EXHIBIT 20-B

Final

MINUTES

MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CARMEL RIVER ADVISORY COMMITTEE

February 5, 2004, 10:00 A.M. Mid-Carmel Valley Fire Station Community Room

1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Rogers, Chuck McKay, Tom House, Rod Mills, Richard Rosenthal, and David Dilworth

MEMBERS ABSENT: John Dalessio

PUBLIC PRESENT: No members of the public were present.

STAFF PRESENT: Fran Farina, Andy Bell, Thomas Christensen, and Larry Hampson

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

David Dilworth directed attention to water use categories listed on page II-29, “Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume II, Water Allocation Program” by MPWMD [Volume II contains responses to comments on the EIR contained in Volume I]. Mr. Dilworth stated that the water demand report provided by Cal-Am gives the community a reference for water use in the Cal-Am system. [A copy of page II-29 of the Final EIR for the Water Allocation Program is provided as Exhibit B in this packet.]

3. CONSENT CALENDAR

Mr. House made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 18, 2003 regular meeting. Seconded by Mr. Dilworth. Approval was unanimous.

4. UPDATE ON CARMEL RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL ACTIVITIES

Mr. Sanders was unable to attend the meeting, and this item was continued to the next regular Committee meeting. Mr. Hampson reported on MPWMD work in the field to assess the Carmel River watershed as part of a contract with the Carmel River Watershed Conservancy. In response to questions from Mr. Dilworth about the methods used and data being gathered for the assessment, Mr. Christensen offered to give a presentation on the “Proper Functioning Condition” method for assessing riparian areas. This method was developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service for use by landowners, managers, and others involved in managing riparian resources.

[Prior to discussion of Item 5, Mr. Rosenthal requested a change to the agenda to hear the report on Item 6E of “Staff Reports,” concerning the Committee’s request for information about the Cal-Am water system. Ms. Rogers moved Item 6E up on the agenda as requested. See Item 6, “Staff Reports” below.]

5. REVIEW THE MISSION STATEMENT OF THE CARMEL RIVER ADVISORY COMMITTEEE

Mr. Rosenthal questioned why the Committee should be limited to the five basic areas of responsibilities outlined in the CRAC Mission Statement set by the MPWMD Board of Directors (Board) in 1995. Mr. Rosenthal stated that managing the resources of the Carmel River should include scrutiny of water extraction practices that affect riparian vegetation and that information about the Cal-Am system is critical to the public. Mr. Rosenthal said that the Committee has an obligation to discuss major issues and advise the Board and recommended that the Committee have a broad authority to consider such issues.

Ms. Rogers acknowledged that the impact of Carmel Valley pumpers is significant, but questioned whether the Committee should have oversight, saying that the Committee should not spread itself too thinly. She asked whether a review of the top 200 water users within the District is an appropriate task for the Committee. She recommended developing a prioritized list of issues for the Committee to consider.

Mr. Dilworth stated that the Committee has the ability to delve into Carmel River issues to a greater degree than the Board and can provide an in-depth understanding of each issue. Mr. Dilworth said that the Committee should not be limited to a few issues and that he would like to expand the educational efforts of the Committee.

Mr. House agreed that the Committee should investigate issues affecting the Carmel River.

Mr. Mills stated that San Clemente Dam is a lethal hazard, that this issue is important to the public, and that the Committee should suggest to the Board that an action plan is needed. Mr. Rosenthal stated that Cal-Am is not complying with State mandates concerning the dam. Ms. Rogers agreed that dam safety is an important issue and that Cal-Am needs to meet its obligation to make the dam safe.

Mr. Rosenthal made a motion to eliminate the Mission Statement and continue operating under the definition of the Committee’s role as outlined in MPWMD Rule 120A. [Note: Rule 120A states the Committee’s purpose as follows: “The Carmel River Advisory Committee is a standing committee of the District. The committee shall advise the Board of Directors with regard to management of the Carmel River, and its riparian corridor and to any matter referred to this committee.] Mr. Mills seconded the motion.

Mr. Dilworth made a substitute motion, seconded by Mr. Mills, to recommend to the Board that the the existing Mission Statement for the Committee be modified by adding the following sentence immediately above the itemized listing of Committee responsibilities:

“Some of the activities include, but are not limited to the following:”

Mr. Rosenthal then withdrew his initial motion. The Committee unanimously approved Mr. Dilworth’s motion to make an addition to the Committee’s Mission Statement.

Mr. Dilworth stated that there are 31 distinct watersheds in the District that are outside of the Carmel River watershed and that he is concerned that groundwater management within the Carmel River watershed could affect these separate watersheds. He said that the Committee should consider expanding its purview and gather information about other watersheds within the District.

Ms. Rogers stated that this concept issue is too broad for the Committee to consider. No action was taken on Mr. Dilworth’s proposal.

[After completion of this item, Mr. Rosenthal and Ms. Farina left the meeting.]

6. STAFF REPORTS

Under Item 6E, Mr. Bell reported that Cal-Am would not authorize the release of information that the Committee had requested concerning water quality, quantity and the dependability of the Cal-Am system. Mr. Bell stated that a written response to that effect had been provided by Cal-Am. Committee members requested that a copy of Cal-Am’s response be provided to them, and Mr. Bell agreed to do so. (Exhibit C in this packet is Cal-Am’s response, an e-mail dated November 12, 2003 from Charley Kemp of Cal-Am to Mr. Bell).

Under Item 6A, Mr. Christensen reported on planting activities at Rancho Cañada and at Richard H. Rosenthal’s property. In response to a question from Mr. Dilworth, Mr. Christensen explained the District’s planting techniques. Mr. Dilworth asked what is the most effective practice, given limited resources (staff and funding). Mr. Hampson responded saying that the District normally carries out comprehensive projects and avoids piecemeal or limited works that have a higher potential for failure during high flows.

Under Item 6B, Mr. Hampson reported that Federal agencies have completed biological opinions on threatened species in the Carmel River in connection with MPWMD’s application for a Regional General Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for maintenance and restoration of the Carmel River. Mr. Hampson described two potential sites for streambank restoration in the Carmel River. One site is at the Valley Hills Restoration Project, where a number of car bodies placed on the streambank after the 1969 flood have rusted and fallen apart. The other site is along the north streambank between Via Mallorca Bridge and Rancho San Carlos Bridge, where active bank erosion occurs at low to moderate flows.

Mr. Hampson also reported on a proposed change to the District’s indemnification policy to allow riverfront property owners to be covered for general liability under the District’s insurance policy.

Under Item 6C, Mr. Hampson reported on the 2003 Large Wood Study completed by the Watershed Institute at California State University, Monterey Bay, under contract with the District.

Under Item 6D, Mr. Bell explained that in the District’s FY 2003-2004 budget, line item 2-6-1.C, “Review water development proposals,” is for when District staff members review EIRs for various projects that are sent to the District for review and comment.

Under Item 6E, Mr. Bell reported that pursuant to the Committee’s request, the District’s legal counsel had been requested to provide a legal opinion on obtaining information on the top 200 water users in the Cal-Am system, but that the legal opinion had not yet been prepared.

7. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS

The following items were requested:

a.) Provide a presentation on assessing riparian areas using the Proper Functioning Condition method (Mr. Dilworth);

b.) Invite a representative from Cal-Am to update the Committee on the San Clemente Dam seismic retrofit project (Mr. Mills);

c.) Invite Ken Gray of California Department of Parks and Recreation to give a presentation on proposed work around the Carmel River Lagoon (Mr. Mills); and

d.) Invite a representative of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to speak to the Committee (Mr. Dilworth).

8. ADJOURNMENT

Mr. House made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Mr. Mills. The motion was unanimously approved, and the meeting was adjourned at 12:18 p.m.

U:\staff\word\boardpacket\2004\2004boardpacket\20041213\InfoItems_Reports\20\item20_exh20b.doc