FINAL DRAFT

MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (MPWMD)

SIX-MONTH STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

April 19, 2007 – September 30, 2007

B THREE-YEAR GOAL: Establish respectful and effective relationships among the District, CAW, public, jurisdictions and the Water Master

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. On August 30, 2007	Board	Hold a special meeting with the CAW General Manager to learn about the operation and regulation of CAW Monterey Division (see suggestion #1 from attached document approved by the Board on 2/22/07).
2. By August 31, 2007	General Manager (lead) and the Public Information Coordinator	Develop and implement a procedure to implement suggestions #3 and #4 from the document approved on 2/22/07 for improving understanding and cooperation between CAW and MPWMD (see attachment at the end of this record).
3. By September 30, 2007	Public Outreach Committee (Board Member Michelle Knight-lead), the General Manager and the Water Demand Manager	Develop a Public Outreach Plan to educate the public on District activities and regulation changes.
4. By September 30, 2007	General Manager (lead) and Board Members	Make a presentation to each jurisdiction regarding water issues affecting the jurisdictions.
5. By September 30, 2007	Water Demand Manager (lead) and TAC	Document and implement a process for educating the jurisdictions and the public on changes to District permit regulations.
6. By September 30, 2007	Senior Hydrogeologist	Initiate work under the initial contract with the Seaside Basin Watermaster and determine, in conjunction with the Watermaster, the amount and type of District technical services required to complete and implement the Monitoring and Management Plan.

FINAL DRAFT

B THREE-YEAR GOAL: Determine and participate in long-term water supply solution(s)

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. Ongoing	General Manager and District Counsel (co-leads)	Continue active participation in PUC Coastal Water Project (CWP) process, including environmental review and Department of Ratepayer Advocates processes.
2. Ongoing	Senior Hydrogeologist	Provide technical support or guidance to the MRWPCA for its Groundwater Replenishment Project in the Seaside Basin.
3. By June 30, 2007	General Manager	Present to the Board for consideration an MOU for participation in the Monterey Bay Regional Water Solutions Task Force to evaluate regional water solutions.
4. By September 30, 2007	General Manager	Present to the Board the Community Advisory Committee Report on projects listed in the matrix of water supply alternatives.
FUTURE: By the November 2007 Board meeting	District Engineer (lead) and Project Manager	Refine the matrix of water supply alternatives (using the quantified supply target) to incorporate results of the revised Bookman-Edmonston/GEI report evaluating desalination projects.

FINAL DRAFT

C THREE-YEAR GOAL: Complete ASR Phase 1 and expanded ASR Project(s)

ASR PHASE 1 OBJECTIVES:

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. By May 31, 2007	District Engineer	Secure SWRCB water rights permit for Phase 1 ASR project (if not, ASR team will prepare for water rights hearing).
2. By September 30, 2007	Senior Hydrogeologist	Complete Well #2 for Phase 1 ASR, including final facilities design and contractor selection.
3. By September 30, 2007	Senior Hydrogeologist	Determine the feasibility of a dual-well injection test and report the results to the General Manager.
4. By September 30, 2007	Senior Hydrogeologist, in cooperation with CAW	Facilitate determination and schedule for completion of necessary infrastructure improvements to the CAW system to ensure they are in place to support Phase 1 ASR.
5. By September 30, 2007	District Counsel	Confirm water storage rights with the Watermaster.

EXPANDED ASR PROJECT(S) OBJECTIVES:

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. By June 30, 2007	Team Water Rights (General Manager-lead, General Counsel, District Engineer, Water Resources Manager, Senior Hydrogeologist and Senior Fisheries Biologist)	Complete negotiations with CAW for joint ownership of water rights, to obtain future ASR and other water rights permit(s).
2. By August 31, 2007	Water Resources Manager, in cooperation with CAW	Develop a project description and yield estimate for expanded ASR and present to the Board.

FINAL DRAFT

DTHREE-YEAR GOAL: Enhance revenue from external resources

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. By May 31, 2007	General Manager (lead) and Water Demand Manager	Complete reimbursement agreement for the Conservation Program with CAW.
2. By June 30, 2007	District Engineer	Complete and submit to the Board for action the IRWMP (Integrated Regional Water Management Plan) to compete for State grant funds.
3. By July 31, 2007	Water Resources Manager	Apply for 100% NMFS/CAW settlement agreement funding of the Water Intake Retrofit Project at the Sleepy Hollow Fish Rearing Facility.
4. By August 31, 2007	Chief Financial Officer (lead), Administrative Committee and the Board	Secure funding through a debt issuance for ASR Phase 1.
5. By September 30, 2007	Chief Financial Officer (lead), General Counsel and the Administrative Committee	Monitor the future CPUC rate increase requests and project potential impact on MPWMD.

FINAL DRAFT

ETHREE-YEAR GOAL: Enhance and protect the water resources of the Carmel River and the Seaside Ground Water Basin for the benefit of the environment and the community

WHEN	WHO	WHAT	STATUS			COMMENTS
			DONE	ON TARGET	REVISED
1. Beginning immediately and ongoing	Board Member David Potter (lead) and the District Engineer	Provide support data and participate in the Big Sur Land Trust Carmel River Parkway Project.
2. At the August 2007 Board meeting	Water Demand Manager	Present to the Board for direction the amendment of Rule 23 to reflect new metering technology.
3. At the August 2007 Board meeting	Water Resources Manager (lead) and the Water Demand Manager	Present to the Board for their discussion a possible environmental trigger related to stream flow that would require existing conservation measures during low-flow years.
4. At the August 2007 Board meeting	General Counsel	Present to the Board for direction an ordinance to amend the process by which the District enforces its rules and regulations.
5. By September 30, 2007	Water Demand Manager (lead) and Water Resources Manager	Present to the Board for its consideration an ordinance that will include all areas of the Seaside Basin so they are subject to the Expanded Conservation and Standby Rationing Plan.
6. By September 30, 2007	Water Demand Manager (lead) and Water Resources Manager, working with CAW and the Seaside Municipal Water System, and in consultation with the Watermaster	Present to the Water Demand Committee a draft contingency plan to implement Stages 5-7 of the Expanded Conservation and Standby Rationing Plan in case of drought.

List of Suggestions for Improving Understanding and Cooperation between California American Water and the MPWMD

Adopted February 22, 2007

1. Conduct a televised workshop on August 30, 2007 that would provide Steven Leonard, General Manager of the Monterey Division, California American Water (CAW), the opportunity to educate the Board and public about how a regulated utility is operated and funded. He could describe: (a) the physical system including the number of tanks, pumps and customers CAW serves locally; (b) the regulatory process; (c) operating costs and the interaction between capital and operations; (d) how capital budgets are developed and the associated priorities; and (e) how the Public Utility Commission regulates profits through a public process. Mr. Leonard would like to explain why customers pay higher rates for less water, and that rates pay for maintenance and operation of the entire water system, even if only 60 percent of the available water is utilized. Mr. Leonard suggested that another subsequent workshop could be focused on describing the tiered rate system. Mr. Leonard shall submit an outline of the presentation to the Public Outreach Committee for review prior to the August 30, 2007 workshop.

2. Mr. Leonard invited the District Board members to tour CAW facilities to increase their understanding of the complicated system they are regulating. The Board should make a visit to San Clemente Dam and view the siltation that has occurred. Directors should also see the Seaside Basin wells. These tours could be arranged without the participation of the press.

3. CAW could inform the District before it begins infrastructure improvements, such as replacement of a water main in a sensitive area. The District would then be prepared to make statements in support of the work when warranted. This would alleviate confusion among members of the public as to whether or not the District was in someway responsible for the project.

4. CAW and the District should jointly develop press releases on projects they are developing cooperatively.

5. For issues that have potential as publicly reported disagreements, CAW and the District commit to discussion in order to reach a common understanding of the facts, and mutual recognition of divergent perspectives.

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS AND THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE MPWMD SINCE THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT?

Brainstormed Individual Perceptions:

we have better public relations
we’ve set our goals
improved relationship with Watermaster participants
we set a long-term water supply goal with our jurisdiction as partners (17,000 acre feet per year)
initiated enforcement actions for improper Carmel River works
coordination with California American Water (CAW) on Phase 1 and Phase 2 water rights
strengthened relationship with California Public Utilities Commission, Division of Ratepayer Advocates (CPUC DRA) staff
added the salt water vessel on the matrix
completed our own District meeting space
successful open house
got the rules and regulations on the web
agreed on 5 ways to improve CAW/District relationships
in process of completing implementation guidelines for water distribution permits
took all existing committees and clarified their reason for being (e.g., mission, charge, goals)
expanded the Rebate Program
we resolved the GASB concerns related to unfunded liabilities related to our retirement plan for employees
Phase 1 ASR well is dug
better relationship with the County
completed Lagoon Plan
better relationships with the jurisdictions
dedicated staff
established spending priority for steelhead
CD for water wise gardening
coordination with CAW on conservation
budgeted to add to the financial reserves
Watermaster approved service contract (yesterday)
completed nearly all backlogged water distribution permits
obtained temporary water rights for ASR
in process of developing better tools for data access and sharing
had a clean financial audit
provided leadership in preparing Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Plan—State grant
actively participated in the Technical Committee for the Water Master
passed a resolution supporting Reclamation Project by Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA)
updated water supply matrix
addressed all of the strategic objectives from the strategic plan
completed 2006 Mitigation Report
approved scripts for the PR video
successfully reared steelhead in 2006
cosponsored Water Awareness Committee of Monterey County’s successful Landscape Symposium
gave numerous presentations to groups and organizations regarding District activities
established a Community Advisory Committee
developed presentation to bring to our jurisdictions
simplified and clarified the water permit process
simplified and clarified the fees and charges table
completed 2006 Annual Report
all active wells are in compliance with our water distribution permits
Forest Lake Reservoir rededicated
District’s GIS Plan and implementation is being used by various organizations all over the state
complied with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order 9510
complied with Seaside adjudication production limits
established working relationship with new CAW management
we finished the research and development for the fish ladder video

WHAT’S NOT GOING AS WELL AS YOU WOULD LIKE INTERNALLY WITH MPWMD?

Brainstormed Individual Perceptions:

not enough being done for river environment
frustration with lack of classification study
no new water supply
outdated IT equipment and software
ASR well #2 problem not solved
constrained financial resources
frustration by public at lengthy processing time for Water Distribution System (WDS) permits and pre-apps
no water rights for ASR
not enough emphasis on public information
website difficult to navigate and not user friendly (e.g., length of web address)
difficulty getting access remotely to our data collection equipment
funding for ASR Phase 1 not completed
did not make the presentations to the County, Cities and Airport
didn’t complete the reimbursement agreement
District’s comments on CAW’s water rate increases not fully accepted by CPUC
ASR not operable in dry years
salary/compensation concerns
public’s perception of us is still that we are mean and dysfunctional
public confusion with CAW’s and District’s functions
not enough trained staff working on water distribution permits
have not gotten an expanded ASR Plan
not enough being done about time management response to public
loss of experienced Board members anticipated
have not convinced public that District fisheries staff is coordinating with agencies
public misperception regarding basis of water conservation stages
lack of completion of pipeline from Canyon del Rey to Hilby
public’s confusion of different water agencies’ functions
public’s perception of target yield goals and how they will be achieved financially
the Database Project has not been completed

EXTERNAL FACTORS/TRENDS THAT WILL/MIGHT HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON MPWMD IN 2007/2008

Brainstormed Individual Perceptions:

desalination
Desalination Pilot Project
heightened awareness of the broad public of the environment and global warming
Prop 50, 84 and 1E
active PUC process on Coastal Water Project (CWP)
lots of public education groups focusing on water
a critically dry water year
new technology
use of our GIS Implementation Plan by other agencies (e.g., State Department of Water Resources (DWR) and SWRCB)
implementation of 2006 Conservation Agreement between CAW and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries)
positive working relationship with the Water Master
strong relationships with State legislators
superb local CAW leadership
approved increased rates
improved regional collaborative management for water
multi-pronged approach to solutions
the Governor is talking about reservoir capacity
increased public awareness of drought and water conservation
growing acceptance of recycled water
more cooperation within the cities
getting a date from the State for a water rights hearing
better public data access after the water demand database is completed

EXTERNAL FACTORS/TRENDS THAT WILL/MIGHT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON MPWMD IN 2007/2008

Brainstormed Individual Perceptions:

potential failure of the Water Master to meet the judicial mandate
greater enforcement of SWRCB 95-10
potential flood
complete sedimentation at San Clemente Reservoir
public vs. private water ownership
not enough water for Phase 1 ASR
sale of part of CAW’s holdings (spin off)
CAW transition in its general counsel
lack of publicly-held land, water and wells
change in California Department of Health Services (CDHS) regulation of CAW wells treatment requirements
multiple CAW filings with PUC
litigation de-listing steelhead
loss of storage capacity in Los Padres Reservoir
pandemic flu
public confusion regarding the different water agencies
CPUC delay of EIR process for CAW Project
SWRCB delays on water rights issues
high rate of applications for water distribution permits
competing and incompatible water projects
potential drought
permit failure—lack of ability to get needed permits
greater regulations from National Marine Fisheries and the Marine Sanctuary
coastal erosion issues affecting desal location
sea rise
potential failure of CAW infrastructure
litigation
threat of terrorism
development
catastrophic fire
threats to IT security infrastructure, including telecommunications equipment, and District data
seawater intrusion
rising electric energy costs
unfunded mandates impacting fish rearing facility
threat to economy and affordability of water
pending protests on District’s water rights

BRAINSTORMED CORE VALUES

Openness
Stubbornness
Honesty
Collaboration
Teamwork/team player
Quality control high standards
Fairness
Customer service
Initiative
Public orientation
Problem solving
Being respected
Technical rigor
Ethical
Good data
Passion for what we do
Self-starters
Speaking softly and carrying a big stick
Knowledge
Environmental responsibility
Fiscal responsibility
Realism
Innovation
Adaptability
Integrity
Creativity
Respectfulness
Accuracy
Enthusiasm
Positive attitude
Family atmosphere
Energetic
Fun
Independence
Professionalism
Courtesy
Knowing what you can change and what you can’t
Making a difference
Not giving up
Optimism
Humility
Sensitivity
Perseverance

* * *

WHAT ARE THE PROS OF ESTABLISHING A CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE?

Brainstormed List:

fairness
accountability
transparency
levels the playing field
representation by the people
representation for the people
ethical

WHAT ARE THE CONS OF ESTABLISHING A CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE?

Brainstormed List:

breeds mistrust among the Board members
limits a segment of the community from participating
being labeled
limits the potential ability to get funding for an election
suggests there is a problem to begin with
an excessive layer beyond the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) rules
problems with enforcement
inherently questions integrity
presumes guilt upon candidates
could put a financial burden on a candidate to have to use their own funds that’s limiting those who could afford to run

NEXT STEPS/FOLLOW-UP PROCESS

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

April 20, 2007

Arlene

Distribute the strategic plan to the Board and Administrative Team.

April 25, 2007

All

Read the strategic plan record.

April 26, 2007

General Manager

Present strategic plan update to staff.

May 3, 2007

Administrative Team (General Manager-lead)

Review the “What’s Not Going As Well As You’d Like” list for possible action items.

May 21, 2007

Board

Adopt the strategic plan.

May 21, 2007

Administrative Committee (Director Edwards – lead)

Make a recommendation to the full Board whether or not to pursue a Campaign Finance Ordinance.

June 1, 2007

Arlene

Post strategic plan to the District’s website

Monthly

Board (Chair and Vice Chair-co-leads)

Monitor progress on the goals and objectives and revise objectives (add, amend and/or delete), as needed.

Monthly

Arlene

Prepare and distribute the Strategic Plan Update

January 9, 2008

Board and Administrative Team

Strategic Planning Retreat for a more thorough assessment of progress on the goals and objectives. Develop objectives for the next six months.

U:\Arlene\word\2007\BoardMeetings\Minutes\Final041907attach1.doc

MISSION STATEMENT

CORE VALUES

MPWMD values…

Collaboration and teamwork

Environmental responsibility

A positive attitude

Complete ASR Phase 1 and expanded ASR Project(s)

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

WHAT

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS AND THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE MPWMD SINCE THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT?

WHAT’S NOT GOING AS WELL AS YOU WOULD LIKE INTERNALLY WITH MPWMD?

BRAINSTORMED CORE VALUES

WHAT ARE THE PROS OF ESTABLISHING A CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE?

WHAT ARE THE CONS OF ESTABLISHING A CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE?

NEXT STEPS/FOLLOW-UP PROCESS

WHEN

WHO

WHAT