 just a minute or so late anyway welcome everybody tonight I want to first let people know that there's a road closure on Highway 9 at Brookdale slide that will commence at 10 o'clock so in order to get everybody out of here in time to get home and leave nobody stranded here in the north part of the valley we're going to aim for a 930 hard end of the meeting so I'm going to rearrange some of the items on the agenda in the orders that I think it's absolutely necessary to get those addressed and hopefully we'll get through the whole agenda we've got three hours to do that and I don't think that's terribly unrealistic either but but the order of the items on the agenda will reflect necessity so prioritize them in what I think is an appropriate order so anyway first before we get started on the open session agenda we'd like to report out one statement from closed session and that is regarding the public employee performance evaluation and that so I'm going to read this statement that's we prepared and that is regarding agenda item number for a district manager review no action or discussion took place during tonight's closed session during oh yeah this is item 4e on the closed session agenda so I'll start again regarding agenda item number 4e district manager review no action or discussion took place during tonight's closed session due to limited time available a limited time available and a packed agenda in order to move the review process forward the board would like to schedule a special meeting in the near future for this purpose may 31st has been proposed subject to coordination with district staff so we'll be coming back to the district manager's review in something like a couple of weeks so at this time I will convene to open session and we will our last staff whether there are any additions or deletions to open session agenda okay seeing none then I'll open it up to all communications and this is the portion of the agenda that's reserved for item or communication from the public for items that are not on tonight's agenda and in consideration of our time constraints this evening I hope people will remember that and we'll be able to get through tonight's agenda so if anybody would like to comment on anything that's not on tonight's agenda and I have one speaker slip from Miss Henry who can speak first so President Bobman is it your intent to strictly enforce the three-minute limit for this or communication in Randall Brown's manuscript on page 97 he writes Henry a former credit union CEO quickly familiarized herself with the district's financial situation instead of waiting for a government check the Long Pico board used reserve funds to pay for fixing the Lake Boulevard main causing a cash crunch water sales were down and employee costs were up resulting in a two-year deficit of a hundred and seventy one thousand the loss emptied the reserves and capital improvement accounts reported the local paper probably a blog the main water main on Lake Boulevard was fixed in 2011 in the grand jury report of May 2010 on Long Pico it says a healthy water district would pull money from its capital improvement fund or reserve fund to address the financial challenges but Long Pico water district had no money and either fund nor does it have the realistic capacity to attract new sources of funding such as bonds or loans and then on page 100 he states after many negotiations with FEMA officials agreed to contribute enough money to cover the estimated fifty thousand dollar Lake Boulevard main replacement well this is when SLB stepped in here's the contract Jim Euler Rick Rogers volunteered to oversee the project and they didn't own us thirty thousand dollars and the project was finished April 25 2011 and we submitted a claim to FEMA for sixty thousand dollars the other thing that he's an upper back to page 98 where Randall Brown says that it was decided that Lois Henry had a conflict of interest this was in 2009 well I didn't have a conflict of interest Randall Brown puts that in there but anybody could go to the FPPC site and see I did not have a conflict of interest and so errors or was that deliberate I have no idea the other thing that he doesn't talk about is that Long Pico was commended for taking hard steps to improve our situation in Long Pico and it's a big bold and he lives out now thank you thank you there's no one I've been coming to the board for the last two years in June 1st it will be a two-year anniversary I want people joining us it's not a very good anniversary celebration right now because I keep asking about where's the progress on our CIP program it was originally all supposed to be done in five years we're on year two now these are very important CIP projects for public health and safety and also the district has a contractual obligation I asked for this to be put on the agenda specifically last month or this month so that we can really resolve this you have a workshop do something going over what needs to be done much like your ad hoc committee is doing and in fact I think the problems that are holding up the Long Pico projects are exactly the same problems the district is now looking at for the entire CIP project so this is no longer considered a Long Pico problem according to a Gantt chart that the district manager gave us in February 2017 by June 2018 in a couple weeks the Lewis tank should be 65% complete the lateral should be 40% complete that's 200 out of 500 levels the PRV should be 50% complete that's four out of the eight the interconnection should be 90% completed and the SCADA 20% completed what we have instead are some meters replaced and $13,000 with the laterals replaced and the temporary stated we have not had these projects addressed I went to Bill Smallman's lunchtime discussion on project management and I learned quite a lot and it was a little depressing to hear these projects are now over budget the reason they're over budget because of project management this board had an obligation to use the assessment money to the best of its spending ability every moment you wait these projects get more expensive even the list that I gave you on what should be done by now was a 10-year schedule not a 5-year schedule we are nowhere near a 5-year original schedule we are way past way overdue on a 10-year schedule I have friends Boulder Creek Belton and Lohman that are following this and saying you know Debbie none of these projects are going to be done that's the realistic here thank you would anybody else like to speak in general or else I don't see anybody's hand up so I'll close out communications and we'll move on to the regular agenda in order to expedite tonight's agenda so that nothing that is critical needs to get done this evening is left unaddressed the first item they're going to take up is actually the unfinished business item item 10 a which is the on people assessment district oversight committee applications and is there any staff discussion on this or shall we from the item in the the packet so I don't see staff coming in on this so let me read the so I'll read what the recommendation okay is on this item and that is at the last meeting the board of directors was unable to choose a replacement to the open position on the committee in the interim John Grunow has resigned from the latter committee and Lois Henry moved removed her application from the committee replacement process that leaves two open space spaces and two applicants it is recommended that the board review this memo and Andrew Rippert and Marianne LaVolvo to the committee so when anybody in the I'll first open it up to the public if anybody would like to speak on this this is your opportunity to do so I know that Mary Anne would be a good addition to your committee I would just hope that the new people on the committee would read up on what an oversight committee is supposed to do the reason the committee we have the committee is because people in Long Pico said to me you can't trust SLD I said that's ridiculous well I really need to apologize to the committee should be reporting to the Long Pico community what's being done by SLD not be given a financial report that is then filed and never sees the life day thank you would anybody else from the public like to speak on this I'm a member of the oversight committee and I mean neck with Marianne in previous meetings and my impression of Andrew from the last discussion on this topic I think both would be wonderful additions to the committee thank you any other members of the public would like to speak on this if you can come up to the okay the lectern so that it helps with the recording of the audio for the meeting thank you I'm Marianne and I've lived in the Long Pico 14 years I think I went one was not here last meeting and I've gone to many multiple meetings at the Long Pico water board and look forward to working with this team but on the time that you had done the last time voting I missed it because I was sick and so because I had been postponed so I'm here now again and hoping for this and then I work for the county of Santa Cruz for the Department of Public Works and I'm a supervisor of the camp's payable department and I currently do a lot of the reviewing of contracts and putting them into our system at this time and understanding the process and you know contracts and all that kind of understanding of projects and have a lot of people there that understand projects and I would hope to be able to help with Excel and many of the financial things I would help them with so hopefully I guess I get the vote I'm not sure but thank you thank you anybody else from the public like to speak on this I don't see anybody with hands up so I'm going to close that oral communications and bring it back to the board any I just want to say that you know we only have two openings and two applicants but I think these are excellent applicants and you know it's we're we're lucky to get people who are interested in serving and who have such excellent qualifications it's something that anybody is is potentially qualified to do but just means that they're going to be able to get up to speed maybe a little bit faster so I think that's that we're we're very fortunate to have community members who are willing to serve so thank you for all the folks who want to be and who are committee members your services sincerely appreciated okay and I agree thank you Mary Mary Ann okay for coming both evenings and Andrew was has an impressive resume and was pleased to see him applying and given that we have two openings and who seem to be too very qualified candidates I'd entertain a motion I would move approval of both applicants for both positions okay any further board discussion okay I don't see any so call the vote all those in favor I any opposed so welcome I don't have I don't have on my right now Nick that's coming Tuesday okay very well so hope every ready can make it that evening so let's move on now to the actual new business agenda and the the newly revised order okay of that is that we first want to address item 9b which is the Santa Maria groundwater basin about water patient agency okay do you want to do because the person here for I don't use this here yeah well I kind of want to follow my list and I don't think you're I think you're a point your appointment won't take a lot of time we'll get to the next item on there so let me get back to so let me read and it's going to take me a little bit of paging through this since we've completely upset the order of this stuff tonight so so the subject of this is the Santa Margarita groundwater agency alternate representative and by the way the Santa Margarita groundwater agency is the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act mandated body for the aquifer that we share with Scott's Valley and Scott's Valley Water District and the County of Santa Cruz so the recommendation in this item is that the board review this memo and replace Director Eric Hammer as the alternate representative representative to the Santa Margarita Groundwater Advisory Committee with Director Margaret Bruce so again I'll open it up to public comment at this time would anybody like to comment on this appointment I really understand what this has been. I read in the minutes for March that Director Hammer, Vice President Hammer, would be missing an action for three months. I think this is the third month so he'll be back next month according to whatever it is. And the next meeting of the GSA is after that it's the end of June. So I don't see that there used to be any alternate with Vice President Hammer coming back. It doesn't really matter that much whether you have an appointment because you have two board members. If two board members attend all the meetings, you really don't need an alternate at all. So usually these appointments are made at the beginning of the year and they're last for one year. And I don't understand why there's been a change right now. It seems like some sort of a power play because Vice President Hammer is not here. So what's the story? Is he not coming back? Or just because he's gone for three months and he's going to be back next month all of a sudden he has to be removed from being an alternate on the GSA. I don't understand the purpose of this. And I don't understand where Director Hammer is or what the status is of him. But if he's going for good, I understand this. If he's coming back next month, I don't understand why you're bothering to take up time right now. Would anybody else like to comment on this item? Yes, I'm a little unclear. You said that the recommendation was to appoint Margaret Bruce to this. Correct. And I'm wondering who made that recommendation and when was that done? Was this open to all other board members? There is another board member seated that could also go to these meetings. Has he been asked and declined it? I'm just wondering who's making these decisions that are not in board meetings where we get to see the process of deliberation. Appropriate. The board policy manual calls out that it's the board president. That makes recommendations for all committee appointments. And those are not fully, that's not a round robin table discussion during that process. The president in that situation brings recommendations to the board which the board can then consider and decide to ratify or do something different. So this is very similar to that for the groundwater agency. And it's a recommendation being brought. The board can now discuss it based upon your input and decide whether or not this is a good appointment to make. So this is in line with the other procedures, how other committees are handled, and your concerns about anybody's concerns can be expressed during this meeting at this time. So would anybody else like to comment on this appointment? I've been going to the Santa Margarita Basin meetings. And thank you, President Buckman, for finally answering a question. We ask questions, you write it down. You go to Santa Margarita Basin thing, the fellow who's a chair, he always answers questions. And I would appreciate if you follow this example. It's not against the Brown amendment. Thank you. And I'll comment that there was a clarification at the last Santa Margarita groundwater basin agencies meeting in which the parameters under which how much comment can be made and how much of a discussion and what the nature of that discussion can be at that time. It can't be fully discussed, but a brief informational response and enough discussion to decide whether to agendize the item for the basic parameters of what can be discussed in response to oral communications. Could you answer Bruce Halloway's question? He wants to know why if Eric Cameron is coming back next month, why you're appointing Margaret as an alternate replacement. So please answer Mr. Halloway's question. I'm not going to discuss Eric Cameron tonight. Eric Cameron's, okay, non-presence due to a sickness, okay, that was announced several months ago, still stands. So I think it would be inappropriate to discuss that. Tonight's discussion is about who to appoint and who would be an appropriate position, person to hold that position at this time. Anybody else like to comment on this item? Okay, I don't see anybody else with their hand up. So I'll close out oral communications in this item and bring it back to the board. Would anybody on the board like to weigh in on this appointment? I think it's an appropriate appointment and I do think, I do notice that the other member agencies, their alternates do attend meetings. So they don't all attend every meeting, but I think it's a way of keeping the alternates up to speed on the progress of the business of the agency. I think that's useful. So I do see the point in having an alternate and I definitely think this is a multi-agency body. It's very important for the sows of our district within that agency to have good representation and people who are up to speed and know what's going on because it's a very large and complex body. I think having an alternate is very useful and so that's basically in response to the question of why is an alternate needed. I believe it's to protect the rights of our district with respect to the rights of the other members of the agency. It's important to have all board members and the alternate up to speed in the case of absence. We need to have a vote taken so I think it's very useful. For clarification on that, the Groundwater Sustainability Agency is comprised of two representatives from three member agencies, the two water districts, Scotts Valley Water District ourselves and the county. So if we have only one person, if one of the designated members sitting on that joint powers authority that forms the Groundwater Sustainability Agency is not present, we're shy of a vote on that body. And there could be no discussion, there would be less discussion from the viewpoint of our district if we had only one person at one of those meetings. So it's important that an alternate sit in on those meetings and be prepared to be a participant in it should the regularly designated person not be able to make that. So this is a way to make sure that this happens in a very thorough manner and you're happy to do it. And speaking for myself, I'm willing to serve, have some background in groundwater issues, have background prior to the San Lorenzo Valley Water District Board serving on the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Commission. And specifically for tickets only, it doesn't include any other sorts of gifts. This is a special form attached that we have to fill out if anyone from the board or staff is required to produce a form 700. But other than that, it doesn't apply to the rank file, it's just those that have the file form 700 and we have to do the form. The district has to provide a form 802. I did make some edits to the policy based on my reading of the Political Reform Act. And I believe that the recording requirement is actually way more broad than just form 700 filers. But there's different, there's more limited information that has to be provided for an employee who's not form 700 filer. But so I went through and compared it to the Political Reform Act language. You made some tweaks that you may not have been aware of. I was probably just saying cross-eyed at that point. I want to make sure you're aware that it is a little more broad. Yeah, that's helpful. And this is being encouraged by CSDA or? CSDA and CSDA. I mean I didn't, I read the list of those circumstances under which this might get used and it did seem like worthy, okay, situation. So this seems reasonable to me, but if we've made a motion we would need to make a motion that it would be approved as with some necessary changes as. Oh, no, I already made the changes. It was set to me for review just before it went into the board packet and I made the changes. So it would just require approval of the resolution adopting the policy as written. Any public comment on this? Ms. Lohan? Okay. I'm confused. I saw a hand from you. Not about your coming. You want to do that? That's fine. It doesn't matter where we do it. It's okay, go ahead. It's okay with me too. If you want to speak, speak now. Gee, thanks. I guess the policy is written is what's in the board packet and I guess what I'm hearing is that the book has been changed. So I'm confused. What are you going to vote on? Are you going to vote on what's in the board packet? Yes. The changes have been implemented in this. The changes are in there already? Yes. Yes, that's correct. All right. So, okay, some of the particulars here I'm a little confused about. So if a firefighter gets four tickets to Disneyland, you know, this would be a different kind of special district like BC, FPD. Does that mean it's going to show up as taxable income on that firefighter's income tax? Is that what that said in there? That the firefighter gets, he gets all these tickets for Disneyland, but it's going to be on his income tax. President Barnard, I could respond if you want me to respond now or at the end of public comment. I think this is fine. No, it's not taxable income. This policy, there is an exception to this policy that exists. If a ticket is treated as taxable income, then this policy does not apply. But this policy does apply when a ticket tickets are provided or obtained by the district. And then the district wishes to give them to employees or board members, et cetera. Then there are certain reporting requirements that go with that if they're not reported as taxable income. I thought I saw something in that packet about taxable income. Is there a board packet? So I guess my next question is about the et cetera that you just said. The policy seemed to say that the district gets to decide how to distribute these. They may be distributed to contractors that was in there. It was in the packet. And it says the district will do it. So I assume that will be the district manager will decide who gets the tickets. Will he give them to his friends as well as contractors? Is there any limitation on giving them to your friends? And I apologize. I don't recall what permits the district to give the tickets to contractors. Can you give me a minute to look it up here? What's the item number? 9-8. 9-8. It begins on page 7 of the packet. I'm pretty sure I saw contractors in here. I could take public input from somebody else and come back to you. Now, I had a completely different impression. And June and maybe I'll direct my question to the chair, but maybe the attorney chair to answer the question. I assumed this had to do with the Valley Women's Club and that this district voted to give Valley Women's Club free water and to supply $1,500 worth of items for a music festival that's upcoming in June. And in exchange, in the letter from the Valley Women's Club, they said, if you appear and we will give you free tickets to go to the show. So how does that apply? And I assumed this was to handle that kind of problem because that really does seem like a conflict of interest. If the board votes for something, they're giving free tickets as to employees. It didn't specify to everyone in the district as free tickets. Is it one per? Do each of the board members get two free tickets? Do they get one? What is the value of it? And how does that affect the decision of the board to approve that? And will this policy cover things like that? Thank you. Okay, and I saw that Ms. Morrison wanted to provide a response. I know the answer to that. And the board is not offering tickets, just employees are offering tickets. But she said it also would affect rank and file as well. But yeah, that could very well be. But there's a cap of $50. A cap of $50 for it to be considered a gift isn't there a $50 rule? Or if it's less than $50, it's not affordable? I don't know, in that level of, that's not addressed in the policy, that may be pursuant to the political format. For those who are political format filers, there is a cap of $50 or more. This policy, if it's adopted, would apply to situations like where the Valley Women's Club provides tickets to the district. If the district then wishes to distribute them to board members and employees, et cetera, it would have to follow this policy in doing so in order to make sure that any one of the number of complications that could be related to this don't arise, including income tax consequences, conflict of interest consequences, et cetera. It provides a vehicle for the district to be able to distribute those tickets without triggering a number of various legal... Is this cleaning up something? In the past, there have been tickets made of... As long as I've been here, they have offered tickets to staff. Maybe we just send them a name and that person can go into the shelter. They have a list of employees. Yeah, it includes consultants. It's in Section 82040. Yeah. It's in the definition of district official. It could be a consultant, which would be a contractor. Is this in the memo for your report? I'm quoting from Government Code Section 82048, which is the definition of district official to include every member, officer, employee, or consultant of a local government agency. Right, and I didn't recall that. We took the definition out of the... So that would be people like Randall Brown, former president Randall Brown, former president Fred McPherson. They're all district officials because they're consultants within the last 12 months. And then there's the immediate family, too. So I guess I was just trying to clarify, can the district manager give these to his friends? Can he give them to board members? Can he give them to former board members? Can he give them to contractors? Give them to a immediate family of employees? Who else? Okay. Anybody else in the public want to comment on this item before we close out the world? Okay. I don't see any. So back to us. Any... I'll let others go first. In this. Well, I'm glad that Council had a look at it and did a little tweaking because whenever we get these suggested formats from CSDA, it's very helpful, I think, but it's nice to have... It modified to fit our district specifically, so I think that's useful. Any input from staff? Any about... Have we ever run up against people offering? In the past, it's been about... It was the first to start with employees that went out and volunteered to work but the water was never really left unattended because in case there was issues, but it started with just a couple of employees that were working, you know, a couple of weeks from their family and it grew to any of the district employees and they maintained the name on the list. It's never been outside of the immediate district employees that I know of. I've sort of never been offered a free ticket. Yeah, I don't know anything. It's not 100% but a few of them would be taking advantage of it. I think it's helpful to have a clarifying policy so that we're transparent and clear about disclosing any gifts or any kinds of tax implications for an answer otherwise. And no one employee or manager or management or employee I know has given out the tickets, you know. It's pretty much anybody who want could get a ticket to go if you want to go. Frankly, I'm disinclined on this. I don't think it is something that would be abused. It's not impossible perhaps. This policy may be more trouble than it's worth. So it's well-intentioned. But again, it's reactive rather than, it's reacting to a specific situation that happened in another district. I don't know if that's, you know, if it's recommended because they anticipate this could happen to other special districts and it's good to have it already in the policy manual or if it's superfluous. Or are we heading something off the pass? You know, do we see this as, are there concerned, is SDRMA concerned if we don't have such a policy for our, SDRMA is our insurance and sort of liability? I guess my question is if the district were to receive tickets and give it out, do we have to fill out a form 802 irregardless of if we have a policy or not? We don't receive tickets. I mean that's the thing, we could. I mean there's a catastrophe and Disneyland says all California Water District employees give a Disneyland ticket. Would we have to fill out a form 802 irregardless? I believe that the law requires that there be a policy like this in place in order to distribute tickets in this way. And I think I could find the citation in there somewhere. So if we need one and we don't have one, here is the appropriate language. My suggestion is it's a bit bureaucratic and that's, and it puts, you know, discretion in the hands of the district manager to distribute the tickets, to pursue into a policy that provides protections to the district, when and if it chooses to distribute tickets in this way and works and done. So I would encourage you to consider it. I would be inclined, if we're going to consider something like this, I would be inclined to want to have some restrictions internally as to who would be appropriate recipients for it. I don't think board members should be eligible for this. And as hardworking as staff, senior staff is, I'm not sure they should be either. I'd like for this to be thought about a little more than tonight to see whether this is wise and whether we would want to tighten up at least the eligibility. Exclude form 700 filers. Right. Essentially. Yeah. Right. How do you include district manager? District manager is a, I think form 700 filer. Yes. I think the urgency is we're seeing it ties as the fair is coming up. It's coming up very shortly in the first week of June. I mean, so what is the district starts to do, reject an offer of tickets? If you don't have something. Well, they can file. If you're giving them to non form 700 filing individuals, I think the important thing would be that we need to look into whether they should be treated as income. And I'm not sure without taking a look whether that's like this. Some places they consider free parking income. Some places parking is income. That's right. Given that there is a little bit of a sense of urgency to make sure that whatever is coming up with the water districts relationship with the Redwood Mountain Fair, just tossing out the straw man here. What if we were to approve this policy and ask to have this policy brought back for further consideration out of future date, or have this policy run through the admin committee as we are also in the process of reconciling a number of policy matters in the policy handle. I think it'd be appropriate for it to go to the admin committee. I think it's appropriate to go to the admin committee. What is the timing of that? I don't have a calendar in front of me. The Redwood Mountain Fair is next week? Two weeks? It's before the next meeting. So we're not going to be able to? Which is why to have a policy in place to safeguard the district's interests as this upcoming event occurs and then agendize this for discussion at a subsequent board meeting for potential modification. We want to make sure that staff's concerns about and legal counsel's concerns about we should have a policy in place. If we do not currently have an adequate policy in place, we should have one. We can honor that. It's sage advice. Placeholder policy. A placeholder policy. Tinker with it and improve it. In the past, receipt tickets, tickets have only gone to... Of course I know, yes. No super... Just direct. Direct staff. No consultants. I believe there's a name list of the gates. There's no tickets. The name of all the district staff. Are there? Correct. But it is a value in kind, if you will. I think this year staff asked for tickets. They wouldn't have to go through that hassle at the gate of the clipboard because it always seems to be someone or something trying to find their name on the clipboard and finding someone who knows nothing but one. Thank you. Whether there are physical tickets is what we want. Yeah, that's not the issue. It's the free admission. It's the granting of the pass. A suggestion. This policy could be adopted while in conjunction with the Board placing a limitation on who gets the tickets for the upcoming fair. I would go along with that as long as they were even non-supervised. I don't know, would it not be fair to have the... All non-Form 700 filers. Pardon? Are you thinking anybody who is a non-Form 700 filer? Well that's one alternative and the other is just for somebody who isn't even a supervisor. Is that too... Form 700, we're already required to file certain documents depending on what we get, but we get free tickets to the Disneyland or a baseball game or even meals that are overvalued. I think those people are covered on my mistake. Well this provides of... Having this policy clarifies what the reporting requirement is for those types of tickets and how it can be satisfied by the district filing the form instead of individual forms. But yes, you're right. If a ticket is given to a Form 700 filer they can handle their own compliance without this policy in place. And are required to. If we receive something taken. When something is giving blanket across for all district employees I personally don't see the point limiting it if it's clear that it's the opportunities for all. Because like Rick's saying if you were to do something that would deem him to have to file something because he's a Form 700 filer he would have to do that here in our office. Tickets to a baseball game or something like that. I think that's what this specifically for tickets only is saying that you don't have to do. The district has to file an 802 I think is a known on the farm. Of course, tickets only. This is specific. Not meals, not parking nothing else just for tickets only. This clarifies the Form 700 filers can comply with the rules without this policy in place. This policy simply provides a different vehicle with a single streamlined form for both 700 filers and other staff. Warriors playoff game. And non 700 filers if they receive a gift or theoretically obligated to report it as income for a ticket if you use the form 802 for the 700 filers for a, okay you don't need to report it on the 700 and it gets reported via the 802. But for the non 700 filers who is it applicable? Okay. I'm not following it can be considered as a reportable income. There's no change in this in that case, right? This is no change for people who are non 700 filers. This is only a change for 700. This policy allows non 700 filers to receive the tickets as a gift rather than as reportable income without triggering because in order for it to be a gift in order for them to receive the gift and be handled under the correct section of the political reform act even though they're just staff members the political reform act has provisions that apply to distributing tickets as gifts to staff members as well as form 700 filers so this policy puts in place the vehicle to be able to give them the tickets as gifts without it being treated as taxable income and meeting the requirements of the political reform act. So I would do more public comment or are we done with public comment? Move on? I'll take public comment one more. If you could, would you mind using that? So Holly, okay. Just a quick question. How much are Redwood Mountain their tickets issue? I don't know. Nobody knows. 25 30 So board members don't get these tickets right? Okay. So is it only for employees or employees families? I mean for families? For families? Yeah. Because I had staff take the whole family. It's easy employees. Like family, not their whole family. Like their immediate family? Yeah, immediate family. Oh, not their other cousins. You relate it to some of the years? I'm trying to get it out. No. Southern California. Unfortunately. Okay, thank you. Okay. Yeah, I just wanted to say there's a paragraph here that says policy. The district manager shall have the authority in his or her sole discretion to establish procedures. And you were talking about various procedures. You know, is it a supervisor? Is it a Form 700 file, blah, blah, blah. I think it would be better if you work this out yourselves rather than giving the district manager the authority in his or her sole discretion. Thanks. Not really going back, I wasn't intended to go back for a full round of discussion, but anybody else like to comment on this? Okay. I don't see any, so we're done with opening the things from this. I'm not inclined to make a motion, but if somebody else is, I'm inclined to discuss it. Okay. I would move approval of resolution number 20 parenthetically 17-18 ticket distribution policy as written. You want to hear a second? I'll go for a voice vote first. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. Passes. Okay. That was longer. Okay. So let's move on to item 9c. This should be quite right. In fact, it's been at the budget finance committee a couple of times. This is getting the board a high level view of what the budget is shaping out to be. Kind of training. Get you as much involved now before we have a meeting next month for doing approval of the budget. Operating revenues are projected to be budgeted at about $10 million with operating expenses being just shy of $8 million. Non-operating revenue of 1.1 and non-operating expenses of roughly 1.1 as well. It results in a $2.1 million income that's anticipated to go towards funding the capital projects and the related debt that's going to be related to funding some of the other projects. For operating revenue, we base it on a 650,000 units of water sold, which is roughly what the prior three-year average was tracking around. We have been tracking higher than 650,000 units a year. But since we haven't had summer months yet we're later in this reiterating our stage to water emergency. People will see what the $10 per unit looks like in the summer months. I'm assuming some people were concerned based on that alum. We stay conservative with the 650,000 units. Operating expenses compared to the current year projected actuals is about half a million dollars. It's common to see operating expenses grow 3-5% each year due to inflation. This year there are two new higher requests in the budget. Project manager that we're looking to hire for hopefully the whole year. And then a water quality operator that they push out to be a Jan 1 hire as a way to save some money. Those positions were part of the staffing study that was done gosh two years ago now. So those are part of that overall study. Capital projects, we have about 6 million dollars projected in the fiscal year 1819 for capital projects. A little over 200,000 I believe should be reimbursed around 4 million will be coming from debt. That will be needed to take on here. And then the difference will be eaten up by the reserves that essentially that 2.1 income that we're having that's going to be a majority going towards the capital projects. And that has expected with the rate increase and the increased capital project plan. You know the slated rate increases factored in to go into effect the same time that it did last year. So all those different things are factored into this. Nothing too new increasing. I have a lot of questions. This is coming back to budget and finance. I think on the first right. So we'll have hopefully an average on June 1st the budget and finance meeting. We have a reschedule of the date so it's not at a normal time. It'll be on 6.1. And then in the past we've typically held a special board meeting to approve the budget. That way it can be a more lengthy in depth of people wanting to go into process. So I would suggest that we try and have that on June 11th through 12th. That way we can have a discussion if it's in a form that's ready to be approved great. If not that leaves a couple days to make any changes to get it on June 21st agenda. It sounds good to me. And especially since it's going to be back in budget and finance on the first I'm going to conserve some time here and move on to anything else. Any public comment on this? So the 1.8 million for the probation tank is in that budget and let's say you get the USDA loan do you know about what those payments would be? The USDA loan is tricky because you don't get the USDA loan until you complete all of the projects. I understand that. I have to get some sort of a bridge loan in between. I'm assuming we're going to need about $4 million in debt. So it'll probably somewhere around $600 ish thousand dollars. Okay. Scared my other question right out. I guess I can't remember my other question at the moment. Thank you. Think about it. You can email me. Okay, thank you. Anybody else? I don't see anybody else. I remember what it is. Go ahead. So when does the rate increase go into effect? Is it in October? It goes into effect October 1st for your 1st November 15th. So it's on the 1st billing. So it'll be the 11.5 bill and the 11.20 bills that go out for the 2nd. Thank you. Okay. Any other? I have one tiny question. Mobile services and these fees. I saw that too. I was wondering for that. It's revenue. We allow a couple places to put cell towers. Release agreements. We didn't use two and it went up by $1,900. Sorry, the estimated actuals will go up. That would be the type of... Okay. Okay. Anybody else? Any questions? Okay. Nothing to approve here. So let's move on to item 9D. Which is sort of a financial thing also. That's on page 23. So that's the first one. So okay. I'm glad we got to this. So this is kudos for Stephanie. Received the certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting. The district has received that from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada for our comprehensive annual financial report, the CAPR. Thank you. Thank you. We liked it. That sounds like they liked it too. I want to say that the quantity and quality of financial reporting has grown continuously since I've been on the board. I think we're moving into a CAPR version of the budget perhaps at some time. Not a CAPR version but the GFOA has... The financial report. But right next year I'm hoping to get their budgetary one. Excellent. Okay. Anybody else want to... Anyway, thank you again. Congratulations. And thank you. So 9F the Education Grants and that's on... That's what we're waiting for. I have a lot of materials that I would like to pass on. The spreadsheets of special budget. So we had Education Commission met on Friday evening. I have them over there. Yeah, they're over there. One dropped. Oh, you got it? Thank you. I knew there was another one. So give me a second to review. The first one that I'm handing out is the data collection grant. There were two applications. I'm just going to start talking about it. There were two applications for the data collection grant. I'll put these down for the next topic. Excuse me because there's so much paper. And because Friday night the information was not available for the agenda package. For a project to look at listen to Olympia watershed and how removal of invasive species would impact soil quality. So the endemic species on the sand hill habitat are adapted to very low nutrient in the soil. So the soil in broom or acacia takes over. Those are nitrogen fixers and they put nitrogen into the soil. So the middle school will be looking at how those invasive species have impacted soil quality. And then the second application was from a professor from UCSC who liked to look at how invasive species on the Olympia watershed impact soil moisture content and how that impacts recharge. So there's two different topics both looking at some nuance of soil quality on the Olympia watershed. This data collection restoration grant is specifically geared towards the Olympia watershed and research that can be conducted there. And so I think they both fit and the Education Commission met and discussed them and recommended both projects be awarded and that would bring the total budget for the data collection restoration grant is $15,000 and they were $5,000 each so it would be below budget for a total of $10,000. And then when you're ready we can move on to the watershed education grants as well and we can just we've bundled them together this year and we flew them both simultaneously and so we did them all at the same time so we have one resolution for all. I guess I might advance I hadn't thought about the idea that certain invasive plants might actually capture water rather than get it down to the aquifer and that's an interesting thought. And how they change the quality of the soil is really interesting. Do they have a vicious cycle? Do they self-perpetuate the changes? Interesting stuff. I don't think it's a worthwhile study to study something that we're trying to get rid of. I would rather than study something like like what I proposed about manual pooling possibly how it affects the endangered species with a much worthy study. Right, I think that what they propose is to kind of partner with the eradication effort so looking at pre-soil conditions when the invasive species are present then following removal of the invasive species will get post-soil quality, both of them will do that. So it's kind of looking at monitoring how removing invasive species helps or hinders what you would hope to see in soil quality in soil moisture content. That doesn't make sense to me because you wanted to get rid of it anyway. So I mean so much. Well it's a good opportunity for school kids to learn about soil moisture content. So I think that in terms of integration soil quality various they're going to be looking at various chemical components in the soil. Environmental phase. It's more of an environmental education opportunity and it also can help with our water shed species eradication. It's also going to help with our mitigation bank property because it's going to soil conversion and nitrogen enrichment will affect the endemic soil dwelling critters we've got out there. So I imagine that might be useful information down the road when we're talking about managing our mitigation bank chunk out there. Because that's where a lot of our energy is going to be focused on that one piece of quality habitat is doesn't really have a lot of the basic species. That's why it's so high quality habitat. So and then if you're ready we'll move on to the water shed education grants as well. There were seven applications for the water shed education grants. Many of them were repeats that we've seen in the past. The Boulder Creek Elementary Parents Club is requesting $2,500 to help lower the cost for fifth grade students to attend the Camp Campbell Science School. The Banana Slug Stream Band is offering to do musical entertainment to five elementary schools and assemblies in San Lorenzo and Scots Valley. And the Family Science Night has been hugely successful for the last two years at San Lorenzo Valley Elementary School I believe. Yeah. And that's been great attendance. I've been to one or two. I went to the first one myself and it was great. And then water awareness environmental awareness through science literacy K-3 Science Enrichment at the San Lorenzo Valley Elementary School and that one is another repeat. There's programs in the past and so these are going to continue to provide environmental education to mostly elementary school kids in the San Lorenzo Valley. They're focused on watershed health, water quality and protecting. And then we have the Exploring the San Lorenzo River which was also funded last year by the Museum of Natural History. They're requesting $3,000 and the recommended award is $2,500 for them. They didn't all receive exactly what they were requesting. Some of them were cut a little bit so that they could so that they could fund more projects. That was the recommendation from the Education Commission. And the last one is water-wise, water information for educators project which is a new one from Monterey Bay Environmental Literacy Group. That will be a series of six sessions in the fourth and fifth grade science class to Boulder Creek Elementary and students will learn about watersheds, water cycle, aquifers, impacts of climate change and how humans clean water and what can happen to water after it goes down the drain and kind of just some practical lessons where water comes from and where water goes and how we manage all of that. And so the Education Commission and then there's actually two more, there's one more that they've recommended for funding which is the second time they have slope has applied which is generally the outdoor preserve for education and that is at the San Juan Valley Middle School and they've constructed a classroom and it has some signs up and they have seating out there in a little small stadium for classes to be held outside and they're all focused on environmental education so they have a sort of phase two of that project which should be it looks like they have quite some donated labor and materials and then they're getting some crowd-sourcing funding to match this project so that's $3,000 The last one is the KBCZ Radio at Boulder Creek Community Radio right here and they are requesting funds to do 10 30-second promo spots 10 1-3 minute promo spots and 5 5-minute feature segments each promotional spot with Highlight Center in the Valley Water District Activity Service and or Achievement and that would be spread out over the next year between May 2018 and May 2019 and the commission discussed that topic and decided that they would ask the board to fund that separately through the district's communications fund that it didn't seem like a good educational brand fund match it felt like it would fit better with the budget so all the other ones they requested become funded and those numbers are all provided on your big spreadsheet a special magnetic sense and the total budget requested is the total requested funds from all the applications together was 21,100 and the budget available is 17,500 and so the recommendation from the general commission how much should we pay for it last year? every year is the same since I've been here and I think last year we didn't have as many applicants and so I don't think that we hit a total of 17,500 but every year we can budget you around that hasn't changed since the beginning did the group were there other proposals that were reviewed and fell below the scoring cutoff or this was the full suite of applicants every once in a while once in the days of your we would get kind of non responsive applicants right and that hasn't really happened we've had long tenure of people on the education commission too haven't we used it a couple of years they changed over with the board members any public comment on this one? we've got to choose and if there was a new board member that person got to choose someone to replace who or what is that what happens? yes okay I'm very happy with my appointee okay any other public comment? okay I don't see any so we've got public comment I don't have any more board discussion there is a resolution that I handed out it doesn't have a number it's just X it's resolution do seconds right so we're at 21, 17, 18 18 21 18 anybody care to make a motion? I would be happy to recommend approval of the education program advisory commission's funding recommendations for the 2018 classic watershed grant proposals which include both the classic watershed grant and the data collection and restoration grants okay would you like to do anything about the radio proposal? comment on the radio it's evolving to where the coverage is going to be most of the San Lorenzo Valley it can be very instrumental during disaster to get messages out especially locally we're kind of working with them now it would be good to support them I think it has a real a real lead or a real good use in the valley messaging as time goes on it's going to be a good tool to have coverage just about the most of our service area I'm delighted to have some support for that community radio I'm wondering if if I may ask staff if the $2,000 for their initial foray into a spotlighting the district is a significant enough assistance to them or if it should be not a grant it should be something that we do with them as a communications tool like we would buy space in a newspaper of general circulation and buy space for a column I don't have a sense of what's more appropriate from the staff's perspective but I think engaging and supporting the radio stations is a phenomenal idea and important we're working with as you know the board approved the location to have one more tank sites they're just getting to the point now I think it's been a year and a two years from getting that equipment installed so we're going to assist them on that as well but I think it's a great tool to have I think it approved as part of the public outreach just direct staff to follow up with the applicant in a more appropriate area so then I would amend my motion to say with the exclusion of the KVCZ application which would be remanded back to staff for appropriate communications there was no board recommendation for them it kind of exploded in this so they wanted to make a special recommendation that the board supports staff and KVCZ as part of a communications strategy so do I amend my motion do I I've lost the thread as to what's in the resolution versus a separate issue that's been placed on the table regarding the radio station do we need to include that? it doesn't speak to it it's just whereas let's see staff received eight classic watershed grant proposals and two data restoration grant proposals seven of the 2018 classic watershed education grant proposals and two would be worthy of funding so the one for the radio station between seven were received eight were blessed so the resolution speaks to the number it doesn't speak to the specificity of which particular grant applicant we're saying maybe remanded for other activity did we need to include that in our motion can we just direct staff to continue communication with the radio station and bring it back to us on a future agenda item the resolution presupposes this spreadsheet of who the participants are including the fact that one of them is a zero funded participant I don't think they need to be singled out as not receiving I think they would just not receive I don't see that any board action is required on the radio station so so then just the resolution as written and my motion would be to approve the resolution 21-17-18 I'll second your resolution number 21-17-18 as stated in the resolution so any other discussion call off this on a voice vote all in favor any opposed none good thank you if you get a chance thank everybody on the commission it's plowing through a watery yes item 9 I would be okay okay so the subject matter of this which is discussion and possible action on recommendation to reaffirm the current stage 2 water shortage emergency and I believe Jen this is probably oh okay the subject is discussion and possible action on recommendation to reaffirm the current stage 2 water shortage emergency now I'll go ask for any staff 85 find things again so this year in 2017-18 water year we have had a total of 60% 60% of our average recorded rainfall we're seeing that same water deficit in our street flow as well and so that's about 40% less than normal so we anticipate that we'll be having to switch over to groundwater earlier in the north system the south system is already drawing from a depleted aquifer they're also experiencing significant infrastructure changeover and so there'll be some water shortages in the south system and because the town of Felton is relying on surface water only they'll be seeing about 40% less water than normal and there will be no groundwater to switch over to so we're asking the board to adopt or reaffirm the Stage 2 water shortage Stage 1 would be if we were having a 10% less than normal water shortage and Stage 2 is 20% or more so Stage 3 goes into mandatory restrictions so we're because in the past we've been so successful with sort of voluntary restrictions with a few requirements with regard to watering we asked before 10am or after 5pm and only watering 2 days a week and some of these kind of easy lift restrictions were recommending the same Stage 2 water shortage I didn't write down all of the requirements that were in there but one thing that we have done in the past was we had designated specific days of the week for address that resulted in quite some confusion and often some some difficulty with people who are going to be out of town and couldn't get their timers set for Tuesday and Thursday or Tuesday and Saturday or whatever it was and so because that was so successful and our community has been so responsive and we ended up with a 40% water conservation during the height of the 2015 drought we have decided that at this time we would recommend that we allow the customers to self-select which 2 days of the week they would like to water and as long as that's working then we'll just go with that so that's kind of the one thing other than that it would be watering outside of the hours of 10 and 5pm so not between 10 and 5pm during the day to avoid evaporation and and then no washing your sidewalks and no spraying no filling or refilling pools or spas you have it? yeah actually I just turned it out assuming that it was currently the same as it was in April 28th of 2014 great it is I mean I could read the 8 or so bullets no watering or irrigation between 10am and 5pm no outdoor watering on Monday outdoor irrigation is permitted only 3 days a week if your address ends in an even number water on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday and you're changing that and then on your watering days limit irrigation to 15 minutes per station do not wash down harder paved surfaces initially fill or drain and refill residential swimming pools drinking water will only be served at restaurants upon request and shut off nozzles are required on all hoses so all sounds like pretty reasonable stuff and I'd say keep on keeping on any other board discussion? any public input on this item? I don't see any so anybody like to make a motion? let's see what pages comment on that where you dock stage 2 water water second and if there's no more discussion I'll call a vote on this all those in favor can you oppose? no? okay commentaries and I believe we are at the end of new business I think there's one more no one more? let me see alright Eric J since I thought committee report out I don't know if this would be an action no I kind of actually think this is a committee report that would be appropriate for the committee in the report section so there's a single page on the first meeting of the CIP replacement program it was one meeting continued to two days and I guess I can read a few three paragraphs that state what occurred during that time and that is that with a time critical opportunity for low-interest USDA for a low-interest USDA loan, the committee reviewed and staff selected projects for the application for this loan high priority in-road pipeline replacements totaling less than five million dollars the district must secure and is seeking short-term environmental consulting support to complete the application and I may ask you in a moment where we stand on that and then the project management needs staff plans to be in recruiting for a full-time project manager to support the coordination of the CIP projects and I put in parentheses this position is in accordance with the board approved staffing plan I believe that's been worked into the budget so that's proceeding in concurrence with what the recommendation in the committee meeting was and the third paragraph in this is in the future the committee will be considering the feasibility of accelerating as much work as possible taking advantage of lower-interest financing grouping projects by geography or type and seeking grants and additional staffing parenthetically a CIP pipeline crew and or grant writer will be considered and opportunities for bundled financing will also be explored so I will ask anything about the environmental or anything that is a time to ask that question well, we've reached out to environmental consultants and they have not yet heard back okay any public input on this item it's from any season okay, I don't see public comment on this any board discussion there's no action to be taken so let's move on and it takes us to 10a which is handled very long time ago and we move into some yeah, we'll find the on this so item 11 the consent agenda we have minutes from two board meetings here I need to pull the first, the second one I was only present in one of the two meetings okay, so you're pulling item 10d wait, I'm 11d minutes from the third anybody else have reason to pull okay could I just make there was a correction on the other minutes, a typographical correction absent at that meeting it had director smallman and director hammer they both did this typo so sorry let's just pull them both we'll address them both so let's first address item 11a minutes from board of directors meeting April 19th, 2018 and you have one correction on that correct? and that I think I know what page? it's not the first page item 1 under excuse do you have director I'm sorry I can't hear what you're saying under item 1, excuse director vice president smallman should be vice president hammer any other board discussion? would the public like to comment on item 11a the minutes from May the third the minutes from April 19th I don't see any public comment on that I'll make a motion that we approve April 19th, 2018 minutes as modified to correct pp smallman to pp hammer I would second that motion any board discussion? I'll call the board's vote all those in favor I'm I'm abstaining and any opposed? so no opposed three yes, one abstention and let's address the next item which is the minutes from the first meeting for the May 3rd meeting this time first of all public input anybody want to comment on the minutes from May the 3rd I don't think I see none and I I will move approval of the May 3rd 2018 minutes as in the board packet all those in favor I any opposed? none so let's move on to district reports I believe and so first of all any public comments on district reports I don't see any President Baughman are you intending to cover all communication for all reports? right so any public input on and my agenda item is okay so district reports is item 12 no public input on district reports any board discussion on district reports let me see if I have anything on this before I since we're way ahead of schedule we since we're way ahead of schedule I would be delighted to hear of staff highlights they wanted to share but if there aren't any the Felton Library Friends of Felton Library and the county parks received a $400,000 grant for the Nature Explorer Park that will be associated with the Felton Library I don't know if it's valid or something but that was exciting news very cool and I'll point out the photograph that I think is notable which is page 174 of the probation tanks well the probation the new temporary probation tanks and the aging hulk off there in the background as soon as we go and I'm curious is the contractor going to dispose of the old tank it is a hundred percent their project now and so these responsible for tree work and who will the tank everything that's it usually there's some pretty somewhat good work in those tanks but that tank is pretty much you might have a little of it but not what people think pretty much a stick since we have a few extra minutes I did have a question we're talking about flushing in the filter the screen is being filled up with magnesium and iron iron and magnesium the manjana well was that way is that because is everything in that basin and that sandstone that way majority of the wells we have on iron but we don't have that problem over here not as bad thank you and that's a biological process that pulls it out or is it just a precipitation process okay nobody else says further on this there are no written communications and there's informational material of four items if anybody has come we don't need communication no need to take public input is it an item well it's an item on the agenda technically yes if somebody would like to comment would anybody like to comment on the non-existent written communications okay I imagine not so and then there are four items of informational material so and I don't see anybody raising their hand who wants to speak about this so we'll close out orals and we will adjourn without taking public comments anyway so anyway thank you all two of you for sticking it out for the last minutes I'm glad everybody can get home yep unobstructed