 Okay, good evening and welcome to the board meeting. It is now going to be convened. And I'll ask Holly if she will call the roll, please. President Swan, the district secretary isn't here tonight due to a planned vacation. So I'm going to go ahead and call the roll if that's all right. Thank you, Gina. Okay, President Swan. Here. Vice President Henry. Here. Director Fultz. Here. Director Ferris. Here. Great. Director Moran. Present. We have a quorum and all directors present. Thank you. Thank you, Gina. Okay, Rick, over to you with a new business. Oh, thank you, Chair Swan. Subject is landslide debris flow hazard conditions now threatening the San Lorenzo Valley caused by the CZU wildfire. This memorandum presents for the district's board of directors and the public the status of actions being taken by the district and other agencies to evaluate and mitigate landslides and debris flow hazard conditions created by the recent CZU lightning complex fire. The recommendation is to review this memo that you should have all been sent to you late today and posted with the agenda. And the hyperlink for the work report and provide direction as to whether the board wants to agendize any of these items for further discussion or for further discussion and possible action. The CZU lightning complex wildfire started as a series of lightning fires on August 16, 2020, across Western Santa Cruz and San Mateo counties. The fire was active for more than a month and burned approximately 86,500 acres with 1,450 structures destroyed and one fatality. District staff have been working tirelessly since the start of the wildfire to mitigate, assess and repair damage to its public water facilities and the other public property. This includes approximately 1,600 acres of watershed land owned by the district that supplies about half of the water supply to the Santa Rosa Valley. Large areas of watershed land were burned by the CZU wildfire resulting in landslide and debris flow hazard conditions during the upcoming rainy season. The district has been working as fast as it can with the help of emergency contractors to mitigate hazards, including identification and removal of fire damage trees closing hazards on district property. The district also has been coordinating with numerous other agencies engaged in post-disaster emergency efforts within the Santa Rosa Valley. Such agencies include the County of Santa Cruz, Cal Fire, Cal OES, California Department of Conservation, FEMA and the US Department of Agricultural USDA and the Natural Resource Conservation Service among others. Two of these agencies, Cal Fire and the California Department of Conservation recently released a report entitled Watershed Emergency Response Team Evaluation, CZU Lightning Complex. A copy of this will be called work report is available and the link is embedded in this memo and is on our website. The district received a copy of the work report. October 12th, 2020 from Santa Cruz County Department of Public Works, the first page of the work report explains that the mission of work is to help communities prepare after wildfire by rapidly documenting and communicating post-fire risks to life and property posed by debris flows, blood and rockfall hazards. The findings include in this report are not intended to be fully comprehensive or conclusive but rather to serve as a preliminary tool to assist responsible agencies in the development of more detailed post-fire emergency response plans. It is intended that the agencies will use this information presented in the report as a preliminary guide to complete their own more detailed evaluations and to develop detailed emergency response plans and mitigation. The work report identifies hazards to district territory starting on page 39 of the report, the highway nine corridor titled the highway nine corridor observations. Based on field observations, it appears that there is a moderate to high potential for debris flow impacts to life and safety and property within and adjacent to the following creeks and streams. It's the Jamison Creek, Ormond Creek, Clear Creek, non-name tributary upslope of downtown Boulder Creek, unnamed tributary upslope of Acorn Drive and an unnamed tributary to Herrick Creek. The work report further starts or further states starting on page 40, based on limited field reconnaissance, a property, a properly designed and located deflection structure may reduce the potential for evolution from the current channel on an unnamed watercourse immediately upslope of the Boulder Creek Elementary School in a joining residential neighborhood. That unnamed watercourse is what the district calls Harmon Creek. It's a source that the district used many years ago located above the Boulder Creek Cemetery. The actual debris flow pathways are highly uncertain and were difficult to predict during the rapid evaluation. Deflection structures may prove effective in reducing the chance for evolution in other areas where the potential for post-fire debris flows and flooding impacts were observed. For these reasons, the report recommends further observation and determinations be made by state certified professional geologists and professional engineers. The work report makes the following recommendations for the Highway 9 Corridor. You can see those on page 41 and 42 consider Pacific recommendations for values at risk. Those are listed in the report. Utilize early warning systems tied to prediction of incoming storm events. Educate the public about post-fire debris flows and how rapidly they move. The public should be informed to be out of the way of potential flow paths before a storm impacts the area. Areas along the Highway 9 Corridor that are identified as post-fire hazard areas should not be occupied during storm warnings. Provide Boulder Creek residents and commercial business owners with information included in this report so they may understand their proximity to hazard areas and take appropriate actions. Perform storm patrols and monitor road drainage infrastructure. Consider vegetation and debris removal within the channels particularly at watercourse crossings. Utilize experts in civil, geotechnical, hydrologic, engineering, soil erosion, hydrology and engineering geology to develop site Pacific recommendations and mitigation activities. Consider and evaluate the potential for storing stormwater control and deflection structures including sandbags and or concrete K-rail along stream banks and around residents where high flood flood flows and debris flows are predicted along granages. The district takes the work recommendations extremely serious. Time is short before the start of the rainy season. Though the urgency through this urgency scheduled board meetings, the district is continuing its efforts to educate the public including local residents and businesses about the hazards of post-fire debris flows. The district understands that the county is working on a debris flow response plan including evacuation plans for local neighborhoods. Upon its release, the district will help push out this information to the public posting on the district's websites and social media. Other actions taken by the district include pursuing the possibility of installing deflection structures as described in the work report. In particular, as shown above, the work report mentions mitigation measures to prevent possible debris flows from leaving the Harmon Creek Channel and flowing through the Boulder Creek Cemetery elementary school and into the town of Boulder Creek. However, the recommendations of the work report are not well-defined in terms of a project or projects that could be constructed by reasonable agencies such as the district within the necessary time frames. The district continues to engage in ongoing discussions with county representatives with direct post-fire knowledge in the Harmon Creek watershed and work report. The district believes the county could help facilitate a design for deflection structure given its familiarity with the watershed and its technical resources such as professional geologists and engineers. And most importantly, the county's ability to reach out to state and other federal agencies with emergency construction capabilities well beyond those of the district on its own. The district has clearly and consistently communicated its willingness to participate in a project or projects in cooperation with other agencies. The scale of the potential, the scale of the possible emergency is far beyond the resources of the district to prevent or meaningfully full, mitigate on its own limitations on the district's ability to design and construct mitigation projects on its own include permitting requirements and time frames, lack of internal technical expertise such as professional geologists, engineers and liability concerns of private consultants. On October 19th, 2020 district staff and its engineering consultants met with a team of engineers from the USDA who applied for funding for engineering, design and construction costs for stormwater control and a deflection structure regrettably, no feasible project or projects alternative were identified through this consultation at this time. District staff understands that in response to concerns raised by the district and others, the county recently facilitated a meeting with Cal OES watershed task force to discuss the findings of the work report. Today, the watershed task force has reached out to the district and the county to the district to set up a meeting with the district manager to discuss debris slide mitigation measures mentioned in the work report and whether or not the district should pursue any of these measures. The district has been informed that a viable project is identified if a viable project is identified, it may be eligible for FEMA grant funding. The district will continue its efforts to identify whether or not there is a viable mitigation project and to seek county, state and federal assistance as necessary. Additionally, the district will continue communicating with the public about the hazards associated with possible landslides and debris flows and update its internal response plans for the protection of public water facilities in the event of emergency. With that is my report as up to today. With that, I'll turn it back over to Chair Swann. Thank you, Rick. Pretty comprehensive. With respect to the watershed task force reaching out to the district to set up a meeting, what's the status of that at this time? Well, the meeting was facilitated through the county with Supervisor McPherson's office taking the lead. We are, I do believe, scheduled for a meeting on this Tuesday. This coming Tuesday. This coming Tuesday, that's correct. Okay. Do we have any questions from the board at this time? Can I ask a question? Yeah, Lois, one second. Bob had his blue hand up before your flip of the hand. Bob, go ahead. Yeah, thanks, Rick, for going through that. I want to ask a few questions, make sure I understand the situation clearly. In the report and the recommendations that were made, there is a line here that says, provide Boulder Creek residents and commercial business owners with the information so they may understand their proximity to hazard areas and take appropriate actions. What would those appropriate actions be? Right now, I really can't answer that. Bob, the county is in the process of putting out evacuation information and mapping. And I don't want to speculate, but I believe the county will be putting out that information. So at this point, the only thing that's contemplated is evacuation. To my knowledge, yes. So they're putting out a lot of other information on how you should make sure that you're prepared. Yes, evacuation is number one, make sure your drainage is open, the preparation type information. Well, I mean, could it include, for example, a homeowner deciding they wanted to put K-rail up around their house? I'm not sure that. I would have to refer that to the county. I don't believe so. I believe the county is working on mapping, on areas that they feel that there could be debris flows and are centering on evacuation. I can't speak to that. I understand that, I mean, we've talked to them. Are they themselves thinking about initiating or supporting any mitigation projects that we may want to take with respect to putting K-rail around channels? What have you? As of now, no, but those are questions that we will have when we meet next week to talk about what we can do. And, you know, there's a lot of difference of opinions on getting on the worth report. You know, there's still a lot more information that's needed, you know, as the work report says, it was a very, very quick look. And so there's still a lot of folks digesting that and I know they're out cleaning culverts and cleaning channels and so forth now. We see them every day. In a debris flow, how effective will Culver to be? I can't answer that. I mean, if the Culver gets plugged then it's just gonna go around the Culver, right? I mean, Matt. Right, well, I do know from other meetings that the county and the Caltrans especially will be deploying teams out to keep the Culverts open along the Highlandine Corridor. I did hear that from the Caltrans representative. Well, given we have about six weeks maybe before the rain started, maybe if we're lucky, time is short, if we had a project that we wanted to do is the county, state, and federal governments prepared to move quickly on permitting or are we looking at a normal permitting process here which would take months to years? I will get those, those are questions that if we develop a project, those are questions that we will ask, definitely. And have we not asked those questions yet? Well, we don't have a project. I think it depends on if we have a project. I think this is a given timeframe, this is kind of a parallel thing where, they need to be sort of giving us some signals, I think, whether or not this is something they're gonna support. Would we be able to find, given that there may not be any county or state or federal agencies prepared to help engineer this, are there private consultants we can tap into to help engineer a mitigation plan? Possibly, I have reached out, private consultants are concerned about litigation on construction or design of such a structure. You mean if they were to design something and it failed due to just the fact that the brief flows are unpredictable, that they could be sued? Most likely, I didn't get that deep into the reasons, but I did not find an interest. But that was just me looking locally. Now, once we meet with Cal OES, there may be a whole different, they may have engineers that they deal with or different consultants that they deal with that do this type of work during this time, during the brief flows and so forth, and that could be tapped for their resources. I haven't got that far yet. Okay, thank you. I'll have some other questions later, but I know other people wanna talk. Thanks, Rick. Hey, Lois, your turn. Well, Bob asked so many questions. He asked some of mine. Let's see if I can dig something else up out of my brain. Rick, what's the chance of finding a geologist that can work for us? That might be available and to do this kind of work. I think that's possible. I think that's very possible. I'll know a lot more after Tuesday's meeting of what is possible. Okay, so we're getting more cooperation from the county, is that what I'm hearing? We're getting a lot of cooperation from the county working with us to try to develop a project possibly or to determine if a project is needed. Okay, well, it sounds like pretty scary stuff to me. I mean, where I am, I'm not gonna get a debris flow, but I assume unless somehow it got to Lompico Creek, which in like 82, some women fell on Lompico Creek and they found her body down by the big band area or whatever, not funny, but it sounds pretty scary for people, for the school. And I'm wondering how we're going to help people understand what's going on in the community. People understand the risk. A lot more information will be coming out from the county regarding debris flow and mapping and so forth. Okay, but if you build something and you change the course, the map of where the debris flow might go, it might not count, the debris flow might go elsewhere. Right? Possible. I'm not trying to avoid any of these questions, but I am not an engineer and we're not quite there yet. And I know that I wish we were farther with more answers tonight, but unfortunately this is kind of an introduction to the board and I'm gathering questions from you all as the meeting goes on. And these are all great questions, pretty much the same ones that staff had and we'll be addressing this more Tuesday. Okay, thank you, Rick. I know you have a tremendous amount on your plate and there's a lot of things to find out about this particular thing. I just can't answer these questions, but I appreciate it. We'll get answers. Thank you. Thank you, Lois. Rick Moran? Yes. First I'd like to say to district manager, Rick Rogers for being proactive on dealing with another part of the CZU fire. But it's always been a concern of mine that we try to control nature. And as much as the documents that I read is always this uncertainty about what they can actually do. And provide safety for people and their property. Most of all, what I'm concerned about is the safety of people. And I don't really know if K-rails or any kind of other deflection mitigation is going to really work. And all the debris flows that I've seen around here and in California, I have seen debris flows up in Mount St. Helens where there's a tremendous amount of wood. And that's, I think, what we have. And there's no K-rail that I know of that's gonna prevent great big redwood trees from going wherever they wanna go. And they're gonna change course very little, if any. So I'm not really concerned. I don't think our efforts should be so much in a physical trying to deal with this. As much as an educational thing to, I think people realize there's risk living up here. And this is part of it. And we should do as much as we can to provide information that would keep them out of their homes during a highly probable time. And that's, again, what it is, highly probable. There's very little certainty about this. So I understand people's desire to have some understanding about this, but we can't be certain about any of this. And we can, the best we can do is try to be safe. And so I'm gonna emphasize, we spend as much of our energy in focusing on education and keeping people aware of the weather situation up here and being tied into the alert systems that we have. And I love this idea of the patrolling. We need to, those are the things that I wanna see focused on. Thank you. And just to touch on that, Rick, the county is doing a lot of these recommendations into their program moving forward. They're discussing almost all of those recommendations for the early warning system and so forth and keeping an eye on forwards. Also, we're working with the county on tying our rain gauges in with the county system on the early warning alert system. And there's a series of rain gauges that the county will be monitoring. And if I could just say one more thing, Steve, is when I first moved up here, I became a weather spotter for KION television. Because there were no rain reports for the San Lorenzo Valley and I knew it was raining a heck of a lot more than it was in Capitola where I used to live. And what I'm really glad to see and as I see these reports, is they're talking about not inch a day, not inch an hour, they're talking about rainfall for 15-minute periods, which is if we've lived up here long enough, we've seen that it may rain a lot during an hour, but there's these really high intense periods that really only last 10, 15 minutes long. And those are the things that we need to be, you know, I like the incremental definition that's coming out of some of this work that's being a little more precise and I like that. Thank you. Thank you, Rick. Rick, I wanted to ask the, with respect to the public awareness program you saying the county is starting to do a lot in that area, has the county produced any sort of plan yet that addresses the public awareness and information? I do believe they're working on it. If it isn't out, they are working on it and it should be rolling out shortly. I don't have those dates in front of me, but I do know that there are working on mapping and on getting out a lot of information to the general public. Okay. If you could provide us with an update with where they are when you get a chance. And we've offered to share that, you know, through our email, the trees and our Facebook as well to help get the word out. And they have been putting a lot of information out as time goes on. Okay, thank you. Lou, you have your hand up. Yeah, thank you. I noticed there is a large number of public participants tonight. And I would suggest at this point that we go to the public because I suspect a lot of people are wanting to weigh in on this issue. And I wanna make sure everybody that wants to have the chance to speak. So I would suggest we hold any more comments for the board until after the public weighs in. We'll go right there shortly. If there's any final board questions right now that are burning, and then we'll go to the public. Just to chair, chair, so on before you go to the public. Yeah. Just so the public knows that if they, you know, technical questions, we will not be able to answer tonight, but we will collect questions. So we can get these questions answered. Again, I'm not an engineer or a geologist or a hydrologist. And this is a very technical information. So, but we will keep track of their questions. The meeting is being recorded and we will try to get answers for people. Thank you. Bob, we'll be coming back to the directors again. But if you wanna ask a question right now before we go to the public, feel free. I wanted to ask Rick if it would be possible to have another board meeting next Tuesday or Wednesday after the meeting with the OEA. This is critical from my point of view. Sure. And there is some talk from Supervisor McPherson's office to also have a public meeting as well to answer questions. I think that is still in the development stages as well. Supervisor McPherson has taken a lead on this. In fact, has been out on the watershed with many of the local business and community members touring watershed and has taken a real interest in this. Matter of fact, I talked to him as of late today. So I think that he will be also moving ahead with something as well. But yes, we can schedule another meeting. I am no problem for that. Great, thank you. Okay, let's open it up then for the public. Of our attendees, we have Gail Mohood. You have the floor. Okay, in my previous life, as a volcanologist before I retired, I spent over 40 years worrying about debris flows. It's seven o'clock. We're triggered by volcanic eruptions. And so I know a fair amount about this and what happens when you try to mess with mother nature. And I read this memo and I thought the first three pages were excellent, warning people. But when I got to the fourth page, I just thought it was a terrible idea in that we were essentially taking responsibility for an act of God. And we were taking responsibility for debris flows when we would never take responsibility if there'd been a little flood that went down those same creeks. So I thought that the fourth page was actually setting us up to get sued. Secondly, the diversion structure that Wirt put out would potentially, if it worked, and I think Rick Moran brought up the question that you never know whether it worked given the kind of debris that's gonna be coming down, would actually divert it down into the town of Boulder Creek. And so instead of taking out the school, you take out about a dozen houses. Well, when they've tried that in Italy where they've diverted lava flows and saved the town, the people that sued them were the other town that was inundated by a lava flow. So you have to be really careful when you start diverting things because it's unpredictable where things will go. But in that particular one, it is absolutely sure that if something stayed in the channel, it will end up over those 12 houses. The other is, is if you take responsibility for what's happening on that alluvial fan in Boulder Creek, then you're also gonna have to take responsibility for the alluvial fan that is at the foot of Foreman Creek, which has Boulder Brook in the community there. And even worse, Clear Creek, the whole town of Brookdale is on an alluvial fan that was affected, for example, in the huge flood of 1982. So once we start down this road, and Peabline Creek has a small alluvial fan, so once you start down this road, there's really no end to it. And so I just would say that I think that the wiser thing to do would be to basically, if Caltrans or the state or the county wants to build diversion structures on our watershed lands, then they have to do it and they have to take the liability for it. And you've already expressed the problem of why you've had such a hard time finding a engineering geologist to do this, is the unpredictability with what will happen. You can get sued either because you divert something or you can get sued because the thing that you attempted to divert didn't work very well. And so I just would suggest that we be very, very careful as we proceed on this and not take responsibility for something that's an act of God and that we wouldn't, for example, in a normal flood take responsibility for. Thank you. Thank you, Gail. Well, it is 2020, so anything's up for grabs it seems this year. Larry Ford, thank you very much. I'd like to hear some discussion about the distinction between potential responsibilities that the district might take for its own to protect or to recover its own infrastructure as distinct from some of the discussion that I've heard so far, which is that we might be more concerned about residences and business owners and other people that happen to be affected by these floods. I think the district's first responsibility has to be to ensure that we can continue to deliver water, safe water to the rate pairs and work out what those are. And so what I'd like to hear the board do right now is to say, yes, district manager Rogers, we support you, we endorse your plan to start to develop pre and post emergency plans for the district's interests and give whatever funding or authority is needed for Mr. Rogers to proceed with that. I think that's really the first step that's necessary. A lot of these other things about, you know, the specific design for deflection structures or, you know, how the debris flows might go in different directions. Those would be secondary to the considerations about protecting the district's infrastructure. Thank you. Thank you, Larry. Okay. Do we have any other comments or questions from the audience? President Swann, may I just interject for a moment? I see that we have a couple of comments on chat and while that is a public record, it's not regularly monitored as part of this public meeting. Because this is a public meeting and we want all the staff and the public and the board members to be able to participate, it would be helpful if you could address the board through the speaking during the public comment period, put up your hand and request to speak and make your comment and ask your question that way so that everybody is aware that that would be very much appreciated. Thank you, Jen. Do you know? Mr. Armstrong. Can you hear me now? Yes. Yes, I'd like to just say that I really do appreciate everything that you're going through with this and I understand the challenges and the long-term costs that are associated with these kinds of events, having been through a number of them as a civil engineer, for example. My suggestion is to find somebody who can be your point person on this, take the responsibility away from the actual operations itself because you guys have already got your hands full completely and you're doing a very good job overall of handling all of this and this additional stress that's going to go on for a number of years with a tremendous amount of emotionality and potential loss for members of the community and meetings with the county which can consume a tremendous amount of bandwidth and a public forum. I would suggest that you find somebody who you feel is competent to carry this water forward for the district and let them deal with all of this and then you all just continue to focus on bringing the operations back up to where they were before in a predictable and realistic manner. That's a huge challenge in itself and adding all of these other, piling all this other on is just not gonna produce benefits. I just don't see it as a value. I see there's just way too many variables here to deal with, way too many observations, way too many data points. It's just gonna be a very complicated problem going forward and I think it could very easily take down the whole water district if everybody gets all spaced out about it. Focus on the core mission, get that together, hold it as close as you can and then let this other problem evolve on its own. That's my thoughts on it. And thank you again very much. Greatly appreciated. Thank you, Ms. Hartra and thank you for the pun. Okay, Beth Thomas. Hi, thank you. I have a couple of questions for Rick Rogers. Rick, it seems to me that the county is the key agency that's involved with this and has the greatest responsibility for coordinating the other agencies. I didn't hear you say whether or not the fire departments of the communities were involved in these conversations and whether or not the school district was involved. Thank you for the question, Beth. I am not sure about the school district, but I do know the Valley Chiefs are working very closely with key people, the key representatives of the county regarding debris flows. They're meeting several times a week and developing response plans. They're very informed. The counties being in the fire districts are very informed. That's great, because as we know, they're sort of our key first responders. And I would say with respect to some of the conversation about liability and whether we should be talking about our role in preventing disaster for residents or solely for the infrastructure of the water district in a small community like this, I don't think we can take a position that's black and white. I think that our community would consider us not to be doing our job if we solely looked at the liability interests of the water district. Thank you. Thank you, Beth. Any other public comments, questions? We would see if there are any. Let me ask you a question, Rick, to basically leveraging off of Larry Ford's question are there specific plans that the district is doing specifically oriented towards preserving its infrastructure irrespective of some of the other matters that we were looking to the county to help address? Are there specific concerns and specific plans that are being developed or put into place? Yes, I'm glad you brought up Mr. Ford's questions. I wanted to answer his questions. Yes, the district, the director of operations and Sandus engineering have been out at key facilities along potential debris flow routes such as our Foreman Creek intake structure or the pipeline we just replaced our water treatment plant and some other key facilities and have designed erosion control measures for those areas. We are hardening our infrastructure as we speak. The surface water sources and pipelines, they've all been destroyed by fire. There's nothing to protect up in the watershed but our treatment plant, we are putting quite a erosion control around that treatment plant, including K-rail just in case because it is right at the foot of a pretty steep embankment and we are doing some other deflection of our Foreman Creek to protect the new pipeline that was just installed. Answer that question, yes. Thank you, Rick. Okay, I don't see any other hands coming up on the public here. So we'll go back to the board. Lou, give you a chance to continue off where you left off. Actually, I think Bob was before me so I'm gonna let him go ahead first. Go ahead, we'll flip the coin. Yeah, you gave up your time to the public, so go ahead. Lou, it's up to you. I can't. Oh, Lou, did you disconnect yourself? You're on mute. Go ahead, Bob. And I hit it again. Okay, there you go. Okay, I'm back. Just a quick question for you, Rick. Speaking as a follow up to what Larry was saying and Steve was saying, is there any sort of an early warning system that we can put in place to give us time in case there are debris flows that threaten the town of Boulder Creek? Is there video monitoring? Is there satellite monitoring? Is there anything that we can do to give us time to execute an evacuation plan or an emergency plan specific to debris flow that we know is headed in our direction? And well, I guess that's the main question. Go ahead, Rick. What I do know, the county is working, putting together an early warning system. They are linking a series of rain gauges, USDS is where, not USDS, the, they're having one of the governor agencies are working with the county. Yeah, USDS, there you go. USDS is working with the county on installing a pretty sophisticated rain gauge up on our watershed up right below the Braemort area. And that'll be tied to a network of gauges and the county is working on some type of early warning system. I don't have all the particulars, I just know they are working on that. And you have tied our rain gauges into that system. Just to follow up to what you said, it's fine to have monitoring of rain with rain gauges, but I think it would be even more important to monitor other things like earth movement. USDS does a very good job of that. Once it's not how much rain is coming down, it's when the earth starts to move that we need to know. And I have no problem with rain gauges, but I would certainly like to have at least some sort of earth movement early warning system investigated as well. I'll get more information on the early warning for you, Director Ferris. Okay, Bob. Thanks, Steve. Yeah, you know, one of the first jobs of governmental agencies is protection of life safety and property. And in situations like this, where the disaster is, one disaster's passed, but the potential for another one is well known, is not protection against getting sued. And it is entirely possible that the district and or other agencies could get sued for doing nothing. In the case of the big rainfall of 1982, Rick didn't the district get sued for some damage, nothing that we caused, but then certainly unexpected, but I believe there were some lawsuits that came out of that. I think the question is, is do we collectively, meaning the district as the owner of the property, which means we have a certain amount of responsibility there, but we don't have the resources to do the whole job, do we in conjunction with the county, state, and possibly the federal government, try to figure out a way to do something, not letting the perfect be the enemy of doing something, or do we do nothing? And I recall reading in the paper about Chief Bingham's really call inspirational call to action during the fighting the fire that the schools represent, and a lot of the town represents the soul of the town. And it would be a real shame to have saved the school from the fire to potentially lose it into the brief flow, if there was something that could be done to potentially mitigate against that. I don't think there's any perfect solution here, but I am not one to just say, hey, we're gonna let it be what it's gonna be. If we're putting a K rail around our facilities, why would individuals or other people not be allowed to put a K rail around their facilities and their assets and their retirement funds and their property in a way that that's not a level playing field? And so I'm really hopeful. Again, recognize the district can't do this on its own. We do not have the resources for this. 8,000 subscribers do not have the resources to deal with 1,600 acres. I'm very hopeful that the county will step up and the state and the federal government will step up and not put this through a five year permitting process, because we don't have the time for that. If something isn't being done in the next few weeks, then basically we've made a decision through a mission that nothing is going to be done. And we're gonna let nature take its course, regardless of whether that means some massive destruction. Maybe we'll get lucky and we'll have a light winter. I certainly hope so, although we could use rain in other areas. And isn't the Harmon Creek issue that was identified, wouldn't the potential flow impact our administrative and operations buildings potentially? If it's coming right through the school, it's coming right down the street. I would be very disappointed if we end up just saying, hey, nothing we can do, we're not gonna try. We're just gonna let it be what it's gonna be. That's a tough one. I would have a hard time going to the community with that one. Rick Moran. Well, I see Lois has her hand up and I'll defer it to Lois at this point. Where's her hand? I took it down because I had it up for 30 minutes. I'll defer it to Ms. Henry. Okay, Lois, you were doing so good with the blue hand button last week or last meeting. Well, I've been doing that. Anyway. Okay, I get confused between go-to meeting and Zoom. I have no idea what's going on. I think that there's no easy answers here and if the district does something that causes more damage, they're in trouble. If we do nothing and there's damage, there's trouble. This basically is an act of God when this happens. I'm not sure how necessarily you can be sued and I don't care if this is a small community, the district has been sued before. And in fact, this board worked hard to get rid of those lawsuits that cost the district so much money and kept infrastructure from being fixed. And I don't wanna see the district be sued again. But if somebody can tell me what we can do, if things go wrong to keep from being sued, if we do nothing, if we do something, it doesn't matter. The dance is there and just because we're a little community, it hasn't stopped people from suing the district in the past and what is our, I've been asking, what is our safety here? And it may be warning people and this is an act of God. We can't be held responsible for an act of God. People can try to hold us responsible. That's just the way I'm looking at it. I want everyone to be safe. I don't want anybody to be thrown out to the beach. I don't want anything to happen to anybody. I don't want anybody hurt. I don't want anybody's property destroyed. I don't want the district's properties destroyed, but let's get real here. What can we really do and we don't have those answers tonight? Okay, I hang on, Lois. Thank you very much. I'm gonna call an audible here and ask Rick Miranda to hold for one second. We're all asking a lot of legal questions and we have a legal scholar on the phone. Let's get an official legal assessment or opinion or at least a comment from Gina, who graduated first in her class at Yale to comment. Gina? I didn't go to Yale, President Blong, but frankly, I hesitate to comment on some of these issues. There's a lot of great comments being made. They're zeroing in on a lot of the real issues that the district is facing. But I think the key question is the one that was just asked is what can the district do? And as I understand it, that is exactly what the district manager and the district staff are trying to figure out going through this process with other agencies and that they're gonna run that to ground and come up with a plan that maximizes the protection for the community and the district assets that are at stake. Given your experience with other water districts through Nassau, Men, et cetera, have you encountered a similar situation and what sort of examples might there be? That we could look at as, you know, whether a district did something to try to prevent or ameliorate a natural disaster potential or didn't do something, is there equal liability as we're kind of hearing, you know, the amateurs discuss tonight? Well, these situations are two facts specific to say, do X, Y and Z, the circumstances are gonna be different everywhere, the liability is gonna be different everywhere, the engineering is gonna be different everywhere. In terms of getting, looking for analogous factual patterns, the most recent analogous situation may be the Galeta, Montecito mudslides that occurred after the wildfires up there a couple of years ago. Okay, and what was the result of that? What did they result in from the standpoint of the water districts? I mean, I could try to research that, but frankly, it's not going to be very, a very productive exercise. A lot of that wouldn't have made its way through the courts. It would set a lot of court. It would depend on the facts and circumstances of each particular situation. I can take a look to see if there's anything that can be gleaned from it, but the reality is that the district's gotta deal with the facts and circumstances presented to it here. And I believe that the district is doing the best it can with that in working with these other agencies to try to figure out what can feasibly be done to address the risks that are presented. Right. Okay, thank you, Gina. We appreciate that on the behalf of the districts. Go ahead, Rick, Moran, you had- Yes, thank you. I kind of want to respond to a couple of people's Lou's question and maybe to what Bob was driving out here is Lou, I think for the detecting land motion, they have creep meters for earthquakes. I don't know if this could be incorporated in what we're trying to do, but I know there's early ways of detecting a small motion, right? But everything I know and have read about these debris flows is they are quick. And early warning is hard. So what we're trying to do is have to increase the warning time, right? So whatever we can do to do that, I agree with you. And as far as, so I don't think this or that is, or we're not doing nothing if we don't put up miles of K-rail or all sorts of deflection things. What if we have an aggressive education program, if we have an aggressive approach to this to try and tell people where they're in danger, try to alert people, keep people informed, keep people informed. As this goes on, our job is to keep people informed about this. That's not doing nothing, all right? I'm not advocating that we do nothing, all right? I'm just advocating that we do what we can control. And I don't think we can control lots of big redwood trees coming down to Canyon up in Boulder Creek, all right? So that's just my point there. But I wanna tell a little story if I can. In 1963, I was 12 years old in Norwich, Connecticut. And we had a dam above our town. And it gave way. In March of 1963, and came down and nobody expected this to happen. And what it was that killed people, and it was six people killed, was chunks of ice in this frozen pond behind the dam. The dam gave way. And it destroyed a lot, it destroyed a small factory where four people were killed. But there was a sandwich shop that I used to go to that was in that debris flow. And they always kept that headline of that 1963 flood. And every time I went in there and got a sandwich, I was reminded of that debris flow and the damage that it caused. And they didn't talk about the buildings that were lost. They talked about the people that were lost. So my primary thing is to make sure that people are safe. Thank you. Okay, Rick. Dr. Fultz? Yes, and I think the safety aspect of it, Rick, is you're absolutely right. It's sort of table stakes. I mean, that has to be done under any circumstances. You know, I think I wasn't living in the community at the time. I think some of the people on the meeting probably were. But, you know, our last big mudslide anyway was, you know, Love Creek back in 1982 where 10 people were lost. I think it was 10 people were lost. Very tragic situation for the entire community. And in that situation, you know, that was sort of once in the century storm. No one could have predicted it. That area hadn't been unstable, I don't think. And it happened, you know, we have a little different circumstance here in that everybody's basically saying, you're gonna have debris flows. So this is, you know, in an act of God situation, the facts and circumstances are a little different. This isn't sort of unexpected or uncontrolled. This is what's gonna happen after a wildfire on the slope. And this is, you know, somewhat exacerbated by the fact that, you know, we own so much property. We own that property in order to protect our watershed. But at this point, that property is not the asset that we want it to be. It's going to be an issue. And I just think the district's in a situation where, you know, we are a bit, you know, in a no win situation. But this is also where the county, the state, and the federal government need to step up and help out. This is the reason that we have governments in order to do what we can do. And it may be that you can't put miles of K rail up. I don't think that was, you know, a suggestion even. But the issue is how do you do what you can to protect as much as you can of both property and life? Again, first rule of government, their job is to protect life, safety, and property. And if what we're gonna say is all we're gonna do is basically tell people to evacuate when the rain gets to a certain level or a storm is predicted or something like that, then I think we need to be very upfront with our community about that and prepare for the lawsuits and that sort of thing that are kind of come out of that. I don't support that as the only thing that we do. But if that is, we need to be really upfront about it. And that's why I'm glad we're having this meeting. And I think after the meeting with Cal OES it would be worthwhile to reconvene and review at that time what some of those options may be. Thank you, Bob, Lou, you have your hand up? Yes, I'd like to add something to what I said before about monitoring Earth movement versus rainfall. I mean, I'm not against monitoring rainfall. I just think it may not be a good indicator in our situation. And here's why, as Gail has mentioned before, the ash that's covering all the surface that burns during the fire is hydrophobic. What that means is water runs off of it like water off a duck's back. So the amount of rain that comes down is not really important. It's the amount of rain that gets under the ash and soaks into the ground. So I'm going to offer one more thing, but it's not in my wheelhouse. But if anybody else knows about it, please comment, is what leads directly to the debris flow is soil saturation. And that's a known entity. And there's some way we can monitor soil saturation along with rainfall and Earth movement. So we get an earlier indication, because once you get close to that soil saturation, that's when it's going to liquefy and cut loose. I just want to add that as another possible monitoring something we could do. Thank you, Lou. We've got, so there's a lot of good back and forth going on and a lot of good input is everybody's noted. And the attendees have got some additional questions. So I'm going to let them comment again, because I don't see any other hands up by any directors at this point. So Gail Mahoud, you have the floor. Yes, can you hear me? Yes. I just wanted in part to respond to some of the questions. One to lose question. Yes, the USGS has developed micro-sized monitors that can detect when debris flows are rumbling down a creek. The problem is, is our creeks are so steep that that would give you about two minutes warning, which in some cases, if a alarm went off or a horn went off, it might be enough to allow you to run up hill if you were awake. What might be better is they've also developed things where they have rain-activated gauges that then are laser, they're not gauges, but they're actually measuring the height of the streams. And that's actually the best measure of whether you're going to get a debris flow is because what causes the debris flows is high amounts of runoff and carrying debris. So just before you're going to get a debris flow, you normally will see a great rise in the level of the creek or alternatively, a rapid decrease in the level of the creek, which means that there's a dam of redwood logs and other things upstream which could potentially give way. And that's actually what happened. I mean, Lois told me the story that that actually happened in Love Creek. So there are things that are short range, but I think the group that's worrying about this, the fire people, the sheriff, Cal Fire, is they recognize these are all short term. So even though you might get a little bit, maybe a few minutes more with these stream level gauges, the really evacuation is the most important thing to do. And I spoke to the county geologist, Jeff Nolan, yesterday. He said that the county is trying to push out its evacuation plans and hopes to do it by the end of the week. He has been working for the last month in the field trying to get more granular data on those areas that need to be evacuated. And one of the frustrations he's having is he has identified individual buildings that need individual spots. And he's worried that there may be over evacuation as it's being considered now by the emergency responders that might lead to evacuation fatigue down the road if the first couple of evacuations don't work. And then finally to Director Fultz's comment, it is a level playing field in that if you read the county reports and the resource conservation district, they are telling individual homeowners to put up sandbags and k-rails if they think that, for example, that'll keep stuff from falling down steep slopes behind their homes and getting them in. For example, one of the churches in Boulder Creek has already done that to protect itself from debris coming down the slope. Thank you. Thank you, girl. Mark Smolley, there we go. Yes, hello. Hello. I wanted to comment, not ask question on what Rick Moran has been saying and I believe what Gail Mayhout has been saying also. I am a licensed professional geologist and I would feel hard pressed to go out there into these areas and recommend simple mitigation measures that could be put in place in a month or two. I feel that identify the areas that are likely to have these debris flows, educate the public, have them prepared to evacuate. Yes, you can put up k-rail, but I think for the amount of a debris flow that a k-rail is gonna protect somebody's home is gonna be a very limited amount of debris flow. If it's gonna impact life and limb, it's gonna overwhelm any k-rail that you're gonna have there. So, leave it with that. Educate the public, be prepared to evacuate for this season coming up. In a longer term, yes, we can be looking, the district should be looking at other measures. Thank you. Mark, good input. Okay, any other public comments? Did I see somebody's hand flutter? I guess not. Okay, oh, no, sorry. Julia Grimm, go right ahead. Julia, did you change your mind? Okay, we'll go back to the board. Okay, Director Fulce, you have a comment? I keep hearing about educating the public. And I guess my question is educating the public about what specifically that they should know about, what they should do. And right now so far, what I've heard is educate the public about the potential for debris flows, which I think most people are probably getting that message one way or the other. And educate the public about evacuation warnings. And if it's a heavy rain season, that could mean many, many evacuation situations, which is going to have impacts on everybody, significant impacts on everybody. I think the other part of the education, though, is that for those folks that are in those areas, and hopefully the county can identify this more granularly than just everything on the eastern side of Benwell and Mountain is in danger. They also need to be prepared for the fact that if it is a heavy debris flow, they could lose their property. And the question is whether or not they have insurance to cover that kind of situation. A lot of insurance doesn't cover that. And in a situation where people are faced with potentially the loss of their major asset, most people's major asset, that is going to be a hard pill to swallow. So I hear the education effort, but I think everybody needs to be really clear about what that means and what the implications are. If, in effect, the conclusion of the county, state, and federal government is there's really no mitigation measures that can be done in a short period of time to protect anybody or potentially protect anybody. And so you're kind of on your own at that point to do what you believe needs to be done to protect yourself and your property. Thank you, Bob. I think that's what they were saying is with regards to educating and informing. Any other... Education is more than that. That's basically saying go educate yourself. Yeah, thank you, Bob. Any other comments or questions from any of the directors on the call? Lou, go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Gail made some comments. The Mark made some comments. Both Gail and Mark are on the engineering committee with me. And I'd like to make a recommendation. We're having a special meeting of the environmental committee tomorrow for good reason. And I think it's time to have a special meeting of the engineering committee to talk about the technical aspects of debris flow more. I just think that would be very valuable. It might lead to some recommendations back to the board. I would be interested in what people think. Given the circumstances, I think that might be a great idea. Bob, do you have a comment? I agree. And I think there's probably two aspects of that. One is protection of district facilities. And the other then is for the rest of the property that we own on Ben Bowen Mountain, is there something more beyond that? Given that we own the property, therefore we have a certain level of responsibility. Bob, Rick Moran? So I think I agree with Lou. I think the engineering committee and we have people that can help out in that. I think the engineering committee should meet. I think that this meeting and the number of people that are attending is a part of that education process. And hopefully the word of mouth comes out of that, that the district is actively involved in trying to find some solutions to an upcoming problem, potential problem, all right? I think you talked earlier, Bob, about Rick is having a meeting Tuesday that we should have a meeting again, subsequent to that. So there's another opportunity for us to get catching up on information that Rick's gonna get about that. It is updated. So we have to be on top of this. And I'm not talking about being anything, but, you know, aggressive on this. And so I know what I think Rick was trying to look for a recommendation to the board from the board, but I like Bob's idea that as soon as possible after your meeting with that group that you call another special meeting and that we try to have an engineering committee. I think that's the direction that I'm feeling out of this. That's, thank you. That's what I'm hearing, but I'm staff time and to start going back and putting a lot of information together for the engineering committee meeting is very limited right now. We are gearing up for a winter response. These meetings preparation take time. I'm not against having a meeting and we absolutely need it such as this meeting tonight and more information as we get it, but we are very short of staff time and there are a lot of meetings being conducted not just for the district, but with the county and with FEMA, our time for staff is very limited right now. And if you want staff reports and a lot of information the time doesn't exist right now. I mean, in a month or so maybe to start looking at things I'm trying to get an engineering report together now replacing the surface water supply lines looking at alternatives and so forth to materials and installation. I mean, we are still working almost seven days a week. Staff are still out on the weekend Saturday. We're still got a water quality issue. We don't have a lot of time right now. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but we just don't have a lot of time right now. Thank you, Rick. Okay, Lois, you have your hand up. I found, I remember. Hey girl, thank you. Okay, you know, I know how hard staff's been working and that they've been working like day and night actually, weekends, everything. But we can only expect so much out of them and they're giving us more, I think, than we can expect, but they've got such a work ethic that we're getting more. But I did want to say one thing to what Bob was saying. I think the most important thing is saving life, not saving structures. Now, I own my house. I'm a widow. If I lost my house, it would be financially pretty devastating for me, but not nearly as much as losing my life because if I can be evacuated, I'm not gonna be in one of these debris flow areas, but just say, if I was, I'd rather have my life than my house and people need to be educated. They need to be warned. They need to know what to expect and how to save their life. And that might mean, get out of there as fast as you can and leave the property. Some people will try to stay and somehow save their property and they'll liable to lose their life. This is heartbreaking. This is difficult. And we wanna do the best for our rate payers, but they've got to know what their part is and what they need to do to protect themselves. Thank you, Lars. Lou. I just want to re-bottle, sorry. No, no, I'm just kidding. Go ahead, Lou. I just want to make a comment back to Rick. Rick, I actually implicit in what I was saying about a special engineering committee meeting was the fact that you would decide when that date was because you're the one that's the busiest of all of us. So just to make it explicit, I would still like to have that special engineering committee meeting, but only when you can attend and you're ready for it. Well, Lou, I'll reach out to you tomorrow and we can talk about what would be on the agenda. And I totally understand the need. I just don't want it broad to cover a multiple lot of issues. And we're trying to get a finance committee meeting together next week. We've got a lot of serious issues to discuss regarding finance. We do have to keep moving with an environmental. We have an RFP coming in that we have to get out. And so I'll get with you tomorrow and see what we can do to facilitate a meeting. Okay, that's good. And try to get going on that. Hey, Bob, Dr. Fultz. Yes, thank you. I'm not sure we're at an either or position here where it's either your life or your property. I certainly think that our community understands that should that proposition come to pass, that they know what the most important thing is. But I just don't know that we're there yet. If everybody from the county, state and federal government walk out of these meetings over the course of the next couple of weeks and basically say, at this point, there's really nothing that can be done. Then I think at that point, it becomes that either or proposition. And again, it may not be that we can do everything. It may be that it is prioritized around some areas and other folks might have to do some things potentially on their own. But let's not minimize the impact on people who potentially could be facing losing their house. Losing their home, especially if it's an uninsured situation. I get that it's better than losing their life, but let's not minimize the overall impact. With respect to the engineering committee meeting, Rick, I think that Lou and you should be able to come up with a way to do that that wouldn't impact staff in an overly bad way, time-wise. But I do think a conversation around this is probably worthwhile, particularly in light of some of the meetings that are gonna be coming up. We do have some people on our committees that are well-suited to be able to provide specific technical information at the committee level to be able to help. And I think that would be worthwhile. Thank you, Bob. Rick Moran. So I'm trying to put a bow on this in some way. So if Rick needs a recommendation from the board right now, I mean, my recommendation is, follow the work recommendations, all right? There they are. That's what specifically you need. Then I have no problem with those work recommendations. The other thing is if you were looking for some direction as far as putting it on the agenda for the November 5th meeting, I would recommend that we do that as well. You would have new information from whatever meeting you were attending and it would still be that same kind of educational flow that we're trying to have more and more information about this potential crisis. That's good for me. I kind of get what I'm thinking when I'm hearing on the direction is that, we meet with Cal OES and we discuss the work report. And I'm not trying to minimize this, but there may be down the line from the experts, a consensus and a lot that you heard here tonight that not to do anything with installing structures or that type of stuff. There that may be where this recommendation is going. There's a lot of folks out there that feel that same way. USDA, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, they indicated that to staff when they reviewed it yesterday. But we're not there yet and we're gonna have this discussion with Cal OES. And I think that we should have a meeting very swiftly after that and discuss where I think this is going. The main point we wanted to do tonight is we wanna make sure the board is informed and our general public and to keep this line of communications open all the way through making sure that the board and the public and our customers know what we know and what we're doing and decisions to be made at this level. Right, the only thing I'd add to that, Rick would be following up with the county with respect to their communication plans and program. I think everybody's talking about educating or informing or advising, that's critical. And if the county's not gonna do something or doesn't have a really comprehensive plan to execute, then it would be, I think at a minimum it would be responsible for us to put something together for our district to provide some form of advanced indication of the potential that exists out there. All indications are the county is planning to roll out a public information campaign and keep people informed. And they're just, they're moving on that, they're getting mapping together and I believe that they'll put out quite a bit of information and we can piggyback off the information they put out and send it out to our people and give it out on our Facebook. And I think you're gonna see quite a bit of information coming out. And we're not looking for the county to solve this problem and that's what we made clear is that we're looking for help in getting to the people at Cal OES and the federal government and helping us get a project or come to a conclusion on this, on what to do. The district has settled along that we will take, we'll do what we have to do, but we do need people with the proper credentials to help us on what to do. And the work report has a lot of different information in it, but not enough to really move ahead. Are you comfortable or happy with McPherson's office and support at this time? Very much so. I mean, I talked to Bruce this office and Bruce several times this week. He has been out on the watershed. He's led, I wouldn't call it tours, but he's been out with department heads from the county, flood control, public works, with the firefighters and other local business leaders and they're discussing this. And Bruce has, like I said, I talked to him as late or as early as tonight and he's engaged. And so is the director of public works, Mr. Machado. They're working on getting this Cal OES being set up. So, you know, I feel that we're working as a team right now and hopefully we can move this ahead one way or another. I'm not sure though what that'll be. Right, thank you, Rick. Bob, do you have a comment? Yeah, a couple of things. One is I wanted to make sure Julia Grimm's comment got here. She posted something in the chat since she had bad audio. She said, my comment as a private individual is that Southern California offers many examples where life and property were saved by properly placed deflection and retention structures. I offer that without comment, that's hers. And then in light of the nature of this issue, Steve, I see there is one additional person, Judy Sherman, who has her hand up and I would recommend that we go back to the audience one more time. Once the directors stop asking questions, I'll go to her. Sounds great, thank you. Okay, any other comments, questions from directors? We'll go to our attendees again and Judy Sherman, you are on. Thank you. I wanna speak to this idea of educating the public because a number of you have said how many people are on this call tonight. And I think we're all on this call tonight because we want to learn about what the conditions are in our neighborhoods, in addition to the whole valley, but what are the conditions in our neighborhoods? Many of us are on creeks that you haven't mentioned. I'm at Albuquerque, for example. And there's been a lot of discussion about Boulder Creek. You may not see the two chat comments that one refers to a question about what about Bull Creek above the Felton treatment plant. I know there are concerns about the Felton library, which we really haven't yet been able to enjoy. And then another comment is the area above Boulder Creek town, the only area that SLD water is focusing on. So I suspect that people are on the call to be educated about where there are dangers. And I'm imagining that a map of where these potentially dangerous debris flows are would be very helpful to people. So those of us who are in areas that are high danger areas would know that and be prepared because I think being prepared to evacuate is critical. And also if there's anything we can do to mitigate the conditions. So in my neighborhood, we've done some work at the culvert to the bridge that Albuquerque goes under to make sure that the culvert is clear and that when if we have a big rain, the water's not gonna back up and go over that. That doesn't mean that it's safe down below the culvert, but we're taking the action that we can. So there are things that we can do to mitigate. I agree with that. And I also think that again, given how many people are on the call that there are questions that need to be answered again, by just having a map of what the valley looks like and where we should be paying attention as residents. Thank you. Thank you, Judy. Excellent suggestion. So just to chime in on that a little bit, there is a map through USGS and the county of debris flows that is not the water district that is more the county responsibility and that's where it's at. So there is debris flow mapping out there. The focus that we've been talking about tonight is due to the fact of our watershed. And our watershed kind of extends across the Ben Loma mountain from north of Albuquerque, across up to Peavey and Creek on 236. So that's kind of where our focus, that's why this discussion is focused to where it's at. Thank you, James. Okay, Gail, you've got a question or comment? Yeah, I just wanted to answer Judy's question. If you look at the thing that was attached to the agenda, there was a link to the word report and there are maps in there that are essentially kind of elaborations as what James was talking about the USGS maps. And they rank all of the watersheds in terms of hazards from low, medium to high. And so what you can do on that map is you just look at what the hazard is in the watershed above where you live. And that you can figure it out for yourself by looking at those maps. Thank you. Thank you, Gail. Rick, so are you comfortable with where we are as far as what you're looking to get out of this meeting and do we need to... Yes, I am, as long as the board is and there are questions about why are we just concentrating on this part of the watershed in this stream. This stream, as far as I know, has been identified as the stream that could leave the channel. Most of the other, and I think all the other streams, yes, they will have the brief flows, but they will not leave the channel. The stream has the potential to leave the channel and come down through Boulder Creek Elementary and into the town. So it's, I think it's one of the most serious, if not the serious, the brief flow of the work report. And Gail's right, the work report has a lot of good mapping in it and actually has parcels identified. There's a lot of great information in that report. But to answer your question, Director Swann, yes, we will be setting up another special meeting. The intent is to keep the board informed and we'll be reaching out to Director Ferris, Chair of the Engineering Committee and see what we can do to read in that group and have them become more involved. Okay, great, thank you, Rick. With that, thank you all for your participation tonight. And we'll look forward to continued participation next week as well. This meeting will be adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.