V. PRESENTATIONS

A. General Manager's Report

1. Report on SWRCB Order 2001-04 Hearing

V. PRESENTATIONS

A. General Manager's Report

1. Report on SWRCB Order 2001-04 Hearing

Stephanie Pintar informed the Board that when applications are submitted for the addition of a bathroom according to Ordinance No. 98, the applicant is asked to list the number of bedrooms in the house and when the house was constructed. The applicant is not required to provide this supplemental information. The information is not verified by staff. Director Chesshire suggested that applicants could be asked the age of the house, instead of the year of construction. No further direction was provided to staff.

C. Directors' Reports

1. Board Comments and Referrals

Director Henson made a motion to allow the Directors the opportunity to ask questions of staff following the staff presentation on each agenda item. Director Erickson seconded the motion. The motion failed on a vote of 3 to 4. Directors Chesshire, Potter, Pendergrass and Edwards voted against the motion.

On a motion by Director Edwards and second by Director Chesshire, the October through December 2001 Quarterly Water Supply Strategy and Budget was approved by the Board of Directors on a vote of 7 - 0.

During the public hearing on this item David Dilworth asked the District to provide written documentation showing that the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with the Water Supply Strategy and Budget. Mr. Dilworth charged that the Carmel River Steelhead and the California red-legged frog would be harmed by implementation of the Water Supply Strategy and Budget.

C. Directors' Reports

1. Board Comments and Referrals

VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Consider Adoption of October through December 2001 Quarterly Water Supply Strategy and Budget

Director Edwards made a motion that was seconded by Director Chesshire to find that "special circumstances" exist for the proposed Cypress Meadows project for the installation of a dual plumbing system and for use of an ozone-treated recycled laundry water system. The Conditions of Approval were adopted with the four amendments listed below. When the final construction drawings and approvals have been received, the District should review the plans and confirm that the project is identical to the currently proposed project. Five years after occupancy, the water records for the site should be reviewed and an adjustment should be made pursuant to the Conditions of Approval. The motion was approved on a vote of 5 - 2. Directors Erickson and Lindstrom voted against the motion.

Amendment 1 - Offered by Director Henson and seconded by Director Edwards. Amend Condition No. 11, sentence 2, to read "If actual water use exceeds the projected amount during any annual review, the District will debit from the city's water allocation a sufficient amount of water to make up for the projects' water deficit."

Amendment 2 - Offered by Director Henson and seconded by Director Edwards. Add a new condition of approval which would require that all laundry be processed on site with non-Cal-Am water supplies. If the laundry is processed off-site, it should be processed outside of the District boundaries.

Amendment 3 - Offered by Director Potter and seconded by Director Edwards. Condition No. 6 be amended to state specifically that any backup water supply proposed by the applicant would be reviewed by the General Manager and presented to the Board to ensure that no inconsistencies exist.

Amendment 4 - Offered by Director Potter and seconded by Director Edwards. Amend Condition No. 11 by adding a statement that would allow the applicant to close rooms or reduce the number of beds in the facility, in the event that water use exceeds the permitted amount.

B. Consider Request for Consideration of Special Circumstances, Rule 24 G, Cypress Meadows - Skyline Crest Enterprises, Incorporated, 110 Cass Street, Monterey

VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS

B. Consider Request for Consideration of Special Circumstances, Rule 24 G, Cypress Meadows - Skyline Crest Enterprises, Incorporated, 110 Cass Street, Monterey

The following comments were directed to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) Paul Davis, representing the Skyline Crest Enterprises, Inc. Mr. Davis confirmed that the applicant was in agreement with all proposed conditions of the permit. He proposed that the toilets and laundry system be served by a well on the property which would use approximately 25 percent of the estimated well capacity. Utilizing the well for laundry use would also save approximately 1.7 acre-feet of Cal-Am water. Mr. Davis advised that the applicant would like to defer construction of the additional back-up well, pending quarterly review of the performance of the main well. (2) Fran Farina, resident of Carmel Valley, stated that the applicant should propose another back-up water supply source if the second well is not constructed. She requested that the applicant specify whether laundry will be processed on or off-site. (3) David Dilworth, representing Responsible Consumers of the Monterey Peninsula, spoke in opposition to this item because he assumed it involved a transfer of water use credits to a new commercial connection, which is not authorized by District rules. (4) Robert Greenwood, representing the Carmel Valley Property Owners Association (CVPOA) read a letter dated October 15, 2001 that is on file at the District office. He urged the Board to deny the request for special circumstances, unless the City of Monterey could guarantee the project an allocation of 8.5 acre-feet of water. (5) Matthew Williamson, representing Reverend Alison Glenn, expressed concern that if the project uses an excessive amount of water, rooms would be closed and residents relocated. He suggested that in order to prevent that from occurring, the Cypress Meadows facility should be occupied 6 rooms at a time, and water use reviewed every three to six months. In addition, the back-up well should be constructed prior to completion of the project. (6) Paul Davis noted that the request for special circumstances does not involve a water use credit transfer. The City of Monterey has allocated water to this project. He assured the Board that it could take up to three years for the facility to be fully occupied. Mr. Davis stated that he expects the City of Monterey to require that water use be reviewed on a quarterly basis.

VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS

B. Consider Request for Consideration of Special Circumstances, Rule 24 G, Cypress Meadows - Skyline Crest Enterprises, Incorporated, 110 Cass Street, Monterey

Motion 1 - Offered by Director Edwards and seconded by Director Pendergrass. Approve the first reading of the ordinance as presented. No action was taken on this motion until all amending motions were received and voted on by the Board. The amending motions are listed below. The motion to approve the ordinance as presented was approved on a vote of 4 to 3. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted against the motion.

Motion 2 - Offered by Director Henson and seconded by Director Erickson. Amend the ordinance to state that for any water use credit transfer other than a property-to-property transfer, 35 percent of any increment of water that is not being transferred to a property will be allocated to the District's drought reserve. The remainder will be placed in a community reserve for low and moderate income housing projects. Individual jurisdictions could make application to the District to access water from the community reserve. The motion failed on a vote of 4 to 3. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted in favor of the motion.

Motion 3 - Offered by Director Chesshire and seconded by Director Edwards. Amend Section 28 B., paragraph Nos. 7, 8, 12 and 13 by deleting the word "District" and replacing it with the word "General Manager." The motion failed on a vote of 4 to 3. Directors Chesshire, Potter and Edwards voted in favor of the motion. Chair Potter requested the record note that General Counsel stated prior to the vote on the motion that all decisions made by the General Manager are appealable to the Board of Directors.

Motion 4 - Offered by Director Erickson and seconded by Director Henson. Amend the ordinance to eliminate all property-to-jurisdiction water use credit transfers. The motion failed on a vote of 4 to 3. Directors Lindstrom, Henson and Erickson voted in favor of the motion.

The following comments were presented to the Board during the public hearing on this item. (1) Robert Greenwood, representing the CVPOA, read a letter dated October 15, 2001 on file at the District office. Mr. Greenwood expressed opposition to the ordinance because of the over-riding need to revise the District's Water Allocation EIR. (2) Bob Davis, representing the City of Pacific Grove, presented comments on behalf of Mayor Sandy Koffman. Mr. Davis urged the Board to continue an aggressive commitment to a safe, secure, sufficient and long-term water supply. He asked the District to identify allocations that will meet affordable housing needs. (3) Bob Davis, a resident of Pacific Grove, spoke in support of the Policy and Technical Advisory Committee recommendation that 25 percent of each water use credit transfer be set aside as permanent conservation savings. (4) Fran Farina, legal representative for Save Our Carmel River, advised that the Water Allocation Program EIR must be revised before any water use credit transfer proposal is considered by the Board. She stated that no property-to- jurisdiction transfers of water use credit should be allowed. (5) David Dilworth, representing HOPE, expressed opposition to all water use credit transfers; however, he would accept like-to-like commercial-to-commercial transfers. Mr. Dilworth proposed that "instead of leaving the water fallow for 5 or 10 years" the amount of accumulated water use credits should be reduced by ten percent each year until the total is zero.

C. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 101 - Water Use Credit Transfers

VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS

C. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 101 - Water Use Credit Transfers

A motion was offered by Director Erickson and seconded by Director Lindstrom to adopt the first reading version of Ordinance No. 99 with the following amendment. On page 102, No. 2, the words "of a non-procedural nature" should be replaced with the words "except those dealing with non-substantive issues." The motion was approved on a vote of 5 to 2. Directors Chesshire and Edwards voted against the motion.

During the public hearing on this item, David Dilworth urged the Board to adopt the ordinance. He characterized approval of the resolution as "an admirable action to take."

D. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 99 - An Ordinance of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Requiring Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications and Establishing Penalties and Remedies for Non-Disclosure

A motion was offered by Director Edwards and seconded by Director Chesshire to approve a contract amendment with Padre Associates of $300,827, for a revised contract amount of $408,831. The motion was approved on a vote of 7 - 0.

The following comments were received during the public comment period on this item. (1) David Dilworth

asked if the staff report addressed ground water problems on Fort Ord that had been identified by the U.S. Army. He noted that if approval of the contract signaled construction of a full scale water supply project alternative, more information should be provided to the public on this item. (2) John Fischer, resident of Pacific Grove, asked for clarification of the proposal. He questioned whether new tasks were being added to the contract, or if staff proposed an amendment to fund the completion of work previously contracted for.

VII. ACTION ITEMS

A. Consider Authorization of Contract Amendment with Padre Associates for Assistance with Infrastructure Improvements and Injection Testing for Water Year 2002 Season

VII. ACTION ITEMS

A. Consider Authorization of Contract Amendment with Padre Associates for Assistance with Infrastructure Improvements and Injection Testing for Water Year 2002 Season

On a motion by Director Erickson and second by Director Edwards, the Board agreed unanimously to continue the meeting past 11:00 PM and to take up at a future meeting item VII.C, Discuss Continued Use of Commercial Water Factors and Residential Fixture Credit Methodology for On-Site Credits.

Motion 1 - A motion was offered by Director Lindstrom and seconded by Director Henson to approve the resolution as presented. No action was immediately taken on the motion. The resolution was later approved on a vote of 4 to 3 with the amendment outlined in Motion 2. Directors Erickson, Pendergrass and Edwards voted against the motion.

Motion 2 - A motion was offered by Director Potter and seconded by Director Lindstrom to amend paragraph 4 of the resolution by deleting the text following the words "City of Monterey" and replacing them with the following: "explore the potential of asserting the City's possible historic and continuing interest by propounding its Pueblo water rights claim; and." In addition, paragraph 5 should be deleted from the resolution. The title of the ordinance should also be amended to read as follows, "A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Supporting the Exploration of Pueblo Water Rights for the City of Monterey."

The following comments were presented to the Board during the public comment period on this item. (1) Fran Farina referred to a letter from the SWRCB dated April 27, 1998 stating reasons that would disqualify the City of Monterey from raising a Pueblo water rights claim that was dependent of water from the Carmel River. She urged the Board to refrain from adoption of the resolution. (2) Nancy Isakson stated that it is inappropriate for the Board to support a resolution urging the City of Monterey to pursue Pueblo water rights. (3) Robert Greenwood, representing the CVPOA, read a statement on file at the District office stating that there is no justification for encouraging the City of Monterey to devote public money towards litigation for Pueblo water rights. (4) Clive Saunders, representing the Carmel River Steelhead Association, stated that an assertion of Pueblo water rights would increase the overdraft of the Carmel River basin, and jeopardize agreements already in place designed to control river flows for the protection of the Carmel River steelhead. (5) David Dilworth stated that it is reasonable to request that the City of Monterey make an effort to pursue a Pueblo water rights claim. He also noted that there are other water supply project alternatives that should not be rejected in favor of Pueblo water rights. (6) Lou Haddad read a statement on file at the District office. Mr. Haddad spoke in favor of the resolution and stated that water obtained through a claim of Pueblo water rights could supply affordable housing projects in the City of Monterey.

VII. ACTION ITEMS

B. Consider Adoption of a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Supporting Pueblo Water Rights for the City of Monterey

VII. ACTION ITEMS

B. Consider Adoption of a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Supporting Pueblo Water Rights for the City of Monterey

This item was deferred by motion of the Board.

C. Discuss Continued Use of Commercial Water Factors and Residential Fixture Credit Methodology for On-Site Credits

No discussion of these items occurred.

VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS

IX. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:20 PM.

X. ADJOURNMENT