May 27, 1998
7:30 p.m.
The Board of Directors of the San Benito County Water District convened in
regular session. All members of the Board were present together with District
Manager,
a. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
President Swanson asked all to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
b. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, approved the agenda with the
deletion of item #1 to be continued to
c. PUBLIC INPUT:
There was no public input.
1.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR
This item was continued to
2. ALLOWANCE OF CLAIMS:
Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, approved the claims as presented.
3. STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH DISTRICT INVESTMENT POLICY:
Moved to be heard after item #7.
4.
REPORT
Manager Gregg made a transparency presentation for the 1998/99 contract year of water transfers, exchanges and sales. He noted exchanges with Santa Clara Valley Water District of up to 16,000 acre feet of irrigation water and a possible 4,000 acre feet M & I water exchange with Alameda-Zone 7. He indicated that given weather and supply, they could sell up to 20,000 acre feet of extra water. He added that he had made initial contacts for irrigation water sales.
President Swanson asked the odds of marketing.
Manager Gregg replied that it was in the 50 - 60% range and probably not all of it and the more it rained, the closer it was to zero.
5.
REPORT
Manager Gregg stated that the Hollister Conduit was loaded up, watered and tested last week and was currently at 45 cubic feet per second. He noted that it was performing at level assumed and they were putting a little water each day into the San Justo Reservoir. He reported that the long term repair posed a number of interesting challenges. He spoke of different repair options as illustrated by transparency presentation.
Director Buzzetta was in attendance at this time.
President Swanson suggested a special meeting the second week of June to discuss the repairs.
Manager Gregg stated that he could target a report for that date.
Director Gonzales asked if the Manager was not recommending putting the Hollister Conduit back where it was.
Manager Gregg stated not unless they put bank protection in and noted that there was a certain minimum and they could not dig the conduit up within the 36 foot right of way. He anticipated the work would be done without destroying the temporary connection and a two week shut down period.
President Swanson set a special meeting to discuss the repair on Thursday, June 11, 1998 at 7:30 p.m.
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
a) Groundwater Committee (Gonzales/Perry):
Manager Gregg stated that with respect to the Groundwater Management Plan, they were in the process of the agencies accepting and endorsing the plan. He noted that all agencies had endorsed the plan, with the exception of the City of San Juan Bautista, who had not put the matter on calendar. He added that the agreement was redrafted by the group.
b) Special Flood Control Committee (Swanson/Perry):
Director Perry stated that he and Manager Gregg had met with County Supervisors Scagliotti and Rodrigues, Rob Mendiola and Max Bridges and discussed San Juan flood control, general flood control and the concept of working together. He stated that bond attorney, Robert Haight, had met with the committee to discuss the potential plan of working with the County of San Benito and using the county as a vehicle to facilitate a bond issue and generate money. He indicated that board members (county) were receptive to it and were willing to present it to their full board when all was in order.
Manager Gregg stated that he would distribute the material to the other board members and perhaps they could go through the information at the special board meeting. He explained that the County had very clear powers to form an improvement district/assessment district. He added that the District powers were not that clear. He stated that the County would form the district and enter into an agreement with the District for operation and maintenance.
7. DISTRICT MANAGER/ENGINEER’S REPORT:
a) Legislative Activities:
Counsel Pipal reported that the legislation had passed through the Appropriations Committee and had been heard by the Senate Committee. He added that it was set for the June 16, 1998 consent agenda and that there was no opposition.
Counsel Pipal stated that AB1986 had been before the Appropriations Committee and without argument had been placed in the suspense file by Keely. He added that there was no argument on the bill, but the next day it was put on the floor and passed. He stated that it had passed assembly and would go to the senate. He advised that they would have to get their act together if they were going to oppose it.
It was noted that Santa Clara County Water District, Santa Clara County, San Benito County, City of Gilroy and the City of Hollister also opposed the legislation.
Manager Gregg reported that ACWA’s Legislative Committee was considering changing their position of "watch" on June 5, 1998. He added that he would send the material to them.
San Benito County Supervisor Richard Place stated that RCRC had voted to oppose the bill and that CSAC had not taken a position.
b) Membrane Filtration Pilot Plant:
Manager Gregg stated that the site had been selected and was the area of Flow 2 on Lone Tree Road because it had the necessary power, utilities and generous area. He added that equipment would be delivered the third week of June and would be operational after July 4, 1998. He indicated that they were meeting with the City of Hollister and Sunnyslope County Water District to discuss the matter.
c) San Benito River System:
Manager Gregg stated that essential permanent repairs had been completed on the Paicines Canal and that there were a number of areas that needed follow up work. He indicated that Hernandez was full as was the Paicines Reservoir. He stated that they would have to consider if it would be worth the effort to put the berms in.
d) Zone 3/Zone 6 Water Rights and Groundwater Storage:
Manager Gregg stated that the proposal for the budget would include the mapping work. He stated that progress was being made and that it was a complicated issue.
e) Water Conservation and Public Education/Information Programs:
Manager Gregg stated that the District had received a $25,000 grant from the Bureau of Reclamation with $15,000 designated for a urban water management plan and $10,000 for water conservation. He reported that on June 16, 1998 the District would be honored by a visit from the Secretary General of the Jordan Valley Water District. He indicated that he wanted to acknowledge the District for its earlier efforts when their representatives visited the District. He reported that the District newsletter was out and they had received 121 water surveys back. He added that the next edition of the newsletter would be in the July/August time frame. He noted that the District would participate in the Street Fair in August.
f) Employer-Employee Relations:
Manager Gregg acknowledged Administrative Services Officer Thome and the fact that she was resigning her position. He reported that employees had chosen external formal representation in the form of SEIU - Local 817. He indicated that there had been an initial meeting with them under meet and confer and that a series of meetings had been scheduled. He stated that it had worked well to meet with the Personnel Committee.
b) Membrane Filtration:
Director Rupert asked to return to item b and asked if there had been a meeting with the City of Hollister.
Manager Gregg stated that they were set to meet on June 9, 1998 to talk of the potential of lengthy time of the pilot project and increase the amount of data.
Director Rupert asked how long the operation would run.
Manager Gregg reported 3 to 5 months for the District’s needs.
Director Rupert asked if they would receive monthly reports.
Manager Gregg concurred that they would.
Director Buzzetta asked if the June 9, 1998 meeting was a staff meeting.
Manager Gregg explained that it would be staff and advisors/consultants.
Director Buzzetta asked how he could be more involved in it.
Manager Gregg stated that if the Board were interested there could be a brief presentation on membrane technology to be held before the regular June board meeting.
Directors Buzzetta and Rupert agreed with the idea.
Manager Gregg stated that he would distribute meeting materials to Board members which spoke of the differences between conventional and membrane filtration. He noted that with membrane filtration they could remove pathogenic organisms without using disinfectants which created carcinogenic compounds. He added that membrane filtration was done without chemicals being added.
President Swanson set a presentation of an overview of membrane filtration vs. conventional filtration for June 24, 1998 at 6:OO p.m.
3) STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH DISTRICT INVESTMENT POLICY:
Manager Gregg stated that a series of issues had been raised regarding the nature and appropriateness of fees to managers and whether to retain and investment advisor/consultant to do an overview of the investment plan. He indicated that he had asked Counsel Pipal to review the matter of compliance and referred to Counsel Pipal’s letter of opinion. He summarized Counsel Pipal’s letter by stating that the District was in compliance. He noted that it was previously viewed that Dean Witter and Franklin Management were separate, whereas they are one under the name of Dean Witter. He spoke of the 50% investment limitation in one agency and the 20% limit of mutual funds. Manager Gregg stated that the District was within the 20% limit for mutual funds and Counsel Pipal had concluded that they were in compliance. He stated that the issue of terms of greater than 5 years arose and what the authority was to invest over the 5 year limit. He indicated that the conclusion was that there was authority to invest in terms of greater than 5 years. He indicated that it could come back as a review or overview and that perhaps they may want to reword or change it. Manager Gregg stated that the committee was to meet Monday with an investment advisor group that does only public agencies. He suggested that the investment overview be done within 3 weeks and under $10,000 and he would proceed with engaging a consultant with an overview by the end of June.
Director Buzzetta asked if the board policy was in compliance with code requirements and prudent policy. He indicated that they were spending a number of dollars on fees for things that the district could do themselves. He stated that he had just received word of a $100,000 investment instrument with a 10 year time frame. He noted that there was some indication of fees that were incurred that did not have to be. He felt they needed to look at it. He further felt there was no quality control or assurance process. Director Buzzetta stated that he and Director Gonzales felt that they should stop all investments at this point until they could review. He commented that they were not doing the best they could with their finances.
President Swanson concurred with Manager Gregg to hire a consultant and asked if the committee was recommending to put a stop gap for 30 days.
Director Buzzetta stated until further notice, not 30 days.
Counsel Pipal stated that any new investments would be put in the bank and receive the same return.
Director Buzzetta recommended a 3 month period.
President Swanson suggested that they review the matter at each monthly board meeting and provide extensions at those times.
Director Gonzales stated that the stop gap would not hurt the district at all and in fact may even gain.
President Swanson brought up the matter of the agenda item of status and compliance and asked if they could take action.
Counsel Pipal advised no and stated that the Investment Committee could do that without authorization.
President Swanson asked Counsel Pipal if it was his legal opinion that the Investment Committee has the authority to put a 30 day stop gap in place and engage a consultant.
Counsel Pipal stated that the committee could review the matter and talk with the consultant and bring it back to the Board.
President Swanson suggested bringing it back at the June 11, 1998 special meeting.
Counsel Pipal explained that it really was not a freeze and they were just placing their investments elsewhere.
President Swanson reiterated that the matter was to come back on the June 11, 1998 special meeting as an action item and perhaps the committee could give a little information to the Board ahead of time. He asked the committee if there was compliance or not.
Director Buzzetta stated yes, based on staff direction.
Director Gonzales concurred.
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.8
AGENCY NEGOTIATOR: DISTRICT MANAGER
FIELD AND OFFICE EMPLOYEE UNIT: S.E.I.U. - LOCAL 817:
Counsel Pipal stated that the purpose was the scope of representation and the Meyers Milias Brown Act.
The Board adjourned into executive session and reconvened into regular session. No action was taken.
The vote of each member of the Board on preceding matters was as follows, unless otherwise stated:
AYES: DIRECTORS: Rupert, Gonzales, Buzzetta, Perry, Swanson
NOES: DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: DIRECTORS: None
The Board adjourned at 9:40 p.m. to a special meeting to be held on June 11, 1998 at 7:30 p.m., 30 Mansfield Road, Hollister, California.
__________________________________________
Robert M. Swanson, President
ATTEST:____________________________________________
Denise R. Thome, Administrative Services Officer