 Okay, I'll reconvene the Board of Public Utilities meeting Next item on the agenda is item 4 the approval of the March 21st minutes, which will be duly entered Item 5.1 is a water supply and recycled water supply update. I was actually going to introduce this one if that's okay because We will be having calling close our senior water resources planner doing the first part of our update for water supply But then I'm also very pleased to announce that Joe Schwal has been selected as the deputy director for our regional water reuse operations position Joe has worked for the city for the last 29 years and he most recently was the interim deputy and He started with the city in 1990 as a wastewater operator and has been here since then so There was great competition, and we're very pleased that Joe has been selected and is now our permanent deputy director So thank you for the indulgence to let the board know Thank you, and congratulations on the appointment. We just at lunch We talked about you need you probably need to find a way to shorten The name or get some sort of an acronym. I'm working on an acronym right now And it's just doesn't there's nothing's coming coming easily though Very good Right chair and Galvin members of the board. Thank you very much. So your water supply update for this month will be no surprise Looking at North Lake Mendocino's storage is at a hundred and nine percent of the new Water storage target as you remember last month. We talked about the major Deviation being allowed and so the water agency is able to hold 11 and a half thousand acre feet Additionally in that lake at this point so you can see we're going into the beginning of the year with of the water with pretty good Supply of water in Lake Mendocino So the storage is actually almost eighty nine thousand acre feet and the releases are about 200 cubic feet per second They were as high as seven hundred earlier in the week So they're kind of hovering below level a thousand at this point a lake Pillsbury has 58,500 acre feet of storage about 83 percent of target and Van Arsdale has 345 acre feet so everything is looking quite good due to this rainy season Looking at Lake Sonoma again also in excellent shape a hundred and four percent of the water supply pool at 255,800 acre feet so also in very good shape and the 24 hour average releases are at a thousand cubic feet per second This past week a little above a little below but right about at the thousand cubic feet per second pretty steady with the inflows and the outflows It's at that hundred and four percent of the water supply capacity Also wanted to bring to your attention just three events that are happening locally. I Mentioned last month to you that we would have the pathways to rebuilding landscapes workshop part one in March That was very successful So 55 folks who are rebuilding their homes post fire attended and really appreciated all of the presentations Including Scott moon from the fire department also presented on wildland in urban interface and landscapes that can be more fire resistant so to speak Coming up part two of that workshop will be this Saturday That's the hands-on portion where folks can walk in with ideas about how they're going to use our templates and walk out with approved Landscape plans so 45 folks are already signed up for two sessions There's a 10 to 12 session in a one to three session And so folks are very excited about helping them move through that process and be ready to have Completed approved landscape plans when they leave it within two hours. So so far. I wanted to mention what we've heard from folks downtown is that 117 properties that have submitted landscape plans of those 41% have used our landscape templates so far not including this new batch of folks who are moving through the process so 131 of those properties have used the landscape plan. So that's really Encouraging for us to see such a high adoption rate on those and they're getting great feedback Folks are really appreciating all the work that's been done and that these are available that they're usable and that they're getting the hands-on help They need So that's coming up on saturday Next week on tuesday evening from six to eight at the utility field operations office on april 9th There'll be a composting and verma composting which is worm composting workshop Sponsored by the master gardeners in conjunction with the city and sonoma county waste management agency So participants are going to learn all about how to turn yard waste and kitchen scraps into great composting for their gardens That's a a free activity and they can sign up online to attend that Lastly, I wanted to mention very briefly because you'll hear more about this. I believe at your next meeting Earth Day is happening on april 27th this year our festival Courthouse square 12 to 4 and it's a great fun free activity for all the members of our community to come and learn more About what's happening and how they can support the earth in positive community building ways If there are any questions, i'm happy to take them Any questions for mr. Close? I Don't know if the city water department staff is involved in it But it I believe they ought to be and that is the conversation about the dan arsdale dam and Tearing down scott dam and the things that that will do To the upper watershed that does get into the russian river and that which is not picked up by alexander valley and cloverdeal heelsburg does come down into our Supply system And so I I really think that that's an important discussion That we ought to be participating in And it has changed because of pgne's basically pending withdrawal from Using it for a power source because it's not cost effective that we shouldn't let the water supply Be lost either so great comments and what i'm going to do is defer to director berck We are involved, but I think maybe she can best characterize our involvement today Yeah, and I would also say that the expanded water supply group which met actually yesterday is is With the assistance of staff we're monitoring the situation as well whether we're going to be A participant if you will and in the ultimate solution to the problem remains to be seen there's there's a lot of Fingers in the pie at the moment, but I'll let deputy or director berck Write some additional information. Sure. I think chair galvin gave a good overview. We are following this closely We are working closely with snowman county water agencies snowmawater staff as well as Sort of following this through the tac As well as through the water advisory committee and the water advisory committee or the whack has agreed And put together a whack ad hoc which will allow for additional Information and discussions and information sharing we also At that whack meeting had mentioned that there was an interest in Putting together a an agreement that would allow us to share information and we've done that as well So it's allowing us to have conversations and get updates and start to strategize as we're moving forward Thank you Thank you with that. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to deputy director schwall to talk about recycled water Good afternoon before I present the Storage curve to show how much the water we've stored so far this winter. I'd like to recap the activities around the storm that we had in february As you all know it was a very significant storm and um The the facility the lugunochino plant considers a 50 million gallon per day Flow to be a big a big day Pretty significant storm During this storm we have six days in a row where our average flow was over 55 million gallons each day the storage The volume of water in storage increased to 150 million gallons in a in a four-day period And that 150 million gallons doesn't really mean a whole lot to me at initially But then I realized that 150 million gallons represents Virtually 10 percent of our entire storage capacity So in four days we Increased our storage, you know, we used 10 percent of our of our capacity and that was while we Were maximizing flow to the geysers as well at an 18 million gallon per day rate Um As you're aware, we did have uh about 120 million gallons of under disinfected effluent leave to plant that was stored in isolation ponds as well as to not contaminate the bulk of our water in storage and also during the uh Storm event we Distra over a 14 day period we discharged 560 million gallons of treated Recycled water That was treated prior to the storm. So it was fully treated water So where we're sitting at now we have just over a billion gallons of Water in storage, which is about where we were a month ago or a little over a month ago before the storm hit Um we the Of the water of the under disinfected water that we captured We have returned 37 million gallons of that back to the plant to be Retreated and put into into storage The remainder of the water of the under disinfected water will be irrigated As uh as allowed per regulations And we continue to manage the storage Uh volume In anticipation of a continued wet spring which could impact our our total irrigation Volume during the rest of the summer certainly it will impact the beginning of the of the season So here's our curve As we sit today The red line is our current Storage capacity And you can see the um, you know very dramatic increase that we uh Experienced at the very end of february and then the uh Resulting decrease from our discharge and then at the end of the discharge how we we continue to increase But as you can see we're crossing that 1,000 million gallons or 1 billion gallon line Just now as we had before the storm hit. So we're um In a good position. We're we're really where we want to be for the for the winter or for the for the spring should say Any questions for the deputy director board member doubt? Mr. Snoll, would you uh just explain in a greater detail on on chart number nine The it says remainder in storage to be used for targeted irrigation as allowed per regulation What does that really mean work when we where can you put it? And What are the regulations I guess right so the regulations for Water that was treated to to the extent that we treated that water were good. It can be used on pasture land As long as uh lactating Animals are not on on the land. It can be used for hay and fodder crops Those are the kind of the most common ones that are at our disposal for that water And and I presume you you have to avoid any runoff from that land Absolutely. Yeah, certainly it as with all of our Irrigated water Other questions or comments Thank you for your presentation and congratulations again on your new appointment. Thank you very much We have no consent items. So we will move on to our one report item item 7.1 On the acceptance of the final total phosphorus blue ribbon panel report interim director Burke Yes, so in follow-up to our study session last Board meeting we have interim deputy director Sean McNeill who's going to Present the report for the board's consideration Okay, good. Good afternoon chair galvin and members of the bp. I'm here to uh bring to you the phosphorus blue ribbon panel final project I just want to kind of go over it with you real quick so start off with a brief history of the uh Nutrient offset requirements that the city faces for our discharge permit I'll go into the purpose that we had for the phosphorus blue ribbon panel Give you some results from the blue ribbon panel and then talk about the next steps so Back in 2006 the city's permit For discharging of our recycled water was that we had a zero net loading for nitrogen and phosphorus This is important to understand that There is trace amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen that is very difficult to remove from our wastewater process That's left over in the recycled water and when you use it in agriculture It's it's great because it's it's a good nutrient for that But when we discharge it into the waterways We needed to come up with one a way to Get that down to zero in 2008 The way that we were able to do that was through a nutrient offset program where we could Look for phosphorus and nitrogen Inputs into the waterways somewhere else and remove those and then come to a net zero from our discharge in 2009 We started developing projects under the nutrient offset program in 2013 We our permit changed every five years we get a new permit and at that time Nitrogen was taken out of our zero net loading. And so now we're just left with phosphorus only in our zero net loading And then one final development that's recently happened is in 2018 the regional water board just adopted a Water quality trading framework What's important to understand about this is our nutrient offset program was an agreement between the city and the water board for our compliance It is not a compliance vehicle for anyone else to use So the regional board had to have something Because they also put zero net loading on the town of windsor's waste water treatment plant discharge And so that's where the water quality trading framework came in So the city's phosphorus compliance strategy has been relatively simple First is to maximize our reuse and minimize our discharges Also to decrease the phosphorus levels in our recycled water and finally To offset any discharges via these nutrient offset projects It's important to understand what our supply looks like or what our What we're doing with our water. So in 2004 Probably the biggest nutrient offset project we have today is The geysers project and you can see here with millions of gallons on the y-axis and Discharge here the season On the x-axis 2004 the blue bars all represent the geysers green bars represent the Mount that we use in irrigation both urban and agriculture And then the red bars Represent our discharge and you can see since the geysers started in 2004. There's dramatically less red bars red portions on our our bars and in our Water reuse so we're looking over time to reduce the amount of phosphorus That's a dramatic showing that a reduction in phosphorus the less we discharge the less phosphorus Is that we need to make up What's important? Let me go back. Sorry. What's important to understand about this since the geysers come on Our discharge has gone from discharging every year to Just occasionally and that's weather based when we discharge. So in high rain activities In years with high amounts of rain. That's when we have to discharge So we're only having to have offsets for those rainy seasons It'll it'll become a little more important You'll understand a little more why that's important when I talk about what our how we go about doing these nutrient offset projects So far to date. We've done three separate projects. We had the Beretta dairy project. This was a manure and pasture management uh program we were able to Uh concentrate cows moving from the barn The milking barns out to the fields and to a concentrated area and have all that runoff Go to a pond instead of to a local waterway That pepper would preserve We did some road and drainage improvements on that property. It's important for the board to understand that A significant source of phosphorus into watersheds is tied to sediment So any projects that control sediment getting into waterways Also, we'll reduce phosphorus getting in and that's how we got uh phosphorus credits from that and then in the ocean view dairy the That project was a closed dairy which left behind a big pond Full of waste that needed to be dealt with and so the city came in hired contractors It has scooped out all the all the uh manure in that pond and used it for land application in agricultural settings And we got a bunch of credits for that as well And here's just kind of a summary of the cost and you could see the costs of these projects were ranging about a half a million dollars a piece But the but they generated very different numbers of credits from beretta about 7600 credits to ocean view dairy 23 000 so the cost per credits varied from 20 to 67 dollars Moving forward. We don't see that future nutrient offset projects Will come in like the ocean view dairy. That was a uh a special case And we staff anticipate that many of the projects that come in would probably be at 67 dollars per credit or greater depending on What that project is So I just want to give you a sense of The process that we go through to get a project the reason why we only have three projects so far Is that this process is is is very challenging? So we start off by the city identifying a project right there at the top box and then we Identify a project that we think might have some phosphorus offset Then we talk to a landowner and begin negotiations with them to have us do that project They agree we go ahead and Calculate the amount of credits that we could generate from that project We bring that for the board to review and approve us to move forward If that's approved then we go to the regulators This is this is one of those challenges that we've had the regulators then need to approve that project Uh if they do then we can build and verify those credits and then eventually we'll generate a report And then that report basically Gives us the credits Once that report is submitted anywhere along this chain a project can get kicked back stalled And the communication can can be very challenging particularly in working with landowners on this It could take one two maybe three years before a project actually gets done Where a lot of people say hey, I could have done that in three months Really? Yes, we could have done it in three months But this is the process we have to go through to make sure that this Is is we're going to get credits from it before we pay for it So with that challenge we came up with a a concept of There's got to be a better way status quo is not okay Let's convene a phosphorus blue room panel and really take a look at the issues in the watershed and how We could possibly look at this differently So we explored an alternative means of compliance through this Fosterous blue room panel panel to support the watershed. How could the city Both meet its compliance and support the watershed So we're not in that place where we're doing projects that the environmental organizations are very upset with Because they meet the intent of the regulation, but they're not necessarily having a big impact on water quality on the ground So we looked for a the city really needed a Consistent compliance approach where we do something we get compliance That's been the challenge with the nutrient offset project. We do something We have to go through all these different steps and we don't know if we're going to get compliance So we wanted to also support ongoing Reliable water quality benefits in the laguna the laguna is a beautiful waterway Right runs through all of the city farms We Our residents probably recreate around it is a great Place we would want to make sure that we Are doing the best that we could with our compliance dollars And then we want to assure the ratepayers that these are cost effective phosphorus reductions that we're not chasing our tail After phosphorus credits that we may or may not need because our discharge is episodic And the thing I didn't mention Is that those credits have a life span? They're not you get a credit. They last forever You get a credit and they might disappear before you use them and they might disappear before you need them And so looking at an alternative to that Chasing our tail was the the grand purpose of this phosphorus blue panel the panel members, uh, it's kind of uh, we had Two regulators Amelia witson from epa region nine. We had matt st. John from the regional board. We also had two Uh, non-profit organizations focused on water quality You know, we had the russian river keeper don mackinill. We had wendy tro bridge from the laguna de senorosa foundation We also had two members from the uh economic community We had euthan brown from the county's economic development board and then alice and picoli representing the north Northern california restaurant association We had two academics michael cullen from sinoma state and john larger from uc davis and uh, we had lisa, uh, chair chairperson, uh, lisa lisa bayden fort has a representative Uh, we did have a facilitator on this program. That was davis seppos From the center for collaborative policy and he came and really helped us through this process The blue room panel had three separate meetings Each about three hours. We completed a report in december 2018 And we're bringing that not on march 5th, but we're bringing it on april fourth To the bpu for acceptance And then possibly a presentation to the regional board's uh board When they they meet again, I don't think we'll be able to do it this april So the blue ribbon panel informational topics that we discussed And shared with the panel was the natural history of the laguna de senorosa So make sure that all the panel members understood what is the water body we're talking about? What are the impairments in the water body and what are the uh special organisms that uh are Use this water body We also introduced the recycled water reuse program. This is something that's usually news to people So when the city of senorosa discharges, that's news It's not news when any other wastewater treatment plant discharges because that's the normal way So that's that was really interesting for the committee to understand They did they did you know that our discharge is episodic, but we have a regulation that really requires A constant discharge because then it makes sense to have credits come and go But when we don't discharge, which is what they want, which is what we want We could be going after credits that we don't need We also highlighted nutrient regulations in other regions. This is the only Water quality trading program in the state We're rather unique We're we're by far not the worst of the dischargers out there. So so it feels a little And possibly came across a little unfair this regulation And that phosphorus removal through treatment was an option and we presented that as as an option to the board that we could do and that the We also let the regional water board present their water quality trading framework To the panel so that we did it wasn't just the city's perspective But we really tried to have it open so the panel had all the information of what's going on in the system in the system So one of the things that I think was another Interesting to the panel was taking a look at where where is the phosphorus coming from in this watershed? What are the large impairments and so here on the Y-axis we have phosphorus in pounds per year This is pounds coming from these different land types and from the city center as is discharged into the laguna So forests under 5 000 pounds agriculture up to about 115 000 pounds of Fosters per year urban this will be our ms4 and suburban areas about 45 000 pounds per year Other sort of industrial sites and other land use cladifications that don't fall into those other three relatively small in the county relatively small input Compare that to the city of santa rosa's discharge. We're the only one with discharge requirements Of any numeric value We're less than two percent of the phosphorus loading in the system. Yeah, we're the only ones regulated So just by doing these little nutrient offset projects, there's no way this little amount That's the city's discharge can have any appreciable effect of the phosphorus entering into the watershed each day each year And that's really part of the impetus of looking at an alternative compliance approach So getting to our episodic discharges. This is a little bit of a complicated graph So what we have is our discharge is the red line going through the geysers Pipeline starts in 2004 and you can see the trend for that red line drops and stays near zero many years Just going up in heavy rainfall years the blue bars represent rainfall And so really this is what's driving our compliance is the the blue bars the amount of rainfall that we get Is driving compliance and that's not a great place to be because we can't really predict the Rainfall that we're going to get each year. What is it that? weather Climates what you expect, but weather is what you get So that's what we're seeing here is that with with future climate change We could see longer periods of droughts with much wetter years and tying our compliance to something as Un Unable for us to plan as rainfall. It just doesn't make sense So the desired outcomes that the city had for this phosphorus balloon panel was really to replace our no net loading Of phosphorus in our npds permit Renewal with some type of an alternative compliance approach to create information sharing and collaboration between the city Local nongovernmental organizations regulators the business community and academic institutions Not to be bold to say that we have all the answers, but to really reach out to the community for a community driven mechanism to move forward And to assure the rate pair is that the rates meet the regulations in the most cost effective in environmentally beneficial manner So the city did at the end of of this in the third meeting We did present a joint proposal between the city of sanarosa and the laguna foundation and The russian river keeper where the city would commit up to 250 000 per year throughout the permit term For laguna restoration and and or water quality monitoring However, we that the regional board thought it appropriate We really believed water water quality monitoring was a good idea early on especially pre having a tmdl in the watershed because The more information we have about the impairments of the watershed and the locations of where those impairments are coming in The better we can target our resources to correcting those actions And then we also had offered Realizing that it would be a cost to implement this program An additional 25 000 per year for nonprofit to manage this program And that city staff would still be available just as we are now with the nutrient offset program to support this process moving forward So that's the proposal Generically that we've presented to the to the regional board and to the blue room panel So the next steps are for the blue room panel Is now completed its work The today before you is a decision to accept this report And that the bpu and staff could prevent present the findings of this report to the The north coast regional water quality control board. This is something when we protested The water quality trading framework the board Chair had asked if when the blue room panel was completed if we would come and present in front of them So that would be part of the plan and then to negotiate an alternative compliance with the regional board staff As we're right now in the midst of negotiating our Discharge compliance uh permit So before you today is the recommendation the staff recommends that the board of public utilities accept the phosphorus blue room panel report That i'll take any questions Thank you, uh, vice chair or noni Two quick questions. First of all is a credit equal to a pound of phosphorus A credit is equal to a pound of phosphorus of discharge But to make it a credit It might take two or three pounds of offset to make it one credit So it's not that's considered a ratio. It's not a one-to-one ratio where we offset one pound of credit We get one pound of discharge available It depends on the type of project and the The certainty or uncertainty that we have with What kind of phosphorus credits that project generates? Okay. Thank you. My second question is Could you explain briefly? What is the water quality trading framework? Is it a mechanism for trading nutrient offset? Credit projects is that is it what it sounds like or that's exactly what it is so It's set up to be that to take the nutrient offset program and turn that more into a water quality trading framework It's currently not fully developed So it's much harder to step in as a tool and with this city and the town of winzers The town of winzers discharge it and their needs are relatively small in the hundreds to 200 Pounds per year our average Need would be about 3600 pounds per year but Without the tmdl in a waste load allocations and other entities having to enter a marketplace It really isn't a marketplace. There aren't buyers and sellers and because these things have Times I just met with the freshwater trust today They said because those credits have a lifespan It really makes it not something investors would want to invest in Because they would have to take that risk and gamble sure we'd love there to be a market that when we need to discharge We call up and we purchase those credits. We make our discharge. We have compliance, but that's not Really how it would work Um, and it's not how it's set up right now. Thank you Board member banister so I have some familiarity with the nop from my days at the laguna foundation and um in reading through and also the regional boards Requirements and in reading through the study sessions And your presentation a couple of questions come up one is you allude to phosphorus removal as one Way of getting there so that when you discharge there's no phosphorus in the water Done right You kind of went by that one without any further comment. Can you elaborate on that and why that's not a viable option? it well It could be a viable option It's it is an option on the table. Uh, it is expensive um, we would to get to zero Not necessarily possible But to get much lower Is possible, but we may have to make a lot of major changes to the treatment process to get there We are currently in the process of Piloting some efforts to reduce our phosphorus by adding alum to the To the water, but I also just want to remind that this remind the board that The recycled water actually has beneficial uses of that nitrogen and phosphorus on agricultural reuse And so there are benefits for it being there should we take all that out It would then need to be imported in For those irrigation land so it becomes that we now make our recycled water less Desirable to our ag users at the same time. We've increased the treatment expense And then we still haven't gotten to zero So speaking of those agricultural users that looked like A really big bang for the buck since they are the biggest contributors to phosphorus in the waterway Why isn't that I mean and you have an example program there with the burrata dairy Why aren't you looking at other dairies to accomplish reductions in phosphorus loading? It's challenging Um This process we worked with burrata dairy. We have a long relationship with uh, dug burrata and because of that He has patience for working with us through this process It's not that easy when you tell somebody you're going to do something And you're met with oh well well not this month not this month. Oh that season's done Maybe next year. We'll get the approval. I know it'll happen. Oh, there's tiger salamanders Okay, we'll we'll address that, you know It starts to sound like a lot of excuses so It's challenging this process as it's outlined because We can't just go in and say we'll do that project and get a credit We have to go through that whole process And you were I believe at the laguna foundation when we were doing the lid wiggy a project Which was an idea of the bend so So it's challenging to get that but under this program You can bet we would continue to look at all potential cost effective Options on the table But there is now a dairy permit and the dairy permit's getting revised And as that revisions to the dairy permit come in they're going to be more responsible for their discharge Therefore, they're not credit worthy projects So many of our projects have kind of fallen out of or the easier projects have fallen out of Being above and beyond what's required for dairies So speaking of the board not approving the science on that project This proposal the $250,000 for laguna restoration and water quality monitoring Sounds good, but I know that matt st. John and dave kuzma were part of the Blue ribbon panel. Did you get indications? What's their approval? I mean, this is fairly non-specific and I know that they want Very specific Calculations about the amount of phosphorus before they're going to approve any program But this doesn't have that. I mean, well, they have to approve each use of the annual $250,000, you know and and those calculations and Is this going anywhere? I guess it's the question I would say that They're open to looking at this in a different way Whether or not this will go anywhere I think you could say that Of the goals that we had set out for the phosphorus blue ribbon panel increasing awareness About this issue with our ratepayers with the academics and the ngo's That has been very successful through this phosphorus blue ribbon panel Have there been some changes to the water the interpretation of the water quality trading framework since this phosphorus blue ribbon panels come out Which it looks like they're looking at as the new law of the land It does appear that there are some changes There's nothing written down, but there have been some verbal discussions around that The alternative compliance approach is well supported. I don't I wouldn't say that it's um Assumed to be approved, but it really is I don't want to get into too much of the details But the zero net loading still is not our final allocation of phosphorus And there's there's a there's some legal room to reinterpret that requirement that could allow this alternative compliance approach to move forward And get away from the phosphorus accounting Because that's not part. I mean that's not part of this annual Allocation for rest or I mean that in the past I think they've shown it's been difficult to Specify the amount of Phosphorus reduction from let's say a riparian restoration program where something along those lines They just can't get the numbers To the point where they're satisfied with them and that has it that been a problem in the past That has been our problem and we did work with the freshwater trust We did evaluate the lower golden creek restoration project and it seems that most of the credits That can be found are in the sediment removal And the increase of a seminal of capacity, which is the amount that the watershed could absorb through the usually plant life or whatever other biological actions that occur The increase from restoration isn't relatively large It's nothing like picking up manure out of Potential ponds that might breach Nothing like 20 dollars per credit. Yeah, I would just say it's that The alternative proposal that's put forward is a starting point for further and ongoing discussions with the regional board staff I think you're right. There is a An interest in a requirement that there be an excess To that you show an excess between what you're doing and the phosphorus requirement and that is a hurdle And we are talking about that and we're going to continue to be talking to the board about You know the next round Our our next round of permitting and what that looks like and we're hopeful that at least This will provide a foundation and a starting point for discussions Okay, thank you I agree with many of the questions that the board member banister just expressed I think i'll be inclined to be supportive of the staff's recommendation but i feeling like It's a walk in the dark And I don't have any sense. I mean the thing the thing that probably gives me the most Comfort about it is that St. John was on the BRP And at least he knows fully what's been going on in the discussions But I just don't feel like there's any commitment from the north coast region water quality control board to find a Reasonable and responsible way To reduce the phosphorus load from anything that we might discharge. It just It just doesn't seem that there's a commitment Uh and I think while I would approve you I would vote for approval of the submission of this I Would be very reserved about approving that first 20 250 thousand dollar expenditure Until I was sure that there was at least some buy-in from them Yeah, if I could just um add I I think both Board Member Bannister and Board Member Dowd bring up a lot of the the concerns and issues that we have with this process and project in terms of our no-net load for phosphorus and We do think this was a good exercise in that it provided some information and education But you are completely correct. There is no commitment on behalf of the board This is as as was mentioned By assistant city attorney mclean, it's what we're a starting point for some conversations and it will be useful with our permit negotiations, but there is There is no commitment and it is um Likely that we're going to be having further discussions with the board Very likely we will be having further discussions with the board in relation to permit negotiations, but it's a starting point it provides some information and um Uh, I think the good thing is that the regional board was was part of the process with the executive officer being there so at least Some of our concerns were heard whether or not they will be Included is is a different conversation, but at least they were heard Any other board member questions or comments? I do have one speaker card randa adelman Probably easiest if you just sit at the table right there with shawn Brenda adelman russian river worship protection committee And i'm going to say something that may shock some of you But I have some sympathy for your situation and I really appreciate the level of discourse right now and I also sympathize with um the regional board and that just Handing someone some money Doesn't necessarily achieve the goal that you'd like to achieve and that there really needs To have some kind of detailed plan about how the money would be used um another factor that wasn't emphasized is the unpredictability of the Weather and the range of possibilities And it's been wonderful that you haven't had to discharge Very much, but after winter like this one, there's no way of predicting which way it's going to go in the future and I'm just curious if you know how many credits You would have to come up with for just this year's Discharges, I don't think that was mentioned um Then the other thing I want to mention is there there is a legacy issue that The reason there such a stringent requirement placed in your permit at this time Is because of the long history of discharges that have left the The river with very severe phosphorus Excedences and I've been asking for tmdl on phosphorus, which is much worse than the bacteria they've been working on for 10 years so that's just my two cents and um I think There does need to be a lot more discussion and negotiation and hopefully they'll you'll be able to come up with something I wish I had solutions to offer but I can't think of any at this point And um, I just want to stay involved with the dialogue. Thank you Thank you for your comments interim director McNeil, do we have a way to compute? just one second the number of Credits we would have needed for the discharge this year We are in the process of doing those calculations right now And that's part of our discharge compliance. So we just completed our First monthly report which covered the first two days of the discharge But we haven't calculated the phosphorus yet that that's due to the regional board by july 1 But we could we could bring that back to this board once once we get that information Thank you board member badford Thank you. I'm trying to Envision some more practical specifics and it I'm inclined to Support what what almost appears like a pilot Program almost but I'm curious about what the process would be Upon this being adopted would then Would then a conversation about a program then return back here before Um an annual contribution would begin would we would we then really Do a program development and design process through this department So I just want to be clear that that was just one of Six different proposals that were put forth in the blue room panel report The your acceptance of the report would not direct staff in any way Around any of those proposals We have talked a little bit about the initial proposal that that we put together We did come to the board Prior to bringing it to the blue ribbon panel And the cost was based on our average spend for nutrient offset per year Over the last eight years of implementing this program so it if There was a project to be developed or a new program to be developed We would definitely bring it back to this board for review and guidance before we moved Forward with anything so really before you is just accepting the report as written Not really choosing any one of the potential Alternative compliance options that were identified by the panel members I just highlighted the one that we came up with i'm kind of partial to it And it just it happens that we are in the process now of our next permit Negotiations so every five years we our npds discharge permit is renewed And the the timing of the blue ribbon panel I don't think was An accident that it's done to help inform the process in the next discussions and negotiations with the regional Board on our permit This is just a document for information To share and hopefully to share with the regional water quality control board Board of directors at some point so we can Help educate the process And then we will be Discussing and and and with the with this with the board of public utilities A lot more in the near future about the ongoing negotiations and process Of what our permit might look like and how this kind of Concept may or may not be able to play into our ultimate Permit and what that looks like so this is just a sort of a foundational exercise And then we'll have further discussions and we are still I think as interim deputy director pointed out that We are still looking for alternatives to the status quo because the status quo has been very difficult and potentially very Increasingly expensive to implement We continue to operate under that nutrient offset program And we are also have the option of operating under the water quality trading framework, which was adopted We currently have both options Because we're in that interim period between permits It's expected that potentially The nutrient offset program as we operate under now would would go away But that's all part of the ongoing discussion and permit negotiation process that we're right now involved in With the regional board so there will be more to come to To all of you on on that piece Thank you That helps quite a bit It does just to At least my sense of this is that there's a very clear Preference With with all of the options and alternatives that are put forward In the report and there are other Elements that I would say as I as I read through Increasing storage for example that might not be full blown alternatives But things that have come up With this department and with this board that I would like to return to so I guess the request Today is The hope that a conversation Following back around with ample time To really engage affected stakeholders as well as the bpu Um We appreciate it. Thank you Yes, we will be we will be engaging in that discussion board member banister this is um, I wanted to take the opportunity to note that brenda edelman was recently recognized by their water board and Like to say thank you. They were thanking you and I would Personally at least like to also thank you for your decades of work on water quality in the uh, russian river watershed So congratulations on that Any other board member questions or comments? If not, uh, the staff is looking for a motion for us to Accept the report I so move A second Motion by board member dowd seconded by board member batten fort to approve item 7.1 and accept the blue ribbon panel report all in favor say I I any opposed Passes unanimously with one absence Item 8 is public comments on non-agenda matters We have no referrals No written communications any subcommittee reports I alluded to the fact that the expanded water supply Committee met yesterday And we got an update on the groundwater sustainability agency And how that is progressing And we also discussed the potter valley project that I alluded to in response to board member dowd's comments Other reports yes board member watts the water conservation subcommittee met this week and We got an update in all the activities that are happening throughout the month of May and it's going to be a very busy month for To the water department and the water conservation team. Um, and so They also discussed the nominees for the awards this year. It's going to be presented. I think may 7th to the city council And there are a list of great recipients that have done Above and beyond to really conserve water not just for themselves, but also In light of the fire and the rebuild process, which is a new Part that was added this year And so those will be there if any board members are able to come on march may 7th to city council And some grant opportunities that they are seeking as well Board member dowd Just at this public dais I want to repeat my comment that I made in the Study session for the budget review subcommittee. I appreciate the work of board member Watts and board member grable That served with me on the budget review subcommittee And you saw the work product that was developed by kimberley deputy director kimbley zanino and her group and we reviewed it over three different meetings Well, I would just like to echo my thanks to the budget subcommittee because I know how much time it took for you to get through everything and particularly with Two newer members of that subcommittee having to wade through everything So thanks to the three of you for the time that you devoted to Getting us to this point Any other subcommittee reports? Any board member reports Then we'll move to interim director burke for the director's report Thank you. I just have a few things to update the board on First um since we last since the last board meeting. We actually had two events That occurred uh sunday march 17th was the santa rosa saint patrick's day 5k and it was also the kickoff of our fixa leak week And that event was a great event and proceeds benefited the santa rosa wrecking parks various programs And we participated we handed out over or just about a hundred leak detection kits To participants and their guests and we also had our hydration station there and It was very successful Folks came up and drank a lot of water, which was great. We were competing with beer. So that's always hard and And then we also got to promote our um 10th annual earth day event Which is coming up which you'll hear about more at the next board meeting And then staff also attended the um sazer shaves festival at bear farm And that was also a great event where we had lots of folks attending And we're able to provide lots of information on our various water smart rebates Which was great also wanted to let the board know that um In past years, we've been following some legislation known as the drinking water tax and that has uh come back around again so in uh 2017 and again in 2018 The city of santa rosa had taken opposed positions to a proposed water tax And the water tax really is looking at trying to have a funding mechanism to provide Funding to disadvantage communities that need assistance from a water supply perspective, whether it's Making improvements to their infrastructure to dealing with water quality issues So those bills had a lot of attention and because there was a lot of discussion They actually kind of turned into two-year bills and then didn't move forward And now this year Governor Newsom has introduced the water tax again and put it forward as a budget trailer bill And then there are three bills a b 217 from garcia a b 134 from bloom and sb 200 from monning That are also proposing a water tax So we're following these bills closely in addition to Santa Rosa all water Industry for the most part are following these bills very closely and are concerned about them and recommending opposed positions and the thought is proposing a different mechanism which is known as a water trust that could be used to provide the funding needed for um disadvantage communities Although we think the intent is is good uh for the water To provide assistance the concern with the water tax is that Our community would would likely not see any return of that investment So the tax would be collected it would go to the state and then it would be redistributed and we we don't think we would see any of that Money back here. It would also Cause an increase to our water bills. So we're concerned about that the the alternative that's being proposed is The water trust and that would be an option where the state would take Surplus general fund money Which is a good time this year because they actually have quite a bit of it and invest it and then use the investment in those proceeds To provide that funding for those disadvantaged communities. So that's what's being proposed by the water industry We're following both Or all four of these bills and we'll keep the board updated as that process goes along We are potentially going to look to see if the city council will take a position on those bills as well And then last I wanted to just provide a quick update on The recycle water ag fees. Um, we had yesterday Meeting with our user group So when we started this process Of the roughly 50 agricultural recycle water customers We reached out to all of them and asked if there were any that would be interested in participating in a user's group And six, um volunteered So yesterday we we met with them after putting out a couple different communications and emails and we're really trying to get an update on Communication what works best for them We were we're going over the fee proposal and process with them again And then starting to review an initial draft of the proposed agreement for agricultural recycle water use It was a really good meeting. Um, we had really good positive response from the five users who are able to attend and They gave us some feedback on communication and preferred that We looked to do hard copies and mailings which we'll do And we also committed to really trying to get better outreach out there So we're working on some frequently asked questions as well as developing a webpage Putting all this information out so that we have a a centered central place where folks can go if they have questions Or don't know what's going on with this process We also got no concerns about the current fee proposal and process and some comments on the initial draft agreement So we will be putting together another user group later this month And then we will be scheduling an ad hoc meeting probably in a Not too distant future after we I will say we also did get a letter from tawny tascone who's the executive director of the farm bureau and she did allay some concerns as well as had some questions and Based on her letter, we will be looking to meet with her and provide information, but it did clearly Indicate that there is a lot of misinformation that's out there and that we think that by providing frequently asked questions And a web page and really having a lot more resources for folks It'll clear up a lot of that misinformation that's out there So we just wanted to provide an update to the board on on that process and more to come as that continues to develop Any questions for the interim director Hearing none. Thank you all for being here. We'll adjourn the meeting