FINAL Minutes Regular Meeting Board of Directors Monterey Peninsula Water Management District October 16, 2006

The meeting was called to order at 7:07 PM in the Board room of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency offices. Board members present: Michelle Knight, Chair – Division 4 Judi Lehman, Vice Chair – Division 2 Alvin Edwards – Division 1 (arrived at 7:10 PM) Kristi Markey – Division 3 Larry Foy – Division 5 David Pendergrass – Mayoral Representative David Potter – Monterey County Board of Supervisors Board members absent: None General Manager present: David A. Berger District Counsel present: David Laredo The assembly recited the Pledge of Allegiance. David Dilworth, representing Helping Our Peninsula’s Environment (HOPE), requested that Item 2 be pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. He cited California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) concerns and precedent setting as reasons to pull the item. On a motion by Director Potter and second by Director Edwards, the Consent Calendar items were approved unanimously on a vote of 7 – 0 with the exception of Item 2 that was pulled for separate consideration. Approved. Director Edwards made a motion to approve the staff recommendation to adopt the Findings of Approval. The motion was seconded by Director Pendergrass and approved on a vote of 5 – 2. Directors Edwards, Foy, Knight, Pendergrass and Potter voted in support of the motion. Directors Lehman and Markey were opposed. During the public comment period on this item, the following persons addressed the Board. (1) David Dilworth, HOPE, stated that no clear and convincing evidence was provided to quantify the amount of water historically used on the lot. Also, no CEQA analysis was prepared for the project. He urged the Board to defer the item until evidence was submitted by the applicant to support approval of the appeal and new findings could be prepared. (2) Jeannie Byrne, representing the applicant, responded that sufficient evidence was submitted to support the findings of approval. Approved. Approved. Approved. Approved. Henrietta Stern, Project Manager, presented the report. A summary is on file at the District office and on the District’s website. General Manager Berger noted that the presentation should be corrected to state that no date has been set for another meeting to discuss formation of the Monterey Bay Regional Water Authority. Darby Fuerst, Senior Hydrologist, presented the report. A summary is on file at the District office and on the District’s website. Mr. Fuerst reported that for Water Year 2006 (October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006) California-American Water (Cal-Am) production from the Carmel River was 742 acre-feet below the production limit established by State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 95-10. For the beginning of Water Year 2007, (October 1 through October 15, 2006) Cal Am production was 51 acre-feet below the production limit. The following comments were received during the public comment period on this item. (1) David Dilworth, representing HOPE, suggested that the charts depicting water use levels be color coded to indicate the months when water production levels were met, and those months when water use exceeded the targets. (2) Steven Leonard, General Manager of Cal Am, complimented his customers on keeping water use within the SWRCB production limit. He stated that as a result of the Seaside Groundwater Basin adjudication, 2006 is the first year that Seaside Basin production is being regulated. Cal Am and the District are working together to monitor water production in both basins. He noted that water production may vary greatly from month to month. District Counsel Laredo reported that progress reports were provided to the Board on items 9A through 9F. No reportable action was taken on those items. A performance evaluation of the General Manager was conducted under item 4. No reportable action was taken. Director Edwards thanked staff members Joe Oliver and Henrietta Stern for attending the October 11, 2006 public hearing of the Seaside Planning Commission. At that meeting, the Commission approved the District’s request for a Conditional Use Permit for the Aquifer Storage and Recovery Phase 1 Project. Chair Knight announced that the Seaside Groundwater Basin Watermaster would conduct a special meeting on October 27, 2006 at 1:30 PM. Director Lehman invited the public to attend the October 26, 2006 MPWMD Open House. Director Markey proposed a motion to: (a) adopt Findings of Approval for Application #20060705PAG; (b) approve application #20060705PAG and issue Permit #M06-02-L4; and (c) direct staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Monterey County Clerk. The motion was seconded by Director Foy and approved unanimously on a vote of 7 – 0. Derinda Messenger, an attorney with the firm Lombardo and Giles, representing applicants Lavielle La Mont and Loni Ison, addressed the Board during the public hearing on this item. She expressed support for the staff recommendation and noted that the staff report was well written. Director Pendergrass made a motion to confirm the General Manager’s administrative direction outlined in Exhibit 12-A of the staff report titled “Water Distribution System Memorandum #3 – Protocol for Applications and Requests Involving Wells in Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer.” The motion was seconded by Director Potter. Director Edwards suggested that paragraph 5 of the memo should be amended in sentence 1 by changing the word “average” to read “arithmetic average.” Directors Pendergrass and Potter agreed with the amendment. The amended motion was approved on a vote of 6 – 1. Directors Edwards, Knight, Lehman, Markey, Pendergrass and Potter voted in favor of the motion. Director Foy voted against the motion. During the public comment period on this item, David Dilworth, representing HOPE, suggested that the word “average” in line 1 of paragraph 5 should be changed to either maximum or mean. Director Markey proposed a motion to accept the Matrix of Water Supply Alternatives, and that quarterly updates should be submitted to the Board. The motion was seconded by Director Foy and approved unanimously on a vote of 7 – 0. David Dilworth, representing HOPE, addressed the Board during the public comment period on this item. He urged the Board to study the “right sized” alternative that will provide enough water to meet the requirements of SWRCB Order 95-10. He suggested that one solution would be to combine water supply alternatives. Mr. Dilworth requested that future updates to the Matrix include the cost for individual components of the water supply alternatives. Director Edwards offered a motion to table this item and bring it back for Board discussion at a future meeting when more is known, such as the additional cost for Bookman-Edmonston/GEI Consultants to incorporate information on the Seawater Conversion Vessel proposal into the Seawater Desalination Projects Evaluation. The motion was seconded by Director Foy and approved unanimously on a vote of 7 – 0. During the public comment period on this item, David Armanasco, representing Andrew Gordon of Water Standard Company, addressed the Board. He stated that other water districts have expressed an interest in the Seawater Conversion Vessel project. The cost will depend on the number of agencies that partner to develop the project. The concept is that barges will deliver the desalinated water to within 200 yards of a wharf. The desalinated water will be pumped out of the barges via hoses that connect to fixed pipes under the wharf. Additional information will be developed on integration with transmission systems. Director Pendergrass offered a motion to adopt the 2006-2007 MPWMD Strategic Plan, and to conduct another Strategic Planning Workshop in six months. The motion was seconded by Director Edwards and approved on a vote of 6 – 1. Directors Edwards, Foy, Knight, Markey, Pendergrass and Potter voted in favor of the motion. Director Lehman was opposed. During the public comment period on this item, David Dilworth, representing HOPE, addressed the Board. He suggested that references to “the environment” in the Strategic Plan be changed to “our environment.” Motion #1 -- Director Edwards moved that a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) should not be formed. The motion was seconded by Director Knight. Motion #2 -- Director Lehman offered a substitute motion, that consideration of this item be continued to the November 20, 2006 meeting so that additional public comment can be received on the issue. Director Markey seconded the motion. Director Potter offered an amendment to Motion #2 to continue the item to a date uncertain. Directors Lehman and Markey agreed to the amendment. Director Markey requested that the motion be amended to continue the item to the December 11, 2006 Board meeting. Directors Lehman and Potter agreed to the amendment. The amended motion was approved on a vote of 4 – 3. Directors Foy, Lehman, Markey and Potter voted in favor of the motion. Directors Knight, Edwards and Pendergrass were opposed. The following comments were directed to the Board during the public comment period on this item. (1) Robert Greenwood, representing the Carmel Valley Association, expressed support for the concept of a Community Advisory Committee (CAC). He voiced a concern that only experienced engineers are qualified to evaluate water supply projects, collecting opinions of amateurs would be a waste of staff time. He stated that a more effective use of resources would be to activate the proposed Monterey Bay Regional Water Authority and focus on selection of an urgently needed water supply solution. (2) David Dilworth, representing HOPE, expressed support for the concept of a CAC. However, he voiced several objections to the charge: (a) discussion would be restricted to comments on the 7 projects in the Matrix of Water Supply Alternatives which might preclude discussion of a project that entails a combination of alternatives; (b) the committee should not be prohibited from making a recommendation; (c) appointing the General Manager as chair of the committee could be problematic if the committee disagrees with how the meetings are conducted; (d) only a few organizations on the list of community groups interested in participating on the committee have attended MPWMD Board meetings. Mr. Dilworth agreed that the committee would be a “legislative body” as defined in the Brown Act. He noted that the Attorney General of California recommended that at public meetings, each speaker be allotted 5 minutes to comment. Director Potter left the meeting at 10:00 PM Director Markey offered a motion that was seconded by Director Knight, to approve the revised letter distributed that evening outlining comments on the scope and content of the EIR. Staff was directed to add to the letter comments on water quality issues they determine have been inadequately addressed. The motion was adopted on a vote of 5 – 1. Directors Edwards, Knight, Lehman, Markey and Pendergrass voted in favor of the motion. Director Foy was opposed. Director Potter was absent for the vote. During the public comment period on this item, David Dilworth, representing HOPE, addressed the Board. He requested that the comment letter raise the issue of water quality in Moss Landing Harbor. According to Mr. Dilworth, sediment in the harbor contains the highest concentration of DDT found in California, and there is no evidence in the report that testing for DDT or other constituents was accomplished in Moss Landing Harbor. There was no discussion of the Informational Items/Staff Reports. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 PM.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consider Adoption of Minutes of the September 18 2006 Regular Board Meeting and September 25, 2006 Strategic Planning Retreat 2. Consider Findings of Approval for Appeal of General Manager’s Decision to Deny a Water Credit for Exterior Use – Patrick and Kathryn Craig, 802 17 Mile Drive, Pacific Grove (APN 006-611-035) 3. Receive and File Fourth Quarter Financial Activity Report for Fiscal Year 2005-06 4. Consider Expenditure of Budgeted Funds to Amend Contract with RAMLIT Associates for Computer Modeling Services 5. Consider Approval of a New Memorandum of Understanding between the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and the Confidential Staff Bargaining Unit 6. Consider Adoption of Treasurer’s Report for June 2006 PRESENTATIONS 7. Water Supply Project Alternatives Update GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT 8. Status Report on California-American Water Compliance with State Water Resources Control Board Order 95-10 ATTORNEY’S REPORT 9. Report on 5:30 PM Closed Session of the Board Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Gov. Code 54956.9 (a)) A. Application of California American Water Company to the Public Utilities Commission Application No. 04-09-019 – Coastal Water Project B. Application of California American Water Company to the Public Utilities Commission Application No. 05-02-012 – General Rate Case C. Save Our Carmel River; Patricia Bernardi; The Open Monterey Project v. MPWMD; MPWMD Board; and the City of Seaside; Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M72877 D. Save Our Carmel River; Patricia Bernardi and The Open Monterey Project v MPWMD; MPWMD Board and the City of Monterey: Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M72061 E. State Water Resources Control Board Permit No. 7130B F. State Water Resources Control Board Permit No. 20808 4. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov. Code 54957) – General Manager DIRECTORS’ REPORTS 10. Oral Reports on Activities of County, Cities, Other Agencies/ Committees/Associations PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. Consider Request for Annexation of Page-La Mont Parcel to Rancho Del Monte Unit of California American Water Distribution System (APN 187-021-034) ACTION ITEMS 12. Consider Confirmation of Policy for Processing Water Distribution System Applications with Wells in Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer 13. Receive Water Supply Alternatives Comparative Matrix Update for 2006 14. Consider Expenditure of Budgeted Contingency Funds to Prepare Revised Version of June 26, 2006 Report by Bookman-Edmonston/GEI Consultants, “Seawater Desalination Projects Evaluation” 15. Review and Consider Adoption of 2006-2007 MPWMD Strategic Plan 16. Consider Adoption of the Board Public Outreach Committee’s Recommendation Regarding Formation of an Ad Hoc Community Advisory Committee 17. Review and Consider Approval of Comments on Scope and Contents of Environmental Impact Report on California American Water Company’s Coastal Water Project INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS 18. Letters Received 19. Committee Reports 20. Carmel River Fishery Report 21. Water Conservation Program Report 22. Monthly Allocation Report 23. Monthly California American Water Production Report 24. Monthly Water Supply Status Report 25. Quarterly Water Supply Project Status Report 26. Quarterly Irrigation Program and Riparian Projects Report 27. Quarterly Carmel River Erosion Protection and Restoration Projects Report 28. Quarterly Water Use Credit Transfer Status Report ADJOURNMENT

____________________________________

David A. Berger, Secretary to the Board

U:\Arlene\word\2006\BoardMeetings\Minutes\FINAL1016006.doc