now they won't tell you if you can culvert it or not they're working with us as we speak so I don't have that answer but I know that they are contracting and that's part of what WSC was doing is getting the environmental team which is another consultant up and running to work with the regulatory agencies the regulatory environmental side particularly whoops they're requiring that they manage drainage long-term drainage plans below the elevation that you're talking about will require not only culvering but 75 feet down you're going to have to put lines in like they did along the highway dying where water is actually saturating the soil will be drained off but then there's also you're going to have to put in jute roles so you're not actually polluting during the construction there's an extensive process that has to be done for construction so the example is that Highway 9 south of Pelton project where they put the it's a smaller scale I realize it but they put the piers and the ground they actually put in retaining walls and extended Highway 9 over that cliff and during this latest storm they work pretty well the water was pouring out of the cul-de-verts not coming across and damaging of course that's a much smaller project but the same concept applies I agree I don't know about the road getting the trucks up there that's going to be a little difficulty temporary road in now for a long time they were walking carrying one gallon chemical containers up and then we started taking a four wheel drive up a smaller road and then once the heavy rain subsided and some of the groundwater dropped we were able to stabilize just enough to get a truck access another technique that they use also is a gun ID the exposed cliff it's like rock and so that doesn't move the problem is the underlying way down 75 feet or 100 feet has liquefaction and the water is totally saturated that's right and that's got to be contained right? that's going to be real difficult just one little comment that to date since the slide we had the slide the district has spent $118,194 to date in which close to about 80,000 of that has been to that consultant and the rest has been to surveyors district staff on keeping erosion control down on that site I'll make a motion that we oops sorry is there anybody else in the audience? this is just for the geotechnical coring right to get samples or is that already been done? that's already done the drill has been done okay anybody else? I heard a motion I'd like to make a motion that we approve the contract to harrow percentage and associates in the amount of $35,540 and may FEMA have mercy on us second Director Smallman did somebody say something? Director Pauls? Director Swans? yes President Henry? yes item 5e letter to press down I believe Councilor Nichols will take this item Gina? so this is the follow up to close session during the last meeting and of course it's important not to rehash the specific discussions that took place in close session but the Board did decide to come back in open session to consider what was supposed to be a draft letter to press down or addressing some of the complaints and controversies that have been in Facebook and the media recently however with the resignation of Director Bruce some of the we're concerned that circumstances have changed such that it's not clear what the content of such a letter would be so we're coming back to the Board for some direction as to whether to proceed with drafting a letter for the Board's approval and if so, what the points would be and who should be involved in that process or what does not wish to continue with this effort well, we're all speechless oh, consider Bob's considering some of us, you know, obviously there's a lot about me you know, really I mean, I really this isn't about you well, in response to I just wanted if something does go out that I am taking this seriously which is to realize that, you know, I really you know, I got fated in the discussion about life of safety and I said something really foolish and everybody knows that the one silly word was really manipulated against me on this whole thing and it's not what I'm about this is not Bill, it's not about you okay the saving millions of dollars for a walk rate while improving our water system I'm constantly and generally focused on improving our water district so let's get back to focusing on those important issues and not, you know do that but, you know I mean, I just I'm not hiding until the end of this I don't think you heard what the direction was and so forth it has nothing to do with I thought it had everything to do with me it has nothing to do with you not I think I think the circumstances and what was said and published are still out there and I think that still needs a response of some kind but maybe different because it would come from the sitting board and not from the board of the sitting at that time because that letter had from the sitting board including Director Bruce at the time and now, you know, I've drafted one Gene and I have looked at a couple different versions and it's different now without Director Bruce here but I still think something needs to be said there were some charges level that could be addressed in a transparent and public way and I think you know, I think the information the information we got from Deb Lohan that's included in here, I don't believe we've seen this before you did not see this before there was two letters sent and we only received one and I mistaken the first the letter for the second letter as the complaint that wasn't the complaint and Deb sent that Lohan sent that letter and we did make that as part of your packet so pretty much this complaint is if you look at the pages okay, Margaret wrote and posted on social media about Director Smallman's post and because member of the public suggested that he spoke for all of us she jumped out and said he doesn't speak for her and then she said Board President Henry, where are you I can't even read all of this anyway, it's been more than 18 hours since Mr. Smallman's statement why haven't you said anything and and I think at that time certainly speaking for myself I had no idea he was even going on and neither did I none of that neighborhood group I wasn't paying any attention to this and all of a sudden we get this sort of attack but she also went along and said that Mr. Smallman she said Mr. Smallman and and she went after me saying that we presided over the failed Longpico Water District please don't go this same way Longpico didn't fail this was a total slur against the community of Longpico about board members who had worked hard to get a merger we didn't have enough water bottom line and yeah we had problems but we were paying our bills we were fixing things we redid our bluest treatment plant we did a lot of stuff that we needed to do and we came to this district with money plus everybody's paying $600 more every year to SLV to fix things that SLV wanted fixed and not only that they get property tax not only the assessment money but they get property tax which they don't get from Felton or anybody else because Longpico was a special district and that meant property tax for SLV so that was part that was just a little much that she went after us because we didn't we did the right thing we had a public meeting that's what we were supposed to do we had a public meeting we didn't go out and hashes out on next door basically what the complaint was about was her post and just a couple of the things part of this was debated extensively during the campaign recently and I think the voters made it clear where they came down with that and with respect to the condition of the Longpico water district when all this repair work is done will it be an adequate shape relative to the rest of the district in terms of how the facilities are yes so I don't understand where all this antipathy toward a valued community in our district is coming from so I think these things need to be need to be discussed I don't know the best way of being able to do that but at this point given that there was going to be sort of letter going out is there a way for us to be able to work on a different letter yes and I think we should do that I guess one of the questions you and I had do you still want a letter yes we would remove certain parts of it that was decided in closed session and it was changing changing it around and address those points would be my recommendation if you still want a letter we weren't sure we'll also the directory would end this or not I agree with Bob I do think that we still need to have a letter that goes to the press banner and explains or refutes of the coverage that former director Bruce made and it doesn't need to be with the same sort of spirits I think the current letter that you guys put together was going to address clearly one that sticks up for the current board members and and clearly explains our disagreement with Bruce's comments and the fact that we were hamstrung from saying anything anyway but that's why it made the round edge even if we wanted to and I think it's cool it behooves us all but make sure that the audience doesn't press banner but reads that stuff actually understands where the current board sits with respect to our feelings on top of that the gist of the discussion so yeah I agree with Bob and I would just get to go and that certainly should be rewritten working different spirit than what you guys probably put together so far Bill I think the letter is a great idea and I think it should I'm not sure on the specificity of what the letter should entail but I think the board should come into a conscious effort of not you know aside from the things that I did on social media and then what Director Bruce said that we are making a conscious effort to not engage in that activity anymore and then yeah I don't know if you want to go into more detail about this long pico stuff I think in general that's a really good idea we have 11 we were addressing one pico I think you should mention something I mean I just found it shocking during the campaign that there was this kind of I didn't even re-read it it was just amazing but yeah so I think now we still want to hear from the public but I think do we need a motion Jean on that or just direction no no motion is needed just direction and it would be helpful if in addition to the content that you've suggested so far you could suggest which one or two directors we could consult with in the process of creating the draft before it was Mr. Fultz and Ms. Henry actually former director Bruce was yeah she was going to so that's pretty normal work so we'll need to slide somebody else in I'd be happy to volunteer for her so I don't know if Steve wants to volunteer or if I should be me yeah I'll be glad to help you I'll be glad to take it I will we'll brought it out and let Steve do it alrighty how about the public do you have something you want to say Tony well I have to say as you know at the candidate debate I was appalled at what John Hayes said and I think most of the people there were appalled and the other thing is none of it was true it was just absolutely not true and I confronted him after the meeting and I said you know this isn't true John everything you said you know very well and he told me well Tony all is fair in Latin politics and you know so so is that where we are now in this world after the Trump candidacy is that where we're going and I would like I would absolutely like you to address the Long Pico part and I was upset that it was brought up again it needs to be it needs to be brought up in your letter and we need people don't know they need to be made aware that not only that Lois Henry saved Long Pico she saved our water board and she always she knew about bookkeeping she went into a mess at the time cleaned it all up and she discovered all kinds of craziness that was going on and corrected it and when we she worked hard to emerge she worked hard to get us into the black and so it was just appalling the statements and they have to stop and Long Pico personally I'm thrilled to be part of San Lorenzo Valley and I enjoy now even though I don't like the drive I love meeting the rest of San Lorenzo Valley I feel like we were always kind of excluded probably because we wanted to be but now we're no longer and I enjoy and I know other people too enjoy being part of San Lorenzo Valley and we love having you anybody else Debbie yeah I actually wrote some stuff down I don't usually but there's a lot of things I wanted to cover this is not about Bill Smallman and this is not about an emotional issue and I have no intentions of talking about Margaret Bruce the way that many people including former board members talked about Bill Smallman when the same issue came up about respectful workplace policy I appreciate the board wanting to uphold the district's commitment to sustaining a welcoming and inclusive public service environment and I'm glad for the change I worked hard for this campaign the campaign was based on civility these are not the only incidents that I bring up in this my letter of complaint we are moving from a toxic board and management to one of civility and openness there are a lot of people coming up to me and telling me their own stories and I really don't want to go into it but there is one in particular that was in April of 2018 I believe it was about Galifase and it was at the Felton Hall where Margaret Bruce totally inappropriately treated a member of the public very poorly that member of the public was on the environmental committee and making very strong points and everyone in that room was opposed to the use of Galifase and yet Rick Moran was picked on publicly and never received an apology and I think that's a long past due but you won't be getting it and neither will I because Margaret Bruce has resigned I'm glad that the district is going to be able to move on this is not about anyone's first amendment elected officials are always under the public eye and we need to know that an expectation of higher behavior now I was perfectly willing to talk to Bill about his behavior and we're friends and I was very clear about this is not acceptable but I'm not imagining that many of Margaret's friends told her that what her she was doing online and sending letters to the paper was not acceptable and that's the difference between this board and the last what we have are three big issues I had expected this to be taken care of really pretty simply and I was out of town for a while and I thought it would all be taken care of by the time I got back because this is really something that the board and the council should have handled we have three violations here we had a potential violation of the Brown Act and the open meeting law where discussions were she was debating other board members to make a discussion and out of having a posted meeting she clearly did not understand the Brown Act or she felt that she was exempt from it this is the violation of the board manual that was just adopted in January this year which defines acceptable board behavior and is a violation of the third thing respectful workplace policy was also just adopted by this board December 2018 is as described actions and consequences of complaints and violations that is the only thing that is under discussion here what if anything the board intends to do to assure the public that you take all of the above policies and laws seriously whether it's a letter of misconduct a letter to the public saying that you you do understand and want to withhold the Brown Act and the respectful workplace policy and you want to follow the board manual and it also as was brought up does Margaret Bruce speak for the rest of the board that you need to be very clear since she is the one that inferred that not speaking out means that you agree the board manual has a code of ethics and conduct just some excerpts from it the board is committed to providing excellence in legislative leadership that results in providing highest quality services to constituents they're expected to maintain the highest ethical standards to follow district policies and regulations not done and to abide by all applicable local state and federal laws directors should commit themselves to emphasizing the positive not done commit themselves to focusing on issues and not personalities not done they have the right to disagree with ideas and opinions but without being disagreeable once the board takes an action directors have to support the action we've seen this in the glyphosate issue the work of the district is a team effort doing things like what Margaret did in posting and dividing this community is not a teamwork directors should be courteous responding to individuals in a positive manner directors should I really request being able to finish this you should function as a part of the whole issue should be brought to the attention of the entire board not one board of director going out on their own that's in the board manual not followed members interaction with the public press and other entities must recognize the limit of any board member to speak for the board they do not, they cannot it is in the board manual the respectful workplace policy says St. Lawrence of Valley is committed to creating and sustaining a professional services environment one which promotes and maintains an environment free from offensive or degrading remarks or conduct and it lists four specific areas one is violence which is physical force harassment or intimidation the second is discriminatory against like race, color, creed, national origin or religion third is disruptive and disrespectful any behavior in the form of hostile or unwanted conduct behavior that disrupts stability and cooperation rudeness, angry outburst non-constructive criticism intended to intimidate or undermine competence fourth is sexual harassment so when I have broad respectful workplace policy thanks to another board in the past and it's kind of getting the feeling when I brought it to this board you are only addressing number three or number two discriminatory behavior it is not an anti-discrimination policy it is a respectful workplace policy so number three disruptive and disrespectful behavior is what I'm bringing to your attention and I expect something to be done under the regulation I was required to respectfully ask the person to stop their behavior a lot of people have done that and I was required to report within 10 days if it didn't stop and I'm sure that it would be investigated and followed up and I would expect to have something followed up not just drop it because Margaret Bruce declined I think that by doing nothing it is an uneven application of all the district policies that you have in place and I understand that Gina Nichols is now working on a social media policy and that will be really important to include as we go forward I believe that the ill will created by the passport and promulgated by Margaret Bruce as with Tony I think it has resulted in the mismanagement of the Long Peak Emerger terms we've been overcharged the assessment district was once the funds were once considered fat two managers the last two managers for instance thought that the cost for replacing the tanks was just fat I think one of them called it puffed up was more than enough money today it's what it's a third of what's needed these projects were supposed to be done within 5 years this has been mismanaged and now it's costing everybody and the reputation of Long Peak is being furnished on this because now there's not enough money in the assessment we are going to be paying this money for 10 years and probably not all our projects this is a real problem in the question and as Tony and I are on the Long Peak Oversight Committee we are the ones that are going to have to now explain to our neighbors why all this money we're putting out is not going to be enough and it comes down to attitudes that have been promulgated in this district in the past and I think it needs to be addressed and it needs to be over and this is the last time I hope we ever have to talk about it I appreciate the board's actions and anything you would choose to do tonight and Gina Nichols anything that you can suggest legally and to make this a real a message to everyone where you stand and this is all about rebuilding public trust especially in Long Peak Oversight thank you Virgil? I was just curious what is the process now that there will be a letter drafted and will it be presented at an open board meeting for board approval before submission is that the general idea okay that's correct thank you very much I look forward to reading it never mind you don't need my advice anybody else I have just kind of come into this recently and had no idea what happened with Long Peak Oversight and I didn't really know the previous board but I'm wondering Debbie it just seems like you're very critical of them and putting them down now if that is very helpful also is that the point of order? yeah Debbie can't answer you no I guess I hope that your letter doesn't criticize the previous board it doesn't seem helpful to me and I haven't been to any of those board meetings I don't know but it just seems like it will continue whatever animosity I'm seeing right now I don't know that the letter will criticize the previous board it isn't about the previous board okay I think we've got some direction for you one request for clarification I apologize it's a little hard to follow all the back and forth over the phone but was it Director Swan and Director Henry were going to be consulting with? yes no it's so Steve volunteered to do it and I'm fine but I didn't say I wanted to do it oh I thought it was going to be Swan okay so we're back to that's a good question I thought it was Swan and Steve just to clarify you're going to come up with a draft I'm always glad to see okay Steve it'll be you and I then because Lois would like to not so that'll be fine okay thank you I'll be glad to do the whole thing with the engineer okay well that's I'll just take a look at it at the end no problem that's great what did he just say? Steve said he'd take it on with Gina oh Steve would just do it all I think that's fantastic yeah it's going to come back you sure you want to do that Steve? all by yourself well you can work with Gina right I'll send you that I'll send you that six pack later Steve just kidding just kidding alright so that's resolved and anybody else in the audience know alright I there's some informational material but I think you already know about it so is everybody ready to adjourn? it is 5 after 9 thank you all for coming thank you thank you Steve