PVWMABoard of Directors Meeting Minutes October 19, 2005

Page 1

Board of Directors MeetingOctober 19, 2005, 7:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers250 Main Street, Watsonville, CA

BUSINESS MEETING MINUTES
  1. Call to Order, Roll Call of the PVWMA Directors, and Pledge of Allegiance: TheRegular Board meeting of Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 250 Main Street, Watsonville, CA, at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Capurro.

Board Members Present:Capurro, Carroll, Dobler, Eiskamp, Imazio, Kegebein, Miljanich

Board Members Absent: None

Staff Members Present: Mary Bannister, Interim General Manager (IGM)

Fred Miles, Engineer

Jonathan Lear, Staff Hydrologist (SH)

Brian Lockwood, Hydrology Assistant (HA)

Mark Dias, Water Programs Coordinator (WPC)

Berta Rodriguez, Administrative Analyst (AA)

Others Present:Anthony Condotti, Counsel

Steve Clary, RMC

  1. Report on Closed Session of September 21, 2005, Board Meeting. Counsel reported that the Board had considered two closed session items with respect to the vacant General Manager’s position, with no reportable action taken.
  1. Oral Communications: Joseph Pendry spoke tongue-in-cheek in favor of fellow citizen Doug McKinney becoming General Manager as recommended in a recent Letter to the Editor that had appeared in the Register-Pajaronian. Dave McCabe asked why the September financial statements had not been included in this meeting’s materials. Director Miljanich replied that financial statements are first reviewed by the Administrative/Finance Committee, and that because the Committee had cancelled its September meeting, the September financial statements would not be available until the next meeting, and that it is anticipated that the September and October financial statements will be made available at the same time. Dave McCabe also inquired about the status of collecting augmentation charges from Santa Cruz County; the IGM replied that she knew only that the Agency was pursuing this matter, and would have to get that information from the ADM who was not in attendance.
  1. Director and General Manager Comments Director Dobler inquired about the upcoming October 26th State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) Public Workshop. The IGM replied that the State Water Board conducts these hearings on a regular basis to receive updates from the different agencies. In this instance, the State Water Board had asked PVWMA and Monterey County Water Resources Agency to report on their efforts to control seawater intrusion into the groundwater aquifers in the Salinas Valley and the Pajaro Valley. She added that the State Control Board had also asked Monterey Peninsula Water Management District to report on its efforts regarding water supply and water quality issues affecting the Carmel River. The IGM indicated that she would make a presentation to the State Water Board on the status of the BMP projects. Counsel indicated that he too would attend.
  1. Consent Agenda
  2. Approve Minutes of September 21, 2005, Board Meeting.

Motion by DirectorImazio to approve the Consent Agenda, as submitted. Motion carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:Capurro, Carroll, Dobler, Eiskamp Imazio, Kegebein, Miljanich
NOES: None

ABSENT:None

ABSTAIN:None

  1. Discussion and/or Action Items

Receive presentation by Pajaro-Sunny Mesa Community Services District on proposed desalination project at Moss Landing. The IGM stated that the Projects Committee meeting, held earlier in the day, had received a presentation on the proposed desalination project from representatives of Pajaro-Sunny Mesa Community Services District (“Pajaro-Sunny Mesa”), its attorney Mac DelPiero, and Peter MacLaggan, Vice President of Poseidon Resources, and that they had been invited to make a similar presentation to the Board. The IGM then introduced Joe Rosa, General Manager of Pajaro-Sunny Mesa who in turn introduced the Board of Directors, and District Engineer who were also in attendance. Mr. Rosa stated that it and Poseidon Resources had formed a public-private partnership to permit, build and operate a seawater desalination plant at Moss Landing, and that the purpose of today’s presentation was to propose a joint solution to bring forward a water supply to the Monterey Bay Region. Mr. DelPiero provided background on Pajaro-Sunny Mesa, its growth, and boundaries. Mr. MacLaggan then made a detailed presentation on the proposed Monterey Bay Regional Seawater Desalination Project at Moss Landing that covered location, project timeline, business and water purchase arrangements. He distributed a copy of his presentation materials. Extensive discussion ensued, with Mr. MacLaggan replying to diverse questions ranging from capital costs, system capabilities, water quality, delivery system, and financing. Mr. MacLaggan stated that their hope was that Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency would enter into an interagency partnership with them to jointly develop this proposed desalination plant. After discussion, the Board directed staff to pursue discussion on key issues on an exploratory basis and report back through either the Projects Committee or the Administrative/Finance Committee.

  1. Consider agreement with Aromas Water District concerning water service outside PVWMA boundary. Counsel briefed the Board on this matter. He noted that at the September 21st meeting, the Board had directed the preparation of this agreement, to include (i) property owners’ commitment to pay impact fees to the Agency, if the Agency adopts an impact fee ordinance; (ii) property owners’ consent to annexation to Pajaro; (iii) incorporation of the Orchard Acres Mutual Water Company wells into the Aromas system, if reasonably feasible; and (iv) appropriate indemnity and other language determined by Counsel. He explained how the language in the agreement regarding the amount of the impact fee ordinance and associated three-year sunset provision as well as the process by which the decision whether to take over the Anzar well by Aromas Water District would be determined, had been arrived at between him and Counsel for AWD. He answered Director questions. Larry Cain, General Manager, Aromas Water District, opined that the amount of any such impact fee had not been clarified in the agreement. Mr. Cain then introduced Kathy Bosworth, a resident of Orchard Acres Subdivision who had been appointed as spokesperson for the residents. She appealed to the Board to reconsider the impact fee provision. Ms. Bosworth described the lengthy and costly struggle the Orchard Acres residents had endured in their need to achieve a clean, safe, reliable water supply so as to lift the State’s “boil water” health directive. Robust discussion ensued regarding the likelihood of an impact fee ordinance being adopted by the Board in the future and the whether it should extend to the Orchard Acres Subdivision; if so, whether it should apply only to the five existing homes or these five, plus six undeveloped lots. Counsel responded to questions.

(Note: Director Miljanich left the meeting at 8:30 p.m.)

Dave McCabe and Margie Kay, members of the public, rose to speak against the proposed agreement. After more discussion, the following action was taken:

Motion by DirectorKegebein to approve the agreement with Aromas Water District concerning water service outside PVWMA boundary, as submitted by Counsel. Motion carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:Capurro, Carroll, Imazio, Kegebein
NOES: Dobler, Eiskamp

ABSENT:Miljanich

ABSTAIN:None

  1. Discuss Technical Advisory Committee reconfiguration, goals and schedule. The SH reported on the Agency’s desire to replace the current TAC membership and purpose with new members to assist Staff in guiding the development of the MODFLOW groundwater model upgrade project recently approved by the Board. He stated that the Agency believes that the current TAC had achieved its stated objective of providing input to the BMP and to the Revised BMP. He indicated that the Agency would recruit the new members from local water agencies, regulatory groups, academic, technical representatives from interested stakeholders, and interested members of the public. He indicated once a new TAC had been constituted, staff would return with a resolution to the Board for approval. Discussion ensued, with the SH answering questions from the Board. After discussion, the Board verbally authorized the Agency to proceed as reported by the SH.

7. Reports/Informational Presentations

A.Counsel Reports

1.Litigation update. Counsel reported that he had been advised by the Agency’s Special Counsel that the Reply Brief had been timely filed as well as the reply to Harold Griffith’s Amicus Brief. Counsel offered to make copies available to any interested Director.

B.Board Committee Reports. The IGM noted that the Administrative/Finance Committee had cancelled its October meeting.

C.Staff Reports

  1. Grant funding status report. The IGM updated the Board on the status of the Prop. 50, Chapter 8 joint grant application as filed by San Benito County, PVWMA, and Santa Clara Valley Water District.
  2. BMP Update. The IGM stated that different Staff members would attend both the State Water Board’s October 26th Public Workshop and the Santa Cruz County Planning Commission’s meeting to discuss the City of Watsonville’s application for a change in the zoning ordinance as it relates to the Water Recycling Facility as they were scheduled on the same date. Steve Clary, RMC, updated the Board on the negotiations with the city on the cooperative agreement regarding the Water Recycling Facility. He answered questions from the Directors. Discussion ensued, focused on the financial capabilities of the Agency in the milieu of pending litigation. Darlene Din requested a copy of said agreement, once it has been finalized.
  3. Project operations report. The IGM noted that this item had been thoroughly covered in discussion above.
  4. Water conservation report. The IGM introduced Mark Dias, the Agency’s new Water Programs Coordinator, and indicated that he would be prepared a water conservation report at the next meeting.

7.Written Communication/Correspondence

8.Future Meetings and Agenda Items. The IGM advised the Board that the County of Santa Cruz Planning Department would hear the City of Watsonville’s request for zoning changes necessary to implementation of the Watsonville Recycled water facility project on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 and that on the same date, at 10:00 a.m., the State water Resources Control Board would hold a public workshop to receive progress reports from Monterey County Water Resources Agency and the Agency regarding their efforts to control seawater intrusion into the groundwater aquifers in the Salinas Valley and the Pajaro Valley in Salinas. She invited Director participation. The Board agreed to cancel the November 2nd Workshop Meeting.

  1. Strategic Planning and Public Outreach Committee Meeting – November 7, 2005
  2. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting – November 18, 2005, 9:30 am, Ag Extension Auditorium
  3. Water Quality and Operations Committee – November 18, 2005, 2:00 pm, Watsonville Wastewater Treatment Facility
  4. Board Workshop Meeting – November 2, 2005, 1:30 pm, Watsonville Council Chambers
  5. Administrative/Finance Committee – November 9, 2005, 1:45 pm, PVWMA Conference Room
  6. Projects Committee –November 16, 2005, 3:00 pm, PVWMA Conference Room
  7. Board Meeting – November 16, 2005, 7:00 pm, Watsonville Council Chambers

9.Closed Session

  1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation

Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b):

One (1) potential case

B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation

Consideration of initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c):

Two (2) potential cases

C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to

Government Code Section 54956.9(a):

PWVMA v. Aguirre, et al. – S

CSC Case No. CV151156

10.Return to Open Session for Closed Session Report

Item 9:

  1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation

Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b):

One (1) potential case

B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation

Consideration of initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c):

Two (2) potential cases

C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to

Government Code Section 54956.9(a):

PWVMA v. Aguirre, et al. – SCSC Case No. CV151156

The closed session convened at approximately 9:15 p.m. at the conclusion of the open portion of the regular meeting with Directors Capurro, Carroll, Imazio, Dobler Eiskamp and Kegebein. Staff in attendance were Bannister and Condotti. The Board reconvened to open session at approximately 9:40 p.m. No members of the public were present and no action was reported.

11.Adjournment at 9:40 p.m.

______

Mary Bannister, Interim General Managerdate approved

2005\AgendaMinutes