FINAL MINUTES

Joint Policy Advisory and Technical Advisory Committee Meeting

June 1, 2001

I. Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 9 AM in the District conference room. Committee members present are listed below.

Policy Advisory Technical Advisory

Carmel-by-the-Sea Paula Hazdovac Chip Rerig

County of Monterey David Potter Bill Phillips

Del Rey Oaks Joe Russell

Monterey Dan Albert Haywood Norton

MPAD Tex Irwin

Pacific Grove Sandy Koffman Judy MacClelland

Sand City Kelly Morgan

Seaside Diana Ingersoll

MPWMD: Darby Fuerst – General Manager

David Laredo – District Counsel

Alexander Henson – Director Representing Division 5

Stephanie Locke – Water Demand Manager

Arlene Tavani – Administrative Assistant

II. Introductions

III. Comments from Public

Keith Maki, owner of a lot in Pebble Beach, addressed the committee. He expressed concern that the availability of water for construction has not improved over the past 30 years.

IV. Approve Minutes from April 2, 2001 Joint Meeting of the Policy and Technical Advisory Committee

On a motion by Koffman and second by Norton, the minutes were unanimously approved with one change: the TAC representative from Seaside should be listed as Don Betts.

V. Update on Status of Pebble Beach Company Proposal re Funding of Phase II Improvements to CAWD/PBCSD Wastewater Reclamation Project

Darby Fuerst reviewed documents submitted to the District by the Pebble Beach Company on May 17, 2001 (on file at the District office) that summarize the financing proposal. He explained that representatives from the District and Pebble Beach Company had formed a working group to address financing agreements, CEQA concerns and water rights issues. If a Mello-Roos district is formed to finance the project, the original reclaimed water sales agreement will be abolished and ordinances developed that would define parameters for wastewater quality, quantity and the sale price for the reclaimed wastewater. Presently, the price of reclaimed wastewater is limited to the sale price of Cal-Am potable water. The Independent Reclaimed Water Users Group is comprised of golf courses outside of the Del Monte Forest that will also receive reclaimed wastewater. They have expressed concern that ordinances could be modified by a future Board of Directors. Those courses would prefer that new contracts be developed.

Alan Williams, representing the Pebble Beach Company, stated that if 45 acre-feet of the reclaimed wastewater were made available to the District for allocation to the jurisdictions, the proposed $18,500 per acre-feet sale price would be based on the cost to produce the water. The Pebble Beach Company would not make a profit from the sale of that portion of the available reclaimed water. The 105 acre-feet of water that the Pebble Beach Company proposes for sale to Del Monte Forest property owners will be sold at $169,185 per acre-foot, to reflect the $55 million investment needed to produce 365 acre-feet of water from the project.

The following statements about the project were made in response to questions from the committee members. (1) The expanded project should alleviate the need to supply potable water to the golf courses because improvements in project design should address the salinity problems that golf courses have experienced. The project includes 420 acre-feet of water storage at Forest Lake Reservoir, that would be utilized if reclaimed water production is inhibited for some reason. (2) The original project included 420 acre-feet of potable water savings that was allocated to the District. That water has not been released to the jurisdictions, but has been set aside as conservation savings. Before that water could be released for use by the jurisdictions, reclaimed water production must reach 800 acre-feet per year. A CEQA analysis would than be done to determine the environmental impacts of releasing 420 acre-feet of water for use within the community. Distribution of that water could be limited by SWRCB Order 95-10. (3) It is expected that 105 acre-feet of water from the expanded project could be distributed within the Del Monte Forest without preparation of a study on growth inducement impacts. In addition, distribution of that water is not limited by SWRCB Order 95-10. (4) The SWRCB has indicated that the 45 acre-feet of water proposed for allocation to the District from the expanded project will not be subject to Order 95-10. (5) District staff could make a presentation to the Board of Directors on the financing plan in August or September 2001.

At the close of the discussion, the committee members made the following comments. (1) The District should be doing all it can to facilitate completion of planning for the reclamation project expansion so that water is available as soon as possible for distribution to the jurisdictions. (2) When action is taken by the Board of Directors to release 45 acre-feet of water, the eight jurisdictions will need to decide if they are willing to allocate that water equally among themselves. To develop another “fair formula” for distribution of that water could be time consuming.

VI. Update on Status of Water Credit Transfer Moratorium

Stephanie Pintar reported that Ordinance No. 100 which limits like-to-like water credit transfers was due to expire on June 18, 2001. A report should be prepared by June 11 that analyzes how much water is saved on transferring and receiving sites when water credits are transferred. The report may be received by the Board of Directors at the June 18 meeting.

VII. Discuss Increase in Non-Permitted Outdoor Restaurant Seating

Stephanie Pintar reported that outdoor restaurant seating has increased. She asked for guidance from the committee on the following items: (1) should a water permit be required for the addition of outdoor restaurant seating; and (2) should permits be issued only for outside seating in an enclosed area. No formal motion was made by the committee on this item. During the discussion it was clear that each jurisdiction has its own method of permitting outdoor restaurant seating. The following comments were made by the committee members. (1) The increase in restaurant seating is driven by smoking regulations. If water use increases significantly in a restaurant as a result of outdoor restaurant seating, the District should investigate. (2) This is a case of micro-management of the resource. Unless there is evidence of a real problem, this should not be pursued. (3) Outdoor restaurant seating is similar to installation of water fountains. No water credit should be given for outdoor restaurant seating, only for enclosed seating.

VIII. Consider Proposal by Director Henson that the Board Review Its Policies Concerning the Use of Fixtures for Determining Remodeling Proposals

Director Henson presented his proposal to permit remodels based on historical water use, instead of the fixture unit methodology. No formal motion was made by the committee on this issue. The following comments were made by the committee members. (1) This is a complicated proposal that will require extensive monitoring. It diverts District staff’s focus away from their primary function which is water supply planning. (2) We have discussed the complexities of measuring water consumption. It would be good to develop some rational method of measuring residential water usage, but this proposal would be difficult to implement. (3) The purpose of water permits was to raise revenue for a water supply project. It then become a regulatory method of allocating water to the jurisdictions. The District should assess whether the purpose for issuing water permits is still valid, rather than just adjusting the fixture unit methodology.

Public Comment: During the discussion Michael Waxer proposed a community averaging technique. For example, it could be determined that in one community the average water use per residence is 1/4 acre-foot of water. That community would be responsible to stay within its allocation by ensuring that the average water use remains at 1/4 acre-foot per residence through conservation measures the jurisdiction deems appropriate.

Director Henson presented his proposal to prohibit the addition of bedrooms in a residence that has installed a bathroom under Ordinance No. 98. No formal motion was made by the committee on this issue. The following comments were made by the committee members. (1) This is similar to previous discussions the committee had on development of Ordinance No. 98. The addition of a bathroom would not increase water use, and the committee was not interested in regulating the size of families that occupy a home. (2) You should not penalize a property owner who wanted to add a bathroom for convenience, by prohibiting the addition of another bedroom. (3) The need for housing is so great that the number of persons living in a house may increase without the addition of another bedroom. In some areas of Monterey, more than one family are living in a house that has only one bathroom. (4) Water use in a house varies with time. Six persons could live in a home, then when the children move away the water use is reduced. (5) This would make permit administration more complicated for the jurisdictions. It would require that permit technicians and building inspectors evaluate what the personal needs of the permit applicant are, such as, is a bedroom needed for a young child that is moving from one part of the house to another. In addition, sufficient resources would need to be in place to enforce the regulations. (6) Due to the high cost of housing, more people are remodeling their homes as their families grow, instead of moving into a larger home.

IX. Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11 AM.

U:\arlene\wp\yr2001\pactac\minutes\0601.wpd

A. Tavani, PAC/TAC minutes, July 19, 2001, 4 pages