The meeting was called to order at 7 PM.

Board members present:

Chair, David Potter - Monterey County Board of Supervisors

Vice Chair, Alvin Edwards - Division 1

Ron Chesshire - Division 2

Molly Erickson - Division 3

Kris Lindstrom - Division 4

Alexander "Zan" Henson - Division 5

David Pendergrass - Mayoral Representative

Board members absent: None

District staff present:

Darby Fuerst, General Manager

Ray Millard, Administrative Services Manager

Joe Oliver, Water Resources Manager

Stephanie Pintar, Water Demand Manager

Henrietta Stern, Project Manager/Public Information Rep.

Cynthia Schmidlin, Human Resources Analyst

Arlene Tavani, Administrative Assistant

District Counsel present: David C. Laredo

I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

The assembly recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The following comments were directed to the Board during Oral Communications. (1) Fran Farina requested that technical staff be available at the District office on Friday's prior to the monthly Board meetings in order to answer questions from the public on upcoming agenda items. Ms. Farina also asked that data she had previously requested regarding water use within the District be included in the Board packet since it would not be part of the Year 2000 Annual Report. (2) John Fischer, a resident of Pacific Grove spoke on item VIII.J, the Monthly Cal-Am Sales Report. He asked for clarification of the agreement between the District and the Pacific Grove Golf Course regarding potable water use. (3) Dr. William Lewis was prepared to speak on item VI.A, concerning the Hidden Hills Water Distribution System, but agreed to hold his comments until the Board considered that item.

III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

On a motion by Director Pendergrass and second by Director Edwards, the Consent Calendar items were approved with the exception of item I, which was pulled for separate consideration. The motion was approved unanimously.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

A motion was made by Director Lindstrom and seconded by Director Chesshire, to approve the Administrative Committee recommendation to post staff notes for the monthly Board packet as PDF (pre-defined format)files. The motion was approved unanimously.

Approved.

IV. CONSENT CALENDAR

A. Consider Approval of Minutes from the Regular Board Meeting of March 19, 2001

B. Ratification of Agreements

C. Receive Requirement Survy and System Implementation Plan on Improving Customer Service Response Time, Data Management and Record Keeping in the Water Demand Division

D. Receive Classification and Compensation Study Prepared by Johnson and Associates

E. Adopt Resolution Supporting Grant Application of Rancho San Carlos Road to Via Mallorca Restoration Project

F. Consider Authorization of Funds for Purchase of Spectrophotometer

G. Consider Authorization of Funds to Retain RJA Management Services, Inc. to Facilitate Strategic Planning

H. Consider Authorization of Funds to Prepare Maps for Implementation of Ordinance No. 96

I. Consider Authorization of Funds to Continue to Post Board Packet Public Hearing Items to District's Web Site

J. Treasurer's Report for the Month of March 2001

General Manager Fuerst reported that the full-scale test injection/recovery well was operational, and it had an injection rate of 1,000 gallons per minute. That rate is three times faster than the injection rate of the pilot injection/recovery test well. Mr. Fuerst announced that approximately 800 adult steelhead were counted at the San Clemente Dam fish ladder. General Manager Fuerst reported that community water use year-to-date was ten percent below the limit established by State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 95-10. He noted that rainfall year-to-date was approximately 100 percent of normal and streamflow was about two-thirds of normal.

V. PRESENTATIONS

A. General Manager's Report

1. Update on Strategic Plan

District Counsel did not present a report.

B. Attorney's Report

Director Chesshire asked District Counsel to summarize the April 16, 2001 letter the Board received from the SWRCB. Mr. Laredo interpreted the letter to state that: (1) the California-American Water Company is the only entity subject to SWRCB Order 95-10; however, it is possible that drilling new wells could affect Cal-Am's ability to comply with Order 95-10; and (2) water in the Cal-Am distribution system that may become available as a result of any alternate supply is subject to the one-to-one reduction. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Laredo advised that according to the letter, water use outside of the Cal-Am system is not subject to Order 95-10. Director Edwards thanked District staff member Joseph Oliver and a consultant, Martin Feeney, for the work they have done on development of the full scale test injection/recovery project. Director Erickson suggested that the Board members check their calendars and schedule a strategic planning session that evening. Director Potter responded that a strategic planning session would be scheduled after a new general manager has been chosen. Director Erickson requested that a policy be developed on ways in which Board members may direct staff or District Counsel to take significant time away from the office without authority from the entire Board. She also asked that until a policy is developed, the General Manager should prepare a brief weekly report updating the Board on significant developments during the week and what projects staff has been working on. The report would include any direction given to staff, thereby keeping the full Board informed. Chair Potter directed the General Manager to proceed with preparation of the weekly report.

C. Directors' Reports

1. Board Comments and Referrals

Chair Potter reported that at the March 21 and March 28, 2001 Closed Sessions, the Board discussed ongoing negotiations with the potential candidate for the position of General Manager. No decisions were made. At the April 16, 2001 Closed Session, instructions were given to the recruiter. No decision was made by the Board.

2. Report on March 21, 2001 Continued Closed Session, March 28, 2001 Closed Session, and April 16, 2001 Closed Session

Motion 1 - Director Edwards made a motion to approve recommendations listed in the staff note as R1, R2, and R3. In addition, R4 should be approved if staff could complete the Phase III Hydrogeologic Study of the Laguna Seca Subarea within six months. Director Chesshire seconded the motion. Director Edwards later withdrew his motion.

Motion 2 - Director Edwards made a motion to approve recommendations R1, R2, R3 and R4 and direct that the Phase III Hydrogeologic Study be completed within 180 days. The motion was seconded by Director Erickson. The motion was later withdrawn.

Motion 3 - Director Chesshire made a motion that was seconded by Director Lindstrom to: (a) approve recommendations R1 and R2 for the 14 existing legal lots of record identified in the staff note with the caveat that they are guaranteed their water right in some manner; (b) add a new condition No. 14 that would require California-American Water Company to pay $435 per acre-foot on the expanded production limit, payable when the permit is finalized; and (c) amend recommendation R3 to establish the annual production limit at 229.9 AFY and to increase the expansion capacity limit by 14 connections for a total of 477 connections. The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 7 to 0.

Motion 4 - Director Henson made a motion that was seconded by Director Erickson, to initiate preparation of the Phase III Hydrogeologic Study coincident to processing the remainder of the application. The motion was amended to state that staff should begin preparation of the request for proposals to conduct the hydrogeologic study immediately. The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 7 to 0. (Note: It is understood by staff, based on the Board's discussion, that the Directors would like to see the hydrogeologic report completed in approximately 180 days, or at least receive a report from staff on how far the report has progressed within 180 days. It was understood that it could be six to nine months before the application for the 44 lots is brought to the Board again.)

The following comments were received during the public hearing on this item. (1) Robert Greenwood, representing the Carmel Valley Property Owners Association, read a letter dated April 16, 2001 that is on file at the District office. The letter recommended that there be no increase in the allocation for the Hidden Hills Water Distribution System until the Phase III Hydrogeologic Study of the Hidden Hills Subarea is completed and the cumulative impacts have been evaluated. (2) Dr William Lewis described a 20-acre parcel he owns and asked how he could determine if that property would benefit from the water distribution system amendment requested by Cal-Am. (3) John Alexander, representing an investor group that subdivided a 20-acre parcel in the Bay Ridge area. He questioned the accuracy of data used to determine water use in the Hidden Hills area. He expressed concern that the Board's actions could deprive his property of a water supply and affect the value of his investment. Mr. Alexander stated that if he had known about the District's involvement with the water system, he could have taken measures to ensure that his investment was secure. (4) Craig Hurt, resident of Hidden Hills Road, recommended that no additional subdivisions should be allowed in the Hidden Hills system until all lots of record are developed. At that time, an assessment of the aquifer could be made. (5) Russ Hatch, former Administrative Officer of the Carmel Valley Mutual Water Company from 1983 to 1994 (the company that preceded the Hidden Hills Water Distribution System). Mr. Hatch explained that under his management, an allocation system was implemented within the water distribution system. Cal-Am did not continue that practice but allocated water based on a first-come, first-served basis. Mr. Hatch noted that some property owners may have paid for a water allocation, but would be denied the use of water unless the Board approved the connection limit increase. He advised the Board that some of the wells identified as part of the Hidden Hills System, actually separated from the system in years past. (6) Denise Stevens, owner of property in Hidden Hills, suggested that a study to determine the source of the increased demand should be done that considers the size of homes built in the area. (7) Fran Farina, representing Cal-Am Rate Payers (CARP) submitted a letter dated March 6, 1998 addressed to the Public utilities Commission that is on file at the District office. Ms. Farina stated that the letter and attachments outlined conditions that Cal-Am was to adhere to as operator of the Hidden Hills system. She noted that water use in the Hidden Hills system has doubled since 1980. Ms. Farina urged the Board to defer a decision on this application until the Phase III Hydrogeologic Study of the Laguna Seca Subarea is complete. According to Ms. Farina, CARP wants to ensure that owners of legal lots of record in the Hidden Hills area can access the water they have been paying for over the last decade. (8) Brad Smith, resident of Salinas and co-owner of a 20-acre parcel in Hidden Hills, urged the Board to approve the amendment to the water distribution system. Mr. Smith reasoned that the amendment would limit water use to the amount guaranteed in the most recent hydrologic study. (9) Terry Ryan, California-American Water Company, announced that Cal-Am is committed to water conservation and meeting the water requirements of its customers in Hidden Hills. He advised that a new rate structure would be developed for the Hidden Hills area due to the unique nature of development in that area. He reported that Cal-Am had made improvements to the Hidden Hills system including construction of the new Bay Ridge well, reconstruction of the Standex well and was currently in the process of building a treatment plant for PH and corrosion control. Mr. Ryan urged the Board to approve the request to amend the water distribution system permit. (10) Ray Herrod, representing Herrod Homes, expressed satisfaction with the service Cal-Am provides to Hidden Hills customers. Mr. Herrod explained that he is a home owner in Bay Ridge. He stated that Cal-Am does monitor residential water use, and that customers are notified if they use an excessive amount of water.

IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Consider Application by California-American Water Company to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System

1. Consider Initial Study and Proposed Negative Declaration

2. Consider Application to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System Permit

IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Consider Application by California-American Water Company to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System

1. Consider Initial Study and Proposed Negative Declaration

2. Consider Application to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System Permit

IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Consider Application by California-American Water Company to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System

1. Consider Initial Study and Proposed Negative Declaration

2. Consider Application to Amend Hidden Hills Water Distribution System Permit

The meeting was recessed between 9 PM and 9:10 PM.

Director Pendergrass made a motion that was seconded by Director Chesshire, to adopt Ordinance No. 98 with an amendment to Rule 24 C, paragraph 3, sentence 14, the word "final" should be changed to "finaled." The motion was approved on a vote of 5 to 2. Directors Henson and Erickson voted against the motion.

The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) Thomas Mancini, Mayor Pro Tem for the City of Seaside, complemented the Board on development of Ordinance No. 98 and supported adoption of the proposed rules. He reported that 198 property owners in Seaside have been waiting to add a second bathroom to their home. (2) Don Edgren, member of the Monterey City Council, spoke in support of Finding No. 6 of the ordinance which mandates homeowners to fully retrofit any home that benefits from Ordinance No. 98. Mr. Edgren asked if Finding No. 7 authorized a one and one-half bathroom home to be upgraded to a two bathroom home. Staff responded that the ordinance would allow a partial bathroom to be expanded to a full bath. The ordinance allows up to 2 bathrooms in a residence. (3) Michael Waxer , a resident of Carmel Valley, commented on the requirement to monitor water use of homeowners that add a second bathroom under proposed Ordinance No. 98. According to Mr. Waxer, water use in a family increases as children grow older. Water use will increase whether or not another bathroom is added to the home. Mr. Waxer suggested that water use should be compared against a property with only one bathroom. He agreed that additional fixtures in a home do not increase water use, but family water needs do vary over time. Mr. Waxer expressed support for the proposed ordinance. (4) David Dilworth, Responsible Consumers of the Monterey Peninsula (RCMP), spoke against adoption of the ordinance. He stated that the District is in a declared water supply emergency, and the ordinance would result in damage to the Carmel River environment. He read a letter dated April 16, 2001written by Kyle Kovalik of Windermere Real Estate (on file at the District office) which maintained that adding another bathroom to a home does support a larger number of people in the home. Mr. Dilworth urged the Board to rescind the Negative Declaration and prepare an environmental impact report on the proposed ordinance. District Counsel responded that the Cal-Am production limit is not modified by this ordinance. Water use in the Cal-Am system must remain below the production limit.

B. Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 98 - An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Amending Residential Water Fixture Unit Values

VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS

B. Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 98 - An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Amending Residential Water Fixture Unit Values

On a motion by Director Edwards and second by Director Henson, the April - June 2001 Water Supply Strategy and Budget was approved unanimously on a vote of 7 to 0.

During the public hearing on this item, Fran Farina representing Save Our Carmel River, asked for a status report on Cal-Am's proposal for reconfiguration of the Lower Carmel River system, that was required by the State Water Resources Control Board in Order 95-10. Staff responded that Cal-Am completed the study and submitted it to the SWRCB in June 1999. The SWRCB has not yet completed its assessment of the study.

C. Consider Adoption of April - June 2001 Water Supply Strategy and Budget

On a motion by Director Edwards and second by Director Chesshire, the Board unanimously approved an expenditure of $11,000 to fund production and distribution of the report.

No comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item.

D. Receive Public Comment on Draft MPWMD 2000 Annual Report and Approve Funding for Production and Distribution of Report

Motion 1 - Director Chesshire made a motion to approve the first recommendation outlined on page 126 of the Board packet to approve the implementation guidelines. Director Edwards seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously on a vote of 7 - 0.

Motion 2 - Director Erickson made a motion that was seconded by Director Lindstrom confirming the following: (a) the guidelines can be revised at the direction of the General Manager; (b) staff's ongoing priorities take precedent over implementation of Ordinance No. 96; (c) staff will coordinate with Monterey County on utilization of its GIS system; (d) wording should be amended on the second row of the table shown on page 143 of the Board packet to read "water source is on one parcel and is applied only on another single legal parcel (can be different APN from source); and (e) refinements will be made to the implementation guidelines as outlined on page 2 of the handout provided by staff entitled "Supplement to Staff Note VII-A, Draft Implementation Guidelines for Ordinance No. 96." The motion was approved unanimously.

The following comments were directed to the Board during the public comment period on this item. (1) Robert Greenwood, representing Carmel Valley Property Owners Association, read a letter dated April 16, 2001 on file at the District office. Mr. Greenwood asked for clarification as to when a public hearing would be required for approval of a well application. District Counsel responded that the public would be given notice and an opportunity to attend all hearings related to approval of well applications, even if the hearings are before a staff hearing officer. (2) Fran Farina, representing SOCR, urged District staff to coordinate with Monterey County on implementation of this ordinance. She thanked staff for working so hard to develop Ordinance No. 96 and the corresponding guidelines. She described the staff effort as a function of the District's charge to manage the water resources on the Monterey Peninsula. Staff responded that the District will coordinate with Monterey County on use of its GIS system, and that staff plans to work closely with the Monterey County Environmental Health and Planning departments on other aspects of ordinance implementation.

VII. ACTION ITEMS

A. Consider Draft Implementation Guidelines for Ordinance No. 96

No action was taken by the Board on the Informational Items.

VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS

• Letters Received
• Committee Reports

• Strategic Plan Update
• Water Supply Projects
• Carmel River Fishery Report
• Carmel River Erosion Protection and Restoration Report
• Irrigation Program and Riparian Projects Report
• Water Conservation Program Report
• Public Information Program
• Monthly Cal-Am Sales Report
• Monthly Cal-Am Production Report
• Monthly Allocation Report
• Financial Report - CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project
• Production Report - CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project
• April 2001 Water Supply Status Report

The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 PM.