 can you hear me? Okay, this is Pam. Yes, we can. Great. Thank you. All right. Good morning all. It is nine o'clock and I believe I see we have a quorum and all speakers present. So we'll go ahead and get started. All right. So we'll call the meeting to order at nine o'clock and we will go ahead and have our recording secretary, Dina Manas, do a roll call vote. Just a reminder to everyone just for ease of recording, can you please state your full name and your agency during roll call and also in making questions and comments. So Secretary Manas, can we have a roll call, please? Good morning. Thank you. City of Cattadi. Greg Scott, City of Cattadi. Thank you. City of Petaluma. Deanna Arora, City of Petaluma. City of Roanart Park. City of Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa Water. Jennifer Burke. City of Sonoma. Matt Wregula, City of Sonoma. North Wren Water District. Hody Williams, North Wren Water District. Town of Windsor. Christina Gulart, Town of Windsor. Valley of the Moonwater District. Matt Fullner, Valley of the Moonwater District. Moran Municipal Water District. All right. Thank you, Secretary Manas. So looks like we have six of eight. Or sorry, we have seven of eight. And I was just looking. Oh, I do see Roanart Park in the participants. Can you please promote Vanessa Garrett? It just promoted her. Thank you. All right. So we have all eight TAC members present. Great. And Secretary Manas, can you please list off the members of the public as well? Additionally, in attendance is an administrator from NMWD, Ann Dubey, Bob Anderson, Chelsea Thompson, Claire Nordley with the City of Santa Rosa, Colin Close with the City of Santa Rosa, Jake Spaulding, Lynn Raselli, Margaret DeGenova, Mike Berger, Peter Martin, Robert Rogers, and Shannon Coutoula. Great. Thank you. And I also know we have a number of Sonoma Water staff also. Okay. Additionally, we have Paul Piazza, Pam Jean from Sonoma Water, and Dawn Seymour from Sonoma Water. Rolling through the list. Andrea Rodriguez, Brad Sherwood from Sonoma Water. I think I caught everyone. Forgive me if I did not. Great. Thank you so much. All right. So now we will move on to item number two, which as everyone has recalled for quite some time, under AB 361, if we need to consider any type of protocols to protect public health and members of governing bodies, we can make findings to meet virtually. I know in tracking our wastewater from Sonoma Rosa, we are definitely seeing increases in all types of respiratory viruses, including COVID right now. So I think it still is, makes sense for us to make findings. So you have before you a memo and a resolution. And are there any questions or comments before I open up for public comment, and then we'll take a motion. Seeing no questions or comments from the TAC members, we are now taking public comment on item two. If you wish to make a comment via Zoom, please raise your hand. And if you're on the phone, dial star nine. And Secretary LeDesma, do we have any comments on item number two? We do not have any comments. All right. Is anyone willing to make a motion and a second on this item? Craig Scott, City of Catania, moved to approve. Thank you, Craig. Tony Williams, sorry, Vanessa. Tony Williams, Northburn Water District. I'll second. Okay, so we have motion from Qatadi and a second from North Marin. And Secretary Manus, can we have a roll call vote please? Thank you, City of Qatadi. Craig Scott, City of Qatadi, yes. City of Petaluma. Dan Herrera, City of Petaluma, yes. City of Brunner Park. Vanessa Garrett, City of Brunner Park, yes. City of Santa Rosa. Sorry, having trouble with my meat today. Santa Rosa Water, Jennifer Burke, yes. North Marin Water District. Tony Williams, North Marin Water District, yes. Town of Windsor. Town of Windsor, Christina Goulart, yes. Valley of the Moonwater District. Map holder, Valley of the Moonwater District, yes. Not the record show. This motion passed unanimously. Great, thank you very much. So we can now continue to meet virtually for the next 30 days of this body. We'll now move on to item number three, which is public comment. So we are taking public comments on non-agenda items. If you wish to make a comment by Zoom, please raise your hand. And if you're on the phone, please dial star nine to raise your hand. I'll give folks a minute. And it looks like we do have a public comment. So Secretary Ledesma, can you please facilitate public comment for this item? Yes, we do have a raised hand from Brenda Edelman. You should have permissions to talk now. Thank you. I just have a question. I'm just wondering if there have been any studies of the impacts of the low flow and on the lower river. It's looking pretty bad visually right now. And it just seems to me somebody should be doing some kind of analysis of what's happening and what can be done to help the lower river preserve its beneficial uses. Thank you for that comment, Brenda. I think we can go ahead and have Dawn Seymour address that under the next item, which would be water supply conditions and temporary urgency change order. Thank you. Great. Any other public comment on non-agenda items, Secretary Ledesma? We do not have any more raised hands. Okay, well then we will move right along to item number four, which will be the water supply conditions and temporary urgency change order. And Dawn Seymour with Sonoma Water is going to make the presentation. Good morning, Jennifer, members of the TAC. So the storm events were actually are being a little beneficial. We're seeing some bumps in natural flow in the Russian river, not huge, but we are seeing some natural flow now in the river and some inflow into both the reservoirs. Lake Mendocino is currently just under 37,000 acre feet, quite a bit better shape than it was last year. Lake Sonoma is just under 97,000 acre feet. And however, like I said, we are seeing some slight bumps in storage at both the reservoirs. Lake Pillsbury is currently at about 28,000 acre feet. This puts at 8,000 acre feet below the trigger for sunsetting the variants that FERC approved back in late July. So the transfer continues to be about 10 CFS through the project. So very, very low transfer of the river water into the Russian River watershed. The good news is storm doors open. We have rain events forecasted through the week. And the 14-day outlook is for probability above normal rainfall. So it's, you know, it's looking optimistic. Really would like to see some time, you know, an event similar to last October to really, really jumpstart inflow into the reservoirs. So on the, with regards to Brenda's question, you know, Brenda, Sonoma water under the current order we're managing the system from the state board, we are required to do significant water quality monitoring, which we report on weekly. And those results are posted on our webpage. I can, Pam or I can forward you the link to where those results are posted. And those are also reported the State Water Resources Control Board weekly. And I would just point out that flows on the lower river now over 200 CFS, or about 200 CFS between the releases from Lake Sonoma and natural flow in the system. With regards to the temperature change order, I think everybody's aware it expires December 13th next week. We submitted petitions back in October, which the State Board has been processing. We've received, State Board received the support letters from NEMS, Fish and Wildlife and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. We anticipate that order will be issued well before the 13th. So there's something in place when that expires. Right now under the current order, Dry Creek is not, wasn't included in the petitions we filed back in May. And as a result, we're still managing Dry Creek under decision 1610 requirements. And that currently puts the minimum stream of flow at 105 CFS. This order that we're anticipating will actually include Dry Creek. And you know, for varying any really significant storm event and change in storage Lake Medesina, we anticipate on December 14th the system will be the water supply condition will be determined as dry as opposed to critical. So the minimum stream flows on the upper river will increase from 25 CFS to 75 CFS. And on the lower Russian River from 35 CFS to 85. However, Dry Creek, which is currently a requirement of 105 CFS, you know, from the dam all the way to the confluence will actually go to 75 CFS. So that'll, that'll help us preserve some storage and reduce those releases out of Lake Sonoma. So that's all I have, Jennifer, unless there's any questions. All right. Thank you for that update, Don. Are there any questions or comments from members of the TAC? All right, seeing none. Don, you just, you mentioned that you anticipate receiving the order before the 13th. So it's coming soon. Any, any indication from the state water board of, of, of when it's coming? I asked, you know, we were down at that panel together in at New Wills at Aqua last week and I asked him that question and he wasn't quite sure. I would anticipate it'll probably come out later this week. Okay. He was confident that it would be issued before expiration of the current order. All right, that's great. Let's hope, let's hope that happens. All right. Seeing no comments or questions from TAC members, we will open up for public comment on item four. If you wish to make a comment on this item and you're on the Zoom meeting, please raise your hand. If you're dialing in on the phone, I'll start nine. And Secretary Ledesma, do we have any comments on this item? We do not have any comments. All right. Thank you very much, Don. Thank you for that update. We will now move on to item number five, which is our snowmarine saving water partnership item. Our first item, as always, is an update on the water production in 2022, comparing water usage to our state benchmark of 2013. You'll see as anticipated water usage among all contractors and members of the partnership down significantly from 2013, thanks to all the conservation activities we've been implementing. The first table compares October to October in 2013. And then the second table is year to date 2022 compared to 2013, again seeing roughly as a whole 27% reduction. And then if you look at the first chart, that shows you over time, or over the, sorry, over the year, are comparisons as well as gallons per capita per day. And then the second chart on the back shows over a number of years the reduction in demand that has occurred. So that is our update on water savings. Are there any questions or comments from the tech on this item? All right. Seeing no questions or comments from the tech, we will now open it up for public comments on item five A. And if you're on Zoom, please raise your hand. If you'd like to make a comment, if you're on the phone, dial star nine to raise your hand. And Secretary LaDesma, can you facilitate public comment on this item? Yes, we do have a raised hand from Margaret DeGenova. You do have permissions to talk. Hi, this is Margaret DeGenova from California American Water. And I just wanted to report on our conservation numbers and also specifically for our area here in Markfield. We are now at the point where we're just about 15 customers shy of where we were in 2017 with the number of customers that we have as a result of the Tufts Fire and the Tufts Fire rebuild. So I just wanted to point that out that comparing anything for us for 2020 as we didn't have all our customers back on since that time we've had a lot more customers come back online. So we are very close to the, I think during that period after Tufts Fire we lost about 550 customers and most of those are back or have water. Now they might not be fully rebuilt, but they do a lot of the customers do have water. So I just wanted to report on that. Great. Thank you for that update, Margaret. I appreciate you keeping us informed and glad to hear that rebuilding is going well and you're almost fully back to your number of customers. Yes. Thank you. Any other public comment on this item? We do not have any other raised hands. Okay, great. Thank you. We'll move on to item 5B, which is our drop outreach messaging and Paul Piazza and Andrea Rodriguez from Snowmawater will be making the presentation. Great. Good morning, everyone. So here's our quick little snapshot of our outreach. Next slide. We are in our winter campaign. So starting with December it is Fix Your Flush. So nothing like the gift of a new water efficient toilet for the ones you love and care about. So we're spreading that one. That'll be fun in our ads this month, but also reminded people turn off their irrigation, especially with the rain, loading up to save, and rainwater harvesting was posted this past Sunday, which was very timely. And we are doing our streaming ads with Comcast again. So that will run mid-December through the end of January. It's fun when everyone is home and streaming and catching up on their shows. So it seems to be a good time to run that campaign. You'll see our print and digital ads as well as our videos and social media. Next slide, please. Here's just our quick snapshot. You see the infographic this is posted in the Sunday Press Democrat paper. So keep an eye out for that and the weather section and the sport back page of the sports. And you can see we're just keeping track of our storage levels as an infographic. If you ever need anything for that, let us know. We're happy to share that with you as well. And our last slide shows we recently updated, we had our photographer go out and take some updated photos. So you'll see some updated photos coming out as we compile those into some videos and other messaging. But here's just a quick comparison of what Lake Sonoma looked like from 2019 to 2022. So these were just taken in earlier November. So big difference. But if you have any questions or you need any information, please feel free to reach out to Paul or myself. Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the talk on this item? All right, none. Thank you, Andrea. I like the promotion. We'll see if we'll see if folks decide they want to buy toilets as gifts. I don't know. All right, so we'll open this up for public comment. We are now taking public comment on item 5B. If you would like to make a comment and are on Zoom, please raise your hand. And if you're on the phone, dial star 9. And Secretary LaDesma, do we have any public comment on this item? We do not have any public comments. Great. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Andrea. We will move on to item number 6, which is our Biological Opinion Status Update. And I believe Pam Jean with Snow Water will be making a presentation. We'll be. Thanks, Jennifer. Thank you. Okay. So hopefully everybody got the attachment that came with the agenda that got sent out by Dina. So it's a little long because there's a lot of photographs in it this time. So bear with me as I get through this. On the Fishflow Project EIR or, yeah, the recirculated EIR, we continue to work on that. There's no real huge change. Modeling work is still happening in order to zero in on some new proposals that will be made as part of the recirculated EIR. So in terms of flow levels. So the next item here is the Dry Creek Habitat Enhancement Project. There's quite a few, there's quite a bit of update here and quite a few photos that folks can take a look at. But we are, of course, not working in the stream right now. The contractor that was out there working this last summer on Reach 13, well, they were working on both Reach, Reach is 10 and 13. They're finished for the season. They're out of the creek. They've got it all buttoned up. There is one piece left of Reach 13, the Reach 13 site that they'll be working on in 2023. So the nine sites associated with Reach 10, however, will be done in 2023, although there was some prep work that was done by the contractor, Nicola, this year to get sort of prepped and ready for that next year. So there's, again, some good photos here of showing that work that was done this year and Reach 13a, including some hydro-seeding, which was when they were buttoning up the project on the 24th of October. As far as habitat monitoring and maintenance goes, we continue to do physical and biological surveys. I don't think that we've changed this section here. There's good description in here of what they're doing out there in terms of collecting data, surveying and bathymetry and those types of things. So I'll just leave it at that. Folks can read that. I don't think that text has changed from the past. Sort of the bigger pieces of what's going on really have to do with the work that we're doing with the Corps of Engineers, implementing phases four through six of the project. So that work is continuing forward. On phase four, we do have 100% level bid documents available. The Corps is intending to advertise this particular portion of their work in early January in hopes to be out there this next construction season. We do have two properties that we're still working on easements with, but we have received comments back from them and are going through those comments right now. So hopefully those will get addressed and will have executed agreements on all of the properties associated with that project fairly soon. Sonoma Water right-of-way staff also continues to work with property owners for the next couple of phases and they intend to get out there and work on phase five this next year. Again, that's the work that we have, the bid design documents already done and then phase six, they're working with property owners. That work is supposed to be done in terms of construction in 2024. So our right-of-way staff who's doing just a bang-up job despite all of the challenges are moving forward with that. There's also an additional phase five site, reach 5B as we call it. That's at about a 60% design phase right now. We're working with the property owner out there on a compensation offer in order to get out there to do that work and that work I believe will be done by Sonoma Water instead of the Corps due to some right-of-way issues out there. There is a small public outreach section in this update this time. There were a couple of visits out to the site. One of them was West Coast Regional Managers for Natural Marine Fisheries Service met up, I believe at Warm Springs Dam to have a meeting and so they went out and did a tour on our sites, construction sites in November, mid-November. And Congressman Huffman was also out there with his staff in October, mid-October. Fish monitoring for this year is in terms of migrating fish, in migrating fish is underway right now. The video camera at the Mirabel Dam was installed in September and we've been monitoring the camera that's there since then. As of last week, I believe it was, there was about 770 adult Chinook had been seen passing through the fish ladder and about 20 Coho. So the numbers are not great but we're hoping that this rain, which triggers the rain tends to trigger Chinook migration and movement through the river. We're hoping that this will trigger some more fish to move into the system. There's some interesting graphs included in this update that you can take a look at. The first graph, what's referred to as figure one in here actually shows just the number of fish in terms of counts of fish and chronologically from left to right. So you can see by date the fish that are migrating past our Mirabel fish or through the ladder there. And then the second figure, which is on the backside of that same sheet actually shows some interesting information with regards to flow and that migration as well as the stage in the estuary and that migration as well as rainfall and that migration. So it's kind of an interesting way of looking at that information associated with those fish coming back into the system and migrating up. So at least as of last week when this update was put together, there was a lot of tributaries that were not connected to the river. They were still dry due to, you know, extremely low flow in the tributaries. So tributaries are where coho salmon spawn. So we're all hoping that those tributaries are connected now with this bit of rain that we've gotten. But our folks will be out looking to see what that looks like of course over the next couple of weeks as they're out in the system. The rush river estuary management project, we did have a couple of closures earlier this year in October and then again in November. The update here indicates that the barrier beach is actually closed, but it did open yesterday on its own. So the barrier beach is open at this point, which also of course provides an opportunity for fish, the salmon to get into the system and get salmon and steelhead to get into the system and get in up the river. So that was good that it breached itself yesterday. Interim flow changes. Don already talked about this, so I won't say anything more about that. And then the big news on the biological assessment, which is going to lead to our new biological opinion is that we've been through first a couple of rounds of review of a draft of the biological assessment at this point. And our consultant ESA has an administrative draft ready to go and we expect to submit that to the National Marine Fisheries Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife on December 9th, which is the end of this week. So hopefully they will then be able to really get working on it and we'll have our biological opinion when we need it next fall. And I think that's it, Jennifer, unless there's any questions. Great. Thank you for that update, Pam. Are there any questions or comments from members of the TAC? Everyone is very quiet today. All right. I was curious, I thought the graphs were very interesting on the Chinook counts. Is there, but I think this is just for this year, correct? For 2022. So how are we doing in comparison to previous years? I know it's hard to, to kind of, because there's so many factors that affect it, but are we seeing that? It's low. Is it low? And I'm going to just speak to Chinook because Coho really haven't, I don't think their season is really quite started yet, but we typically see sort of a delayed start to migration in a drought year like this year for Chinook salmon. And we definitely saw that this year. That's why we're hoping this rain will help with that count, but those, the counts are definitely low. We can sometimes, by this coming year, see two to 3,000 fish and pass the ladder. I would say three's probably up that upper end and favorite, probably not typical, but, you know, it is low. And I don't know about this year. I haven't heard a lot of discussion about sort of the whole, what it looks like coast wide. But last year, coast wide, the numbers were low. The up and down the entire coast. It wasn't just here. So, but I haven't really heard those numbers coast wide yet this year. So I don't know what it's looking like in other places. Thank you. I'm guessing since we're still in drought, probably similar throughout, but appreciate that information. Any other questions or comments from members of the tech? All right. Seeing none. We'll now open it up for public comment on this item. If you would like to make a comment and you're on zoom, please raise your hand. And if you're on the phone dial, please put your hands up. Okay. So this is our first question. And secretary Ladesna can you facilitate public comment on this item, please? Yes. We do have one hand raised from Brenda Edelman. You have permission to talk. Thank you. I have three questions. Do you want them one at a time or do you want them all at once? Brenda, why don't you just, uh, why don't you ask your first question. The work that's been done in Dry Creek, every time I look at it, I wonder why it doesn't have a more natural appearance. It looks the way the logs have been arranged. I'm sure there's some reason for it, but it looks kind of strange to me. Then it's been almost six years since the the public responded at great length and with great effort to the previous EIR on the low flow. And I'm just wondering if those are getting tossed or what's going to happen to those as you when you release revised document. There was a lot of work that went into that and would be pretty disappointing for the community after all this time to just have them thrown out. And the third one is a question about when the biological assessment will be ready for the public to look at. And will there be a comment period or is that have a different kind of response or maybe there's no response required? Just give me a little more background on that, please. And those are my questions. Great. Thank you, Brenda. And seeing no other public comment, Pam, would you like to address any of those questions? I can address the first one. I'm not sure I know the exact answers to the second two. So with regards to Dry Creek and sort of the what you're seeing visually out there on the as part of the projects. Yeah, it doesn't when the projects are completed, it doesn't look very natural as I think the word you used, Brenda, in terms of appearance, however, we, for example, took some folks out to the site that was constructed. Well, it was one of the first sites that was constructed, the one closest to Warm Springs Dam on Dry Creek. And honestly, one of the reasons we took some folks out there was because you can't even tell that the project occurred out there. And then we took them down to one of the construction sites so that they could see, you know, the difference between the two. So when those projects start to grow back in and that happens really rapidly on Dry Creek because of the source of water, the vegetation grows back really quickly. It really does look very, very natural once the vegetation has grown back in. But it's not just natural looking. There's also a lot of structure to it to keep it in place. And that's the whole purpose of all those large logs, the ones both vertical as well as horizontal that you see being laid in the projects. So I assure you the after photos, even just a couple of years later, look far different from those photos that you're seeing in the update that we distributed with the agenda today. So as far as the fish flow, environmental impact report goes, I believe that the comments that were received really are being addressed as part of the recirculated direct environmental impact report. It wouldn't make sense for us to, you know, revise, do a recirculated draft and not address those comments. So I believe that those comments are being addressed. If I am wrong about that, Brenda, I will let you know directly, but I believe that is the case. So I don't think that the effort that the public went through to create comments on the EIR was a waste of time at all. And many of those comments actually are going to help make it a better document. So and as the last thing on the biological assessment, and I don't know if Grant can hear me or not, but my understanding on the biological assessment is that there is no comment period. The biological assessment is for a consultation between ourselves and the resource agencies, not just Sonoma Water, but Sonoma Water, the core and the Mendocino County Blood Control District and the resource agencies. And I don't believe that there's like a not it's not like an environmental impact report process that has a specific comment period and that sort of thing laid out and statute. However, I'm sure once we're able to, we will provide biological assessment to the public. I don't know when that will be, but I'm sure that we will at that point. So Grant, I don't know if you want to add anything. I think that's how we've done it in prior years. It's about regulatory agencies assessment of our take coverage or not. So I think the water contractors need to know we're going to be arguing and articulating to get coverage for our entire operations. So I think what you characterize it is accurate. I don't think there's a requirement or process. So just know that we've got our best folks working on it and are going to strike the most efficient and effective take coverage we can get. It's worked well in the past and I'm expecting the same results this time. So does that mean we won't see it? See it after the regulatory community has issued the the opinion. I don't understand. So so sounds like and I think we've Brenda, we've we've asked these questions similarly in the past, but because this is a different process, we will see a final version of the document released that will have a chance to look at at that time. But we we recognize and appreciate that snow waters doing everything they can to make sure that they're protecting the interests of all of us to ensure that they have the appropriate take needed to protect the fish and continue to run their operation. So I think that's what I heard from both Pam and Grant. They're working very hard with those regulatory agencies to get this process completed. But it is a very different process than a in a typical public document that public process for a document that's being considered and adopted by a local agency. That's a fair statement. That helped Brenda. Um, well, I kind of understood that part. My part is, will the public get to see it? The final version? It'll be it'll be out to all of us. Okay. Thank you. Mm hmm. Any other? Um, any other public comment on this item? We do not have any more public comments on this item. All right. Thank you very much, Pam. Um, we are now moving on to item seven, which is the Potter Valley Project update. Um, Pam, is that you? Because I have in my notes that it's not so. I think that's an error. I'm happy to do it. I don't know who else you might have in there. Maybe we should have Matt do it. It says Dawn Seymour. Just for fun. Dawn was giving an update, but I think that was just an error. Unless you want to put Dawn on the spot. Um, well, Dawn can chime in if he needs to. Actually, Dawn had to leave at 9 30. So, um, anyways, um, so I'll just go ahead. So, um, I think everybody is aware of this, the schedule that PG Ne is on with regards to filing a surrender application and a decommissioning plan that's, uh, so about two years out now at this point. So, um, that's coming, but it's quite a ways out. I think the more interesting thing that has occurred probably since we last spoke is that, um, back in the spring time, uh, National Marine Fisheries Service filed some comments with, uh, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission with regards to operation, continuing operation of the Potter Valley Project. Um, and FERC, uh, issued an annual license for the project in the, in April when the license expired. And there's been a lot of discussion back and forth between PG Ne, National Marine Fisheries Service and FERC since then with regards to potentially, um, putting some new operating requirements, um, in that annual license, which is not typically done. Typically the annual license is just the same license being implemented until such time that either surrender or a new license is issued. And so, um, just, I don't remember the exact timeframe, but recently, I'm going to say, um, FERC issued, uh, a notice about a proceeding where they are considering reopening that annual license, um, or reopening that operating license. And so they have asked, it's a very formal proceeding, um, and they have asked, um, they've requested motions of intervene, of motions of intervention from interested parties who have, um, a stake as well as comments from parties about potentially reopening the existing license that PG Ne is operating under and including some, what we refer to as interim protective measures into, uh, that license, the operating license. So that, um, is going on right now. I believe that, uh, the timeframe to intervene, uh, and or file comments is, uh, next week. I don't remember the exact date, but, um, it's the middle of the month. So, um, that, that's what's going on right now. Um, snow and water will be intervening. I don't know if we're going to make a lot of comments at this point, but we will be, uh, filing a motion to intervene just to make sure that we're part of whatever process happens moving forward. So essentially the bottom line is, is that, uh, FERC is thinking about potentially reopening the license and they're looking for input from other folks about that at this point. So, um, it, it doesn't appear that they've made up their mind. And so they're looking for, you know, just some, some information from folks as well as, you know, what a, what do other people think? So, um, so that's, that's where we're at on that. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Thanks, Pam. I will just note, um, because I have it in front of me that the comment deadline or the deadline to intervene is, um, December 16th. So next Friday, um, I will note for the TAC members and the public, um, we are following this closely and, um, we'll be pulling together a, um, ad hoc, uh, our WAC Potter Valley project ad hoc committee. Um, the intent is that we will be submitting comments from the WAC. Um, I don't believe as a body the WAC has standing to submit a motion to intervene, but we do want to submit comments as appropriate to represent, um, the interests of, uh, the water users in this area. Um, so, uh, I wanted to make sure that everyone is aware that that is occurring. You'll see, uh, some draft comments, uh, soon, uh, but it is due a week, um, a week from Friday, so December 16th. Are there any questions or comments from members of the TAC on this item? All right, seeing none. Pam, I do have a question that you probably do not have an answer to, but I figured I'd ask it anyways. Do we have a sense of once this, um, meeting occurs, comments are received, motions to intervene are filed? There's not going to be, it's my understanding, and maybe I'm wrong, that there's not going to be a decision necessarily by FERC at this meeting, or, or the, sorry, by the comment deadline. Do we have a sense of what the process is going to look like? And when they make, make a decision about whether or not they are going to go through, uh, opening this license? Um, I can, I can picture what the process is, and let me see if I can explain it. I don't know the timeline though. So, um, essentially what is, this is my understanding, and it may not be completely accurate. So please, you know, take it with a grain of salt, um, that once FERC gets, um, the comments and the motions, um, they will, um, be talking to those folks who they do feel havestanding, right? So they'll start a proceeding at that point. Um, if they, I, they will probably have a hearing if they decide to move forward with it. Um, and those folks who have, who are part of the intervention, I think would participate in that hearing. Um, I, again, I don't know timeline at all, but if, if at the end of that process, they decide to reopen the permit, um, the license, sorry, not the permit, the license, um, they would go through a formal consultation process with the, with the resource agencies. And, um, I, I assume they would develop along with the resource agencies as well as the tribes. Uh, they would develop license terms or conditions that they would be looking at, um, including in a re, a re, a reopened license. And, um, so once they had those, then I believe what they would have to do is actually do, uh, an environmental review process, a NEPA process for those, whatever those changes are. Um, so that could be a very long process, um, between the consultation, the formal consultation itself with the resource agencies and the tribes. And then, um, going through an environmental review process, it could be quite, uh, quite some time before they actually adopt a new order or new license or the project or revised license, I guess I'll call it. Um, so I don't think any of this is going to happen really fast if they do decide to reopen it. Um, but we are definitely interested in, um, you know, there, there are things that could be helpful if they, helpful for us and helpful for the Russian River watershed if they reopen the license. So that's one of the reasons why we are really going to pay attention to the process. So Thanks Pam. That's, that's helpful and I appreciate, I recognize that, you know, you're, you're not, uh, with FERC, nor representing or any ways, but, um, appreciate just an overview of process. I think that's helpful. Um, do you, you know, so it's, so it kind of sounds like it's almost like a smaller version of the relicensing effort, right? Yeah, that's the way, at least based on, um, what our attorney has told us, that's the way I interpret it also. Yeah. Okay. So there could be required studies or things that PG&E might have to do if, if they do move forward with this process. It seems like there'd have to be, um, if there's work needed for the environmental review process, the need for process. Yeah, I could see how they might have to do some, I don't know if I'd call them studies or not, but some analysis. Yeah. Got it. And, um, yeah. So, okay. All right. Appreciate it. Any other questions or comments from tech members before we open this up to public comment? All right, seeing none, uh, we will now open up for public comment on item seven. If you're on the meeting on Zoom and would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. If you're on the phone, dial star nine. And Secretary Ledesma, do we have any public comment on this item? We do not have any raised hands on this item. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you, Pam. Appreciate the update. All right. We will now move on to item number eight, which is the, um, government affairs update and Brad Sherwood with Sonoma Water will be presenting this item. Good morning. Hope everyone had a nice weekend. Uh, in addition to your written report, I wanted to add that the North Bay Watershed Association met last Friday. And as you know, Chairman Jack Gibson from Marin Municipal Water District, uh, has served that organization as chair for 22 years. And last Friday was his last board meeting as chair. So at the January 6th meeting, a new chair and vice chair will be selected. So I give everyone a heads up in case any one of your elected officials who attend MBWA are interested. Uh, they will be selecting the chair and vice chair on January 6th. Uh, Damon Conley is now course in the assembly. So that vice chair position opens up, um, as well. So, uh, some leadership change at the MBWA level. And thank you to Marin Municipal Water District for, um, leading us through the last 22 years, uh, as chair. So we'll continue with new leadership soon and continue the progress. Wanted to also update you all on our strategic plan, which many of you have helped out on. We will be doing a public rollout of that plan in January. We are doing a soft rollout to our employees this month, and I will be including you all in that. So as soon as we have our document finalized within the next few weeks, we'll send that out to the tack. Um, you did help us develop this plan. So we thank you tremendously for your input and help. Our Dale Roberts is heading down to the east bay for a few days this week to help get one of, uh, several radars installed at the Rocky Ridge Mountain. He is going to be up there with a big crane getting the most state of the art radar up and going. Uh, with this radar unit, we'll cover the Oakland area specifically and be part of our overall advanced quantitative precipitation radar system. So we'll have some exciting videos and pictures coming from that installation, which we've been trying to get this puppy installed for several years. So this is very exciting news to share. On the state legislative fronts, uh, as my report indicates, we're looking at some Rocky Road ahead of us, budget related. So we'd love to reach out to our our tack and whack members and plan a Sacramento visit in January or early February. It would be great to take a delegation of our whack and tack to Sacramento. There is a whole bunch of new members in Sacramento. There's also been some shifting of staff amongst committees. So, uh, myself along with, uh, if you haven't met him yet, you will. We have two new interns. Uh, Robert Rogers is, uh, based here in Santa Rosa, and he'll be helping coordinate the Sacramento visit with us. And then we also have a government affairs intern, Lindsey Cain, who's actually based down in UCLA. So I call that our Southern California government affairs office. And she actually will be attending some, uh, Southern California aqua meetings for us and turn working with our federal affairs team. But so stay tuned. We'll be sitting out in coordination email to tack members to coordinate a Sacramento tour, uh, coming in January, February. On the federal side, just briefly, Congress is still working on the omnibus spending bill still being negotiated. The current CR is expected to once again get extended, most likely to December 23rd. So all of the different appropriation items that we have on our written report, our federal team is still advocating to ensure those stick in the omnibus spending bill for the president decide once Congress gets through all their negotiations. Uh, lastly on our, on the community engagement side, we are going to be developing an infrastructure outreach campaign for 2023. This is going to be spearheaded by directors Gore and rabbit and Andrea Rodriguez on our communications team will be helping put that together. Once again, we would like to have that be a collaborative approach with our whack and tack to discuss and reach out to the public on the need for funding aging infrastructure. And on that note, we just wrapped up a great tour. Tony, thank you so much for bringing the North Marin team up. Uh, we've got a behind the scenes tour. We got up on top of the Qatadi tanks right before the rain started. It was cold, but it was a good tour and we look forward to having everyone else schedule your tour with us. We've got Windsor. We're working with Windsor getting the Windsor scheduled. We've got Santa Rosa coming up this Thursday. And then we also have the alliances water supply committee scheduled for later in mid December. So we're making the rounds, folks, and we're trying to make the case, of course, with the help of David Royal and Emma Walton on our team for the need for continued infrastructure investment. So, uh, so far so good. And we're also going to be sending out some updated talking points to you all later today on the impact of the rainfall on our water supply conditions. You heard Don give a brief update, but we want to make sure that you can forward some detailed talking points to your official because you all know the media cycle. Everyone's probably going to get a call from your local newspaper asking how the rain has helped the drought. So stay tuned for those talking points from Andrea Rodriguez. And if you have anyone you know in the safety world, we're looking for a good safety analyst. We have a brand new safety and security program that you'll see in the upcoming proposed budget. And we are looking to actually get a coordinator and analyst full time here at Snowmawater to make sure our water supply infrastructure facilities are are safe and secure 24 seven. So we just sent out a recruitment effort. It's on our website. Uh, please let us know if you know of anyone who may be interested. We're looking for someone good for that one, of course. So that, I think, concludes. And if you have any questions, let me know. And we're always here to available for any questions afterwards. Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you, Brad, for that update. Are there any questions or comments from members of the TAC? Yeah, Tony Williams, Northburn Water District. I want to just again thank Brad for coordinating our tour. Please thank Kent Guilty and all the operations team folks who accompanied us on that tour. A lot of good buzz when we were driving back to to Marin County. And I know that I want to get my board back up there in the future to see what we saw. And again, a big thanks to Snowmawater for for organizing that. It was great. Great. Thanks, Tony. Any other questions or comments? Brad, I did have a question on the infrastructure campaign. Just like I'm guessing a number of us have done similar campaigns in the past. I know Santa Rosa, we have our value of water campaign that focuses on our infrastructure, but we're also looking to leverage the Quench California campaign from Ottawa. So I just want to sort of make a suggestion, I guess, for whatever we can do to leverage what's already existing and not spend a lot of effort to recreate something would be quite. So just putting that out there. Are you guys are you guys looking at Quench and how you can use that for this campaign? Yeah, we'll definitely leverage the the Ottawa communications programs. But we also need to make this as localized as possible, right? So it's kind of got it's a two-edged sort here. We want to talk about our aging infrastructure, but we also need to remind folks where they get their water from at the same time. So it's going to be both an education program and also a well, here's how you get your water, but oh, it's at the end of its life. So let's make sure we continue to deliver that safe, reliable water. And here's how you can help. So yes, we will leverage every opportunity. It will be the most cost-efficient public outreach messaging campaign you have ever seen come from Snowmawater, my friends. So stay tuned. Okay, well, keep us keep us in the loop on that, because if there's ways that we can be efficient with what's already been developed, I know at least for Santa Rosa, we're very interested because we have a similar campaign. So we will make sure and I'm guessing that with Andreas on the phone here, you know, the most likely we're going to develop a panel of folks here from the TAC as we develop this and implement it. So everyone will be on board when we do this. All right. Any other questions or comments from the TAC before we open for public comments? All right. Seeing none, we are now taking public comment on item 8. If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand. If you're on the phone, dial star 9 if you'd like to comment. And Secretary Ledesma, do we have any comments on this item? We do not have any comments on this item. All right. Thank you very much, Brad. Appreciate the update. We are now on to item number nine, which is our items for next agenda. Anything in particular that folks are anticipating or would like to see? One thing I will just remind all as we've just gone through elections, if you've had any changes happening either for your WAC or TAC members, sooner you can let us know. We'd appreciate it. We do have a WAC meeting in February. We will coordinate with Sonoma Water to ensure that we have orientation materials for any new members. But just please let us know if there's any changes taking place for either TAC or WAC members as soon as you can. And then we'll have our standard information as well as I think we'll have a start. Yeah, we'll have our standard information on our next agenda. All right. Any questions or comments from the TAC? Seeing none, we'll open up for public comment. If you would like to make public comment on item nine and you're on the meeting, please raise your hand. If you're on the phone dial star nine. And Secretary Ledesma, do we have any public comment on this item? We do not have any public comments on this item. All right, excellent. And we will adjourn at 10.03. Thank you all. Let's hope we see a lot more rain this coming weeks. Have a great Monday. Thanks, everyone.