So I would like to convene this closed session of the Board of Directors of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District for April 21st, 2022. Can I have roll call? President Mayhood. Here. Vice President Ackman. Here. Director Fultz. Here. Director Smalley. Here. Are there any additions or deletions to the closed session agenda? Staff has none. Okay. This is the time for oral communications from members of the public. I don't see any attendees. Mayhood, we might give it just a few more seconds. I'm not sure whether there's nobody here or whether they haven't been let in yet, given that it's still on the 530. Nope, now it's 531. Well, I mean, it's not uncommon that people don't show up for the closed session, so. Sure. But we can wait a minute or two. Well, now that it's 531, I think they would have been able to access it by now. Okay. All right. Well, still seeing no attendees, I think we'll go ahead and adjourn to closed session. So I'll see you guys on the other side. So I would like to convene this closed session of the Board of Directors of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District for April 21st, 2022. Can I have roll call? President Mayhood. Here. Vice President Ackman. Here. Director Fultz. Here. Director Smalley. Here. Are there any additions or deletions to the closed session agenda? Staff has none. Okay. This is the time for oral communications from members to the public. I don't see any attendees. Mayhood, we might give it just a few more seconds. I'm not sure whether there's nobody here or whether they haven't been let in yet given that it's still on the 530. Nope, now it's 531. Well, I mean, it's not uncommon that people don't show up for the closed session, so. Sure. But we can wait a minute or two. Well, now that it's 531, and I think they would have been able to access it by now. Okay. All right. Well, still seeing no attendees, I think we'll go ahead and adjourn to closed session. So I'll see you guys on the other side. Do we still have people trying to join us, Holly? We have seven attendees right now. And, oh, I see what you're talking, you're talking about our people. No, everybody is here. Everybody's here that should be here. Okay. Yes. All right. Well, if that's the case, then I will go ahead and convene this open session meeting of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District Board of Directors for April 21st, 2022. There are no, there were no actions taken during closed session. So we will now convene the open session. Holly, would you take the role? President Mayfield. Here. Vice President Ackerman. Here. Director Fouls. Here. And Director Smalley. Here. Are there any additions or deletions to the agenda tonight? Staff has none, Chair. Okay. That brings us to oral communications from members of the public on any subject that lies within the purview of the district, but is not on the agenda tonight. Would any members of the public like to address the board? If so, please raise your hand. Seeing anybody, I will go ahead and go to the president's report. And in reading the engineering and environmental report, I was really pleased when I saw the number of grants that the district has received of late. And this represents a major change in the district's stance with respect to outside funding. We're being much more aggressive in pursuing grants than we have in the past. And I thought the public would like to know about the successes that we've had. And I also want to recognize and applaud the work of the management staff and our grant writer in putting together these proposals. And to that end, I've asked Carly to briefly describe our recent grant successes and in particular a large proposal that she recently completed and with other staff involvement and submitted. So Carly. Thank you, President Brain Hood. So as you mentioned, I'd like to really thank our consulting grant writer, Susan Robinson, who really helped us through and helped us clean up the narrative for a lot of our grant applications, as well as our staff, a lot of our management staff spent a good amount of time on this as well, helping me answer a lot of questions and then get those narratives straight. But since 2020, we've been awarded about $4.5 million in grant funding. And this year alone, we will be pursuing about $11 million of funding. So I can go through in my environmental department status report, there is the grant tracking table that everyone can follow along with. And I can also share my screen if that's preferred. But just to highlight some of the few, let's see if I can share. The few applications that we have just submitted, we did submit a Cal Fire Fire Prevention Grant to harden our critical water infrastructure at about $1.5 million. The large application that we just submitted to the Cal OAS Hazard Mitigation Grant program was for about $8 million. And that included retrofitting of redwood and polytanks, hardening of pump houses, hardening bylines and field reduction around infrastructure. We're currently working on the WaterSmart Small Scale Water Efficiency Grant, which is about $100,000 in grant funding to allow us to continue retrofitting of our meters to AMI meters. In the future, we may go after the larger grant program through the Bureau of Reclamation. It's also a WaterSmart program. That would be an additional $250,000 for retrofitting of water meters. We also have submitted an application for our Fall Creek Fish Ladder Construction through the Prop 1 Grant Funding with CDFW or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and that was about a million dollars of funding that we're going after there. And then we have another application going out to the Coastal Conservancy's Wildfire Resilience Grant program. We did receive awards last year for that program, so we're hoping that'll happen again. And this year, we're targeting a bit more money at $300,000. Okay, well, thank you, Carly. It's a very impressive list. And again, I just wanna thank all the staff for putting all this effort in and really helping out the district and addressing the challenges of the drought and recovering from the fire. With that, we'll go to new business. The first order of business is a review of applications for the board, they can see. There's somebody's, I don't know if anybody else is hearing it, but I'm hearing somebody's echoing or something. I don't know, maybe if people can mute if they're not talking, that would be good. Good. And then we'll try to figure out what's causing it. All right. The applicants were informed of the process in advance of tonight's meeting. That is that each applicant would be given up to three minutes to introduce themselves. And then as board president, I will ask them sequentially to answer in one minute or less, three questions. And given that this isn't a pop quiz, they were told in advance what those three questions will be. Yesterday afternoon, we received an email from one applicant, Elizabeth Paulson, saying she couldn't attend the meeting tonight because of her previous commitment, but that she is still very interested and wanted to be considered. She included an introduction and answers to the three questions which were distributed to the members of the board before the meeting this afternoon, and have been posted to the website. So we'll go ahead and start with introductions from the two folks that are here tonight, Jeff Hill and Alino Lang. And Jeff, would you like to go ahead and start off? Okay, you have to unmute yourself now. Nothing like technology. So nice to see you all. Good evening, my name is Jeff Hill and a couple of quick notes to start with. For clarity's sake, I am not the Jeff Hill that owns a construction and grading business in the San Lorenzo Valley. And I don't do septic tanks, the retired computer guy. So I've been drinking San Lorenzo Valley water for three, four years. I live in the far southern end of the SLD district in the Whispering Pines neighborhood in Scotts Valley. I understand there's not been a director from that area for many, many years. Married to my lovely wife Karen for almost 51 years, have two adult sons with families who live in Seattle and Denver, the view behind my face here on my screen is the view from my son's vacation home in index Washington looking out as front porch. I retired from full-time work in 2011, keep busy with lots of volunteer activities. I spent two years on the County Sheriff's Citizen Advisory Board, approximately two years on the city of Scotts Valley's general plan update committee. Over five years as treasurer of the Michigan State University Alumni Club for the Monterey Bay Area. And for the past seven years, treasurer of the Scotts Valley Sportsman's Club which is a club of 1,000 members from around the area that owns a shooting range. I'm also the lead board member for environmental issues for the club's leasehold property in the city of Scotts Valley. I have a bachelor's degree from the College of Communication Arts and Sciences of Michigan State and a master of business administration degree from the Leeds Graduate School of Business at the University of Colorado. I was a Boy Scout leader for 10 years in Scotts Valley, both my sons are Eagle Scouts. That was a lot of fun. I'm a veteran of the US Army and was cited for outstanding meritorious service in 1971. Let's see. As a youth and young adult, I spent a lot of time in Northern Wisconsin in the woods. I am familiar with woods and wildlife. And if there's one thing that San Lorenzo Valley has it's lots of woods and wildlife. So while the trees are different from Wisconsin, I know what it's like to be in the woods and I know what it's like to be around wildlife. And I care a lot about that. And I know that that's a major issue when you're talking about water districts and piping and having all kinds of things running through the woods. So I guess that's who I am. I'm looking forward to this opportunity and I've been on the finance committee now for almost two years, I guess a year and a half and I've really enjoyed it. So if anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask. All right. We'll go ahead and let Alina introduce herself and then we'll go to the questions and then we'll let the board ask any questions that they might have. Okay, Alina. All right, well, hi, my name is Alina Ling and I'm a biologist. I was originally asked to come down here to California to apply my expertise in passive integrated transponder technology to help better understand how drought conditions affects all mountain migration. Now having the ability to monitor fish migration and behaviors is critical to understanding the impacts of extreme client conditions, water operations and developing management strategies to minimize those threats. I've been a public servant my entire career, whether it be representing the federal or state government collecting critical data or participating in non-proprietary research to great new open source technological advancements. I fostered relationships with NGOs, private landowners as well as local and federal agencies to allow site access and build partnerships among agencies. I also saw the impact of the previous fire before this easy fire on the water quality and how it affected the sound monitoring at the Scott Creek hatchery. I've been involved in many things in our area including the installation of monitoring equipment on the Felton Blatter Dam and conducting tropographic land surveys for the Carmel Dam Removal Geomorphological Study. Now besides my scientific expertise, I care deeply about the affordability of clean drinking water and addressing the equity of water in the era of rising costs. I've shown this by attending other committee meetings to express my concern about owner only accounts and how it would impact the low income rate assistance program. My commitment to ratepayers is to evaluate every issue in a fair manner by considering all the facts and science behind them. I strive to strike a balance between our ecosystem and the water needs of our customers. I've taken the oath several times in my career to protect and enhance our ecosystems for present and future generations. I would be honored to take the oath to provide reliable clean and high quality drinking water at equitable prices for the San Lorenzo Valley customers in future generations. Thank you, Alina. Okay, so let's go ahead and start with the questions. The first one is please describe what particular skills or perspectives you would bring to the board and why those are important or useful. We'll start with you on this one with Jeff. Okay, so as you know, I've been on the finance committee now for about a year and a half. I understand budgets and I understand the important differences between accrual counting and actual cash flow and how important that is for the the San Lorenzo Valley Water District because we have a lot of projects where we get repaid by grants and the grants may not come in for a long time after we accrue the expenses. And so that's something I'm quite familiar with. I also am quite familiar with the differences between top-down forecasting and bottom-up budgeting and when it's appropriate to do which. I care deeply about our community. I'm well aware that we have many people in the community that may not be able to afford water easily. And so I'm very sensitive to the fact that while we have people in the community that are quite wealthy, we also have people who are quite poor and we need to keep our costs down and we need to provide water to them. I have successfully managed multiple complex project launches and business transformations. I've always tried to turn complexity into simplicity wherever possible. Sometimes things are just complex and the board and the district is facing an awful lot of complexity over the next year or two. Actually the next probably four or five years. Sometimes there's just a whole lot of detail to take care of. This is an area I'm really good at. I'm very good at dealing with large complex projects, product launches, working hand and glove between business management and engineering management. That's an area of real strength for me. I was a product manager, a vice president of product management, director of product management for a number of tech firms and conducting multiple successful product launches nationwide and internationally also. Okay. That's an area I feel I have a strength in. I'll just repeat the question, Elena, so that people know what you're answering. Please describe what particular skills or perspectives you would bring to the board and why those are important or useful. Go ahead. All right, well, I have experience with National Marine Fisheries Service, permitting large water footway infrastructure, whereas also the project manager in the field overseeing the installation. I've hiked many of the streams in this area doing surveys for NEMPs and understand this flashy system very well through system installs giving me a unique insight into what the limitations of this watershed are. I also have a budget and finance experience with the federal government where I was tasked with allocating a project budgets on a firm fixed contracts to ensure research goals are met. And recently I became self-employed as a real estate investor. I've gone out to bid for projects, negotiated contracts and budgeted finances all to see substantial profit increase. I've also assisted in finding, well, I guess one grant that the district actually applied for. And I actually helped write a letter of recommendation to help win that grant. And these skills translate well to the board by understanding the big picture of our watershed, the permitting process that goes along with the district's current construction projects, limitations put forth with dealing with budgeting, the knowledge of how contracts are put to bid in the capability to find additional funding to not further burden our customers financially. Thank you. So we'll go to the second question, which is given that this is a short-term appointment only until December, it would be valuable to have the new board member be ready to hit the ground running. Please describe what experience or involvement you've had with the district and or with leadership positions with similar board. So this time we'll let Alina go first. All right, well, I was appointed to the San Lorenzo Valley Water Districts Environmental Committee in 2021. And then I was reappointed for the 2022 year for the now combined engineering environmental committee. I've shown my dedication by attending every meeting and most cases of quorum would not have been reached in my absence. Out of the candidates today, I have the most knowledge of the inner workings of the districts from being involved in all the ongoing engineering and environmental projects. And you can't talk about these projects without bringing up the budget and financial aspect of them. So it also makes me knowledgeable about the district's finances. And in addition, like I've attended other committee meetings and keep up on their agendas, I also stay current on the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency attending Cal Fire Briefings and other relevant conferences. I really feel that Tina too should have been replaced by another scientist as that's what the community said with their votes. Now that we're left with an administration board member heading the environmental committee, I think it makes logical sense to elect a scientist like me to round out the board and sit on the environmental and engineering committee and then move the administration board member to the proper committee. And I'm confident that I can jump on to this short-term appointment without skipping a beat. Thank you, Lena. Jeff. So, like Elena, I'm a year and a half into committee membership for the district. I'm on the finance committee and Lois Henry who has resigned and finally fully retired, I guess, was the chairman of the finance committee. So that is where we have a current vacancy also. I'm quite familiar with the district's budget, the sources of funds, the use of funds is sort of the flip side of what Elena was saying. She knows the budget from looking at the engineering projects. I know the engineering projects from looking at the budget in that sense. And there's a whole lot of issues that I think need to be dealt with from a financial point of view and I'm pretty well qualified to deal with those. And I have the time, I'm available to do it and I'm interested in eager. So, there's what we have. Thank you. And the final question is, what do you consider the major challenges to the district of the next year or two? And this time we'll let Jeff go first. Okay. So, when I look at the district, the district, it's not business as usual for the next few years. The district is dealing with a set of complex simultaneous projects that require a lot of engineering product management experience, staffing, public relations, customer relations and finance management. You've got the CZU fire rebuild, mergers with Forest Lake, Brackenbrae and Big Basin. The already existing long list of complex engineering upgrades and replacement projects across the district. One of the major problems with all of this is also going to be cash flow because with cash flow, so many of these projects are projects that we have to do something and then get reimbursed for. And so we're going to have to watch cash flow very, very carefully while we manage all these projects so that we don't find ourselves with bills and grants that haven't come in yet or money that hasn't paid back to us by the grantor. So I think if I'm looking at the biggest problem here, it's complexity and financial management as we try to work our way through all of this long list of engineering and construction projects and recovery projects. Okay, thank you. Alina. All right, well, I think he summarized about all of the issues we have going on, but I think that priority number one is getting the surface water intake systems replaced after the CZU and fire and being able to utilize surface water during wet durations of the year and allowing our wells to rest and recharge our groundwater is essential to the long-term health of the watershed. Groundwater is important because it contributes to the base flow of almost all the streams in the basin, which is particularly important in the summer and fall months when there's a lack of rainfall. Without these base flows, it's not possible to support aquatic and habitats or watershed of our watershed. And it also impacts our downstream water users. Oh, and another really important task that I think is important is bringing positivity and cooperation between board members, district employees, and committee members. We've seen a decline in participation in the committees and it's very apparent. There's been a lot of harsh words spoken during the environmental committees directed at staff and community volunteers. I'm kind of over the aggression that's coming at me during a volunteer job. I believe that's why a lot of others have dropped out. Community volunteers feel like they're being heard and contributing to the community. I'm just checking a box. During environmental committee meeting, a board member asks, are we here to protect the environment or provide people with water? And the answer is always both. The water district is obligated under article 10, section two of the California Constitution to protect the beneficial use of water. And we need board members that understand that. The voters deserve a board member that recognizes the environmental impacts of water use and infrastructure. And our future should be in the hands of those who'd be around to experience the impacts that this board will make. We cannot continue to provide clean drinking water without also protecting our environment. Thank you. Well, I don't know how other people respond, but I've just been really impressed by the thoughtfulness of both of your answers. And I thank you for your willingness to serve and for thinking about these things beforehand so that you can give the answers that you did tonight. So let me just go and see if there's any members of the board that would like to ask you questions before we begin our discussion. Mark. Yes. Jeff, given your current work with the Sportsman's Club, what is your availability for board rules, committee rules? Well, first of all, I retired. The Sportsman's Club takes maybe 20% of my time, something like that, maybe 25%. I'm in the process of resigning from being the treasurer of the Michigan State Alumni Club after quite a few years of doing that. But basically I have plenty of time available. Okay, thank you. And I do have one question for Alina also. Alina, in your presentation just a few minutes ago, you expressed the interest in being the board representative on the now combined engineering and environmental committee. If that's not the need or the identified role that we need a board member to fill and you were the one who is seated, how do you feel about being involved in one of the other committees instead? Oh, I mean, and that's fine with me as well. I mean, I always like learning new things and expanding my knowledge. So in giving me more insight into the district, besides just my expertise. So I think that would be a wonderful opportunity as well. Okay, thank you. Any other questions from members of the board? Jamie. So first I wanna thank you both for being here tonight and being so thoughtful in your responses to us. And I really appreciate everyone who applied for the role, but I think that in a situation like this, being here to answer our questions and get to know each other when we're appointing a board member is incredibly important. So thank you for participating in the process. I wanna sort of ask both of you because you are both really in my view very equal candidates in your involvement with the water district and your commitment to our local community over the years. But you both probably come from some differing perspectives as well. So I'm interested if both of you could answer this question from your own perspective about how you will from your background either in finance and technology, Jeff, or your background in environmental concerns, Alina to sort of set aside some of your own personal focus and passion and recognizes a board member that you are playing a role here that has to balance the needs of a district and agency, employees, our commitments to them with our commitments to the community, our partner agencies and of course our regulatory agencies. If you could just sort of talk a little bit about your views on how you can sort of best serve the agency from your own background as we navigate some of those issues, that'd be helpful for me. Jeff, I'll ask you to go first just because you see you both not jumping. I get it. Do you mean- We're both scratching our head. I'm asking. I think that was addressed first to Alina. At least that was the way I read it. So why don't you go ahead and respond? You're either one, whichever one feels like hearing first. Oh, well, I mean, I have a lot of experience playing whatever role it is that I've been hired to do whether that's being with the state or federal government and your personal beliefs don't really come into play with those types of positions. You're there to support your local government or federal government and the task at hand. And I understand that the board is very similar to that. And I've also, you talked about like working with the regulatory agencies and all of that. And I do have experience with that, having to come together and form partnerships that sometimes are not always likely or that people butt heads and trying to come to a common ground to accomplish these projects that I've been assigned to. So I don't want to come off as like I'm some crazy environmentalist that's gonna push my agenda, because that's not me. I want what's best for the water district, what's best for our consumers and also taking into consideration and what's best for our environment. And I think that all plays into the goals of the water district. Thanks, Elena. That was excellent. Jeff, did you want to take a crack at your thoughts? Yeah, let me just pull my thoughts together here for a second. After such a nice response from Elena, I have to stop and think for a second. So, different constituencies that we have to deal with. We have to deal with the public. We have to deal with the ratepayers. We have to deal with employees. We have to deal with government agencies. I've had a fair amount of experience with pretty much all of these. In business, I employed people and I worked with other departments and coordinated things. I recall one time when I was sent to the UK with several of our engineers to meet with our engineering team there. The reason I was sent was I was to be Switzerland. I had to negotiate between these groups a rather difficult compromise and it was deemed that what's the one to do that. Employees, like I said, I've employed people. I've hired them. I've unfortunately occasionally fired them. Most of my former employees, I'm still in touch with people I haven't seen in 20 years. I still keep in touch with them on Facebook. They ask me questions. I do a lot of thinking about how to be good with employees and that's an area of I've had a strength in and haven't had a lot of experience within the last few years because I haven't had any employees but it's an area where I was working. I was very good in. Governmental regulations. Well, I spent a lot of time with governmental regulations in the Army but recently with the Sportsman's Club, shooting ranges held issues with environmental issues and regulations and I've spent a lot of time bringing myself up to speed and working within the boundaries of the various environmental regulations. And basically, as I said, I grew up kind of spending all my summers in Wisconsin in the woods. And so I have a real passion for wild territory with woods and streams and lakes and things like that. And I also got a real firsthand knowledge of how everything interacts in the woods and the relationship between the different aspects of what you find. There are redwood trees up there but woods are woods and it's something I feel deeply about. I'm not quite sure where to go beyond that and answer your question because your question was kind of long and kind of covered a number of areas. So if you want me to highlight anything, please let me know. I appreciate that. Thank you for the very thoughtful answer. Okay. Any other questions from members of the board before we go to a discussion? Bob? No? Okay. I think what we'll do then is we will discuss among the board and then we'll also go out for comments by the public. And then hopefully we'll have a motion from somebody on the board in terms of what to do. So if we could start the discussion with Jamie. Well, I appreciate, like I said, the high quality of the candidates that we have to choose from. It's a high class problem to have to have two such great candidates. And in my view, what we're replacing is the function that we lost in terms of the role that Lowe has played on the board. And I have some particular concerns around how we are proceeding with our capital and construction outreach. And so I'm really interested in making sure that whomever we select is going to help to be a good advocate for the water district as we sort of navigate these really challenging next year or so in terms of community outreach around some really sensitive environmental issues that we're looking at related to capital projects but also financial and budgetary issues. So those are the considerations that I'm weighing as I look at both of these candidates. Okay. Bob? Yeah, I would echo a lot of what Jamie said. I think the three candidates, anybody that puts their name into the hat, so to speak for these roles is really taking on a very serious obligation with the community. And it's really great to see that people step up and do that. From my point of view, I would encourage Elizabeth to perhaps get involved in one of the committees. Well, I think have at least one vacancy depending on which of the other two candidates are selected and get to know the district a little bit more. I think she has some background that has some applicability to the district and its functions. But I think both Jeff and Alina bring a depth of experience, time with the district and particular skills that would be good. In some ways it would be nice if we could kind of put them into one person and bring them everything together into one. So it will be a very, very difficult choice. And I think I would like to hear what Mark and Gail have to say as well. Thank you. Mark? Yes. I've had the opportunity over the last year and a half in leading the engineering and environmental committee to participate with Alina. And I've appreciated her comments and views in those meetings and the fact that she is been a committee participant there. I also appreciate the fact that Jeff has been involved for a similar year and a half with the budget and finance committee. So we have two candidates here in front of us that are obviously interested in the board and interested in successful operation of the district. I think that's great. One question that I wasn't able to ask and it was to Elizabeth was, so what is your awareness of involvement with the district? Because I didn't see that in her application. We did see it with both of these two candidates and in their answers that they presented to us. Very thoughtful, slightly different perspectives, but I think that's good. We have different perspectives often. So I'm pleased that we have a somewhat difficult choice in front of us. Good, thank you both for being here.  All right. I guess I would echo what Bob said to Elizabeth that we encourage you to serve on a committee. And in fact, I would say that Bob said that to me a couple of years ago and look what happened. When I applied for one of these open positions, I was not chosen, but Bob suggested that I serve on a committee and I did. Gosh, what happened next? So I would encourage Elizabeth to do that. But I think that as Mark says that we really want somebody that has the level of engagement that both Jeff and Alina have because we need somebody that can hit the ground running both given the challenges that are facing the district and given that this is a short term situation. I will say that I favor Jeff Hill for this position largely because I have found his participation in the budget and finance committee to be both substantial and substantive and helpful. He will make an excellent replacement for Lois on this committee. And I think that the financial aspects and experience with dealing with staff, I mean, one of the great challenges that we have given that one of the major costs in our budget is staff is understanding how you deal with that is in my view a real positive. And I realize this is just my judgment on this and other people can take another approach to this and I would respect that as well. I also think of the three applicants. Jeff has the most experience serving on boards and commissions and advisory groups, which means that he will grasp readily how boards operate. And finally, I think it would be great to have somebody from Scotts Valley, which we haven't had on the board for decades. So with that, I would like, unless the members of the board wanna say something before I go out to the public, I will come back and ask for more comments from the board. Is that okay? So I will go out to members of the public and gosh, we've got quite a number of people attending, 13, would anybody like to make a comment or ask a question? We'll start with Katie. We allow Katie to speak please. Lee, can you raise the CTV poke? Polly, you're muted, so I can't hear you. Cedric, if you can hear me, can we please ask Katie or unmute Katie? There we go. Okay, thank you. Thank you. All right, Katie, you're up. Hello, this is Katie from Boulder Creek. I voted for Tina Toe and I find it frankly appalling that her vacancy was filled by someone without a scientific background. I really don't understand the logic of not having at least one biologist on the Water District Board and given her background and experience, it seems pretty clear that Alina Lange is the obvious choice and we the constituents would be lucky to have her working for us and with us and that is what I have to say. Okay. Thank you, Katie. Jim Mosher. Yes, thank you. And Jim Mosher from Felton. I am really pleased that we have three candidates here who have applied and I think all three would be great assets to the board. But I would like to say that I think Jeff Hill would be my choice because of his expertise with budgets, the work he's done on the budget committee and his long experience. I think he has the resources, he has the knowledge and the experience that would be most useful for us at this time. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Any other? Elaine Fresco. Go ahead, Elaine. Okay. Hi, this is Elaine Fresco from Felton and I just wanna start out by saying, as you all have said, how impressed I am with both Jeff and Alina because both of you have excellent resumes and very relevant experience. I like Alina's environmental background and her commitment to clean water. And I like Jeff's ability to deal with complicated projects and budget issues. So I'm thinking that right now because of the immediate challenges facing the district, the budget issues and the projects are take precedence, but I would like to say, so I would favor Jeff, but I would like to say to Alina, I will support your candidacy if you decide to run for office. And that's all I have to say. Thank you, Elaine. Larry Ford. Thank you very much. This is Larry Ford from Felton. I really appreciate everything that I've heard tonight. I just have to say that I'm so impressed with anybody who's willing to serve on the board of directors of the Water District. It's a lot of work. It's challenging. Means that you have to face criticism sometimes that's completely irrational. And I think I would have a hard time doing that. I would get mad. Anyway, so I'm really impressed that you all are willing to serve. And I'm impressed that the two candidates that I'm now more familiar with are still willing to serve. This is a temporary position. And so I don't know whether you're willing to run for election in November. I think you would, both of you would be electable if you were running in November and I would support both of you also. I wish we'd had a chance. I'd take a chance, but I'll support. Anyway, this is very difficult to choose among the, you know, between the two of you who we've heard from. But I think I would have to agree that at this point, I'd like to see Jeff nominated and elected to be fulfilling for Lois Henry.  Thank you, over. Okay. Thank you, Larry. Can we get the people that are talking to mute because Elaine, we're creeping into your personal life there. It's not your fault.  So let's make sure that the talking permitted is only with the person that is, that I've called on. So are there any other members that would like to members of the public? Lee. Yeah. I think all of you have a really difficult choice because these are the two people that are present at the meeting. They're both really excellent candidates. And I agree with what people have said before that both should run in the next election. What I'm kind of looking at though is that over the past several years, the environmental committee has been reduced quite a bit. And I know that Carly does an excellent job but she's juggling a lot of things and to have an extra person on the board that has that environmental, such a stellar environmental background like Alina does, that would help fill in some of the gaps that has been missing over the past few years. And so I would recommend that she be nominated for the position, although they're both excellent choices. So, but that's my leaning. So thank you. Thank you, Lee. Would any other members of the public like to speak at this time? Don't see. Oh, sorry, Elizabeth. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, so I'm Elizabeth Zampona. I live in Boulder Creek and I'm actually a neighbor of Alina. And I just cannot say enough about her as she's involved our neighborhood and really gathered us together. So, and then her scientific background, her environmental background and considering what's going on in our world right now, I understand finance is very important, but I also think the environment is too. I think she is reasonable and is not gonna go crazy, like losing in the finances. Anyway, I vote for Alina. Thank you, Elizabeth. Any other comments from members of the public? We just asked Jim Lee, Jim and Lee to mute, please. Yeah, great, thank you. I don't see any other hands raised out there. So I would like to return to the board for any other further discussion or if anybody would like to make a motion. Mark? Yes. Like I've heard from several members of the public, I feel that the financial aspects of the board that are in front of us right now are the critical or the most critical item out there. Given that I'd like to nominate Jeff Hill or make a motion that Jeff Hill be appointed for the vacancy on the board. Is there a second? I'll second it. So we have a motion to appoint Jeff Hill and we will discuss that motion. Bob, you have your hand raised. Yeah, thank you. I wanted to offer a few comments regarding roles of board members. Board members have to address a lot of different topic, ranging from operations, finance, administration, environmental, engineering, construction, what have you. And no one person is gonna have expertise in all of these things, which is why it's really important that the board members be prepared and ready and look at this from a generalist point of view. That is, and really in that generalist role, in my opinion, you have to combine that with oversight. And oversight comes with an inherent amount of skepticism and questioning and looking for ways to improve and change. Ultimately though, the number one job of a board member are the finances. That is the blood that makes the district run. And we have a lot of challenges facing our district right now with finances and how that relates to what we need to do. So I'm looking at both candidates from that lens, generalism, finances, skepticism and this is a really tough decision. Alina, especially since when I look at your resume, I see a lot of places my dad was in terms of when he was working on the dance in the Corps of Engineers, a little different focus back then, of course, in building. And the time you spent on the Oregon coast, about 30 miles south of where I grew up. So I understand that kind of situation very, very much. And it's good that you're going to continue with the district one way or the other and providing your viewpoint to help us make those kinds of decisions. Any other comments or questions from the board? We do have a motion on the table. I would like to go now out to the public in case they want to comment on the motion. See any hands raised out there. So with that, we'll come back. And if there's no further comments by members of the board, I will ask Holly to take a roll call vote on the motion that's on the table, which is to appoint Jeff Hill to the vacancy as a member of the board of directors. Holly? President Mayhood? Aye. Mr. President Ackerman? Yes. Director Falls? Yes. Director Smalley? Yes. The motion passes unanimously. I believe that at this time we, Bob, go ahead. I was gonna ask if we can have like a five minute break while Jeff gets sworn in and that sort of thing. Sure. If everybody else, can you go ahead? Is that okay, Holly? Can you swear him in while the rest of the board goes off and takes a little break? Yeah. Okay. We will wait, hold on just a moment. I would have to ask Chief and defer to Gina. Okay. Gina, is that all right? Sure, Mayhood. I would just recommend keeping with past precedent in terms of swearing him in with the board present and then a break could be taken either before or after the swearing. All right, well, let's do this. Let's go ahead and swear him in and then we'll take a five minute break. How's that, Bob? That'd be great. Okay, all right. Let's go ahead and do that. Okay, Jeff, could I ask you to unmute yourself, please? And raise your right hand and repeat after me. I state your name. Do solemnly swear or affirm? I, Jeffrey, you'll do solemnly swear or affirm? That I will support and defend. That I will support and defend- The Constitution of the United States. The Constitution of the United States. And the Constitution of the State of California. And the Constitution of the State of California. Against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and to the Constitution of the State of California and to the Constitution of the State of California. Take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter upon which I'm about to enter. Welcome to the board. Thank you. Thank you all. And I see that Alyssa has apparently departed the meeting, but I wanted to wish her well. I think she's just a panelist, an attendee, I mean, an attendee now. Okay. I'll do an offline. Okay. Let's go ahead and take a five minute recess. So we'll be back at 7.32. Okay. Okay. Okay. Looks like we're all back. Let's see. Where is Rick back with us? Getting a snack. All right. But you're with us. That's the important thing. Okay. So I think with that, we can go on to the next item of business, which is the membership of the budget and finance committee. And according to the board policy manual, the board president makes recommendations regarding board member committee assignments and submits those to the board for their accrual. So I am recommending that Jeff held be appointed to the budget and finance committee and that all other committee assignments remain the same. So that's my recommendation. Is there any board discussion of that recommendation? I would like to move your recommendation and just say welcome, Jeff Hill. I think you will, you have already made an excellent contribution to the budget and finance committee. And so look forward to you continuing to make an excellent contribution on the budget and finance committee. Is there a second? I will second that. Okay. Any comments by other members of the board on the motion? Seeing none. I'll go out to the members of the public. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on the motion? Seeing none. We'll come back and Holly, could you take a roll call vote on the motion that Jeff Hill be appointed to the budget and finance committee and that all other committee assignments remain as they are. President Mayhood? Aye. Vice President Ackman? Yes. Director Falls? Yes. Director Smalley? Yes. Director Hill? Jeff, are you having trouble muting? I'm sorry. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Yes to the motion or yes you were having trouble. Yes to the motion. Thank you. All right. The motion passes unanimously. That brings us to the next item on the agenda, which is the fiscal year twenty to twenty-three budget review and adjustment. Rick? Yes. Thank you, chair. The district's finance manager will present this item to the board. Good evening, everyone. This item is in regards to the preliminary fiscal year twenty to twenty-three proposed budget adjustments in fiscal year twenty one twenty-two. The board of directors adopted the first by annual budget. District staff does a budget review annually comparing budget to actuals and estimated actuals. Since there have been a lot of changes in talks from the board about possibly amending the budget for fiscal year twenty-two twenty-three. The following outlines the proposed budget adjustments to the fiscal year twenty-two twenty-three adopted budget. So we'll start with operating revenue. The basics were doing a slight adjustment to the basic charge decreasing it by twenty-four hundred dollars. This adjustment. Excuse me. Kendra, do you want to share your screen to do this or? I'm going to zoom in on my iPad. So I would have to bring it up real quick. Or could Holly, could you share your screen and bring it up with the agenda? Holly's keeping the minutes. It might be distracting for her to scroll through. I could. Okay. You have a district council then Holly make her a presenter. It looks like it looks like I have the button. Bear with me here. Thank you Gina. So the water basic charge slight adjustment of decrease of twenty-four hundred dollars. This adjustment is to account for the CZU home rebuilds. It was originally budgeted that a hundred homes would be reconnected by December twenty-twenty-two. We're now only projecting that seventy-five homes will be. We're not seeing it on the screen. We're seeing Gina. We're seeing a meeting invite. Okay. Sorry about that. Hold on just a second. You did have it for a second. Yeah. We had it for a moment and then it went away. Are you seeing it now? Yes. Yes. Okay. Let me make sure I can scroll and it isn't going to toggle to something else again. Do you see it moving? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Director Fultz. Okay. So we are now only projecting that seventy-five homes will be reconnected by December twenty-twenty-two. So that's that slight adjustment. Water usage. This adjustment is to account for the decrease in consumption we have seen in fiscal year twenty-one twenty-two. We are starting to see an increasing usage again in March twenty-twenty-two. In the note I am stating it's eighteen percent higher than prior year. But it's actually that's a typo. It's actually twenty-one percent higher than prior year. And this is attributed to the warmer weather. Over all those since fiscal year twenty-one twenty-two has seen a decrease. We are adjusting fiscal year twenty-two twenty-three's usage by negative three percent. So that's about a two hundred eighty-one thousand dollar difference. In operating grants this is actually going to change. This is for the Coastal Conservancy Grant. We were awarded all of the work is expected to be completed prior to June thirty twenty-twenty-two. And we will invoice all of the work in fiscal year twenty-one twenty-one twenty-two. So that's when the revenue will be recognized then. So this I actually need to make an adjustment to I apologize for that. We will be recognizing this revenue in the current fiscal year we are in. So there will not be a adjustment for the fiscal year twenty-two twenty-three budget. As Carly mentioned earlier in the meeting we will be applying for the Coastal Conservancy Grant again. But it just has not been awarded yet for this obviously for this upcoming fiscal year. So those are the operating revenue adjustments. We will move on to operating expenses. And then in this I'll just go through each department and each category and kind of explain the main adjustments that we are proposing. So for department one hundred the salaries and benefits is a decrease of eighty eight thousand. This adjustment is the difference between the budgeted position assumptions and a potential in-house promotion. It also includes splitting that said promotion of the new administrative analyst position fifty fifty between department one hundred and department five hundred. And then also updated the benefit costs in contract professional services. It's an increase of two hundred eighty nine thousand. A hundred thousand is for the rate study that did not occur in fiscal year twenty one twenty two hundred thirty nine thousand is for the Santa Margarita groundwater expenses. And not yet approved by the board but wanted to note this in here is an additional fifteen thousand for outreach. The chairman committee voted to request the board to to approve a budget increase for outreach to fifty thousand. And then advertising is an increase of twenty five thousand and this is for recruitment of the water quality and treatment manager position. In department two hundred salary salaries and benefits. This is decreased by about one hundred forty five thousand. This adjustment is the difference between the budgeted position and the promotion of the director of finance. Not yet approved is a adjustment to hire a temporary finance position from a temp agency of about eighty five thousand and updated benefit costs in the contract professional services. This is an increase of twenty five hundred. This is to move to paychecks electronic timekeeping and time off system. Department three hundred and engineering. Salaries and benefits increase of ninety eight thousand. This includes an adjustment for the difference between a budgeted GIS card specialist in the new hire. Not yet approved is also adding a construction inspector position. This position is being reviewed by the committee before going to the board for approval. And in this is also updating the benefit costs. Contract professional services with a decrease of ten thousand initially had that in for the master plan but since it's now completed. We will not be incurring any more expenses for that. Operating expenses is an increase of fifteen hundred for a new laptop for the construction inspector if approved by the board. Same with a cell phone for the construction specialist inspector and then general and admin is an increase of five hundred for miscellaneous trainings. Moving on to department four hundred operations and distribution. The salaries and benefits is a decrease of ninety nine thousand. This adjustment is a difference between what was budgeted for the field services worker and a new hire. We decreased overtime wages by fifteen thousand and budgeted or updated the benefit costs. Operating expenses was a decrease of twenty thousand for miscellaneous items. One hundred five hundred in salaries and benefits increase of thirty eight thousand. This is for the in house promotion I was talking about earlier in splitting the department one hundred and five hundred allocation fifty fifty. Not yet approved would be filling the environmental specialist position. And also updated the benefit costs. The national services is an increase of twenty nine thousand thirty five thousand being for grant writing services that was not originally budgeted for and offset by a decrease of six thousand and various other services and an increase of five hundred for a district cell phone. Department eight hundred supply and treatment salaries and benefits is a decrease of three hundred twenty six thousand. This adjustment is the difference between the budgeted water treatment operator who retired and a new hire also adjustment for an estimated six month vacancy to fill the water quality and treatment manager position. We decreased overtime by twenty thousand and updated the benefit costs contract professional services was a decrease of ten thousand for miscellaneous items and operating expenses was a decrease of five thousand. Department six hundred sewer funds the operating supplies is a decrease of two thousand facilities decrease of twenty five hundred. So overall operating expense adjustment is a decrease of two hundred nine thousand or two point negative two point three percent to the adoption fiscal year twenty two twenty three budget. This adjustment includes the potential new hires and outreach increase that have not been not yet been approved by the board. If those positions were to not be approved by the board the overall expense operating expense adjustment is a decrease of five hundred twenty nine thousand or about six negative six percent to the adopted budget. Moving on to capital expenditures. The fiscal year twenty one through twenty three adopted C.I. budget C.I.P. budget had twenty point seven million and thirteen point three million for fiscal year twenty one twenty two fiscal year twenty two twenty three respectively. The budget or the C.I.P. budget adjustments are as follows fiscal year twenty one twenty two. We had a budget request of twenty point seven million. The estimated actuals for fiscal year twenty one twenty two are four point three million. This is primarily due to design and consultant construction material delays on some of our larger projects. The fiscal year twenty two twenty three budget request is thirteen point three million. The budget adjustment is twenty eight point three million. The significant increase in the budget adjustment is obviously attributed to the delays that occurred in fiscal year twenty one twenty two pushing all of the projects into this next fiscal year. So recently I think this was discussed at our last board meeting was FEMA increase their cost share percentage from seventy five percent to ninety percent. And the state cost share percentage that was not originally included in the budget for fiscal year twenty two twenty three is seven point five percent. So our inflows from capital contributions is being adjusted from four point two to eight point one million. And then the adjustment for that estimated physical cash inflow for when we expect to receive those reimburses is as follows this clear twenty two twenty three budget was eight point four. We're adjusting that to the six point three. Which brings us into non operating revenue. I'll skip down to FEMA reimbursements. So these these reimbursements are based on a cash cash basis for when we when the reimbursement will be received. This is the adjustment is to account for the processing time it takes FEMA to review and approve and send out funding. Initially we're expecting to receive funding a lot sooner but with their limited labor labor resources it has been extremely delayed. We have reached out to FEMA and are working with them to see if we can draw down on projects that have not been completed so we can receive funding for those projects sooner. So that's something that's in the works. Capital grants the fiscal year twenty two twenty three budget was zero. The adjustment is the three million for to account for the grant that was awarded for the Bracken Bray Forest Springs consolidation. And then non operating expense. There was no real change there. So that concludes the preliminary review of the proposed adjustments for fiscal year twenty two twenty three. Does anyone have questions. As a chair of that committee I just want to start out by congratulating you and all of the managerial staff of really combing through the budget and finding ways to save money on expenses and on staff salaries. And I think that is really to be commended in the fact that you ended up with an operating budget that was less than the one we had before even though we had to absorb that hundred and thirty seven thousand for administrative our share of administrative costs or Santa Margarita which we have not budgeted previously is you know is to your credit. So thank you to you and the rest of the staff for for doing that. Jeff you're the other board member that's on that committee. Did you have any comments or questions. I really at this point only have one question. And this is under capital expenditures where we went from thirteen million three hundred four thousand to twenty eight million three hundred twelve thousand. And this is really a question for Rick. Do we have the physical capacity the manpower etc to get that much more work done. I don't know is this going to that's a big job. It is a big job and we have to answer your question and we have brought up our engineering staff to three. Most of these projects will be consulting hired out of consulting engineer firms. Yes but there will be oversight and review by not only the engineering staff but the engineering and environmental committee. The short answer is yes I believe so we do. Okay. Thank you word for that but that was a big concern there because I looked at that and said that's a big job. And I know one of our issues is having enough people to get some of this work done so. And you know Jeff is as you get your settled in we'd be more than happy in district engineer myself or even the engineer chair and you weren't happy to sit down and go through the process with you. I'd love to do that. Real speed. Thank you. Okay. So let's go to the rest of the board. Let me start with Bob. Excuse me. I had his hand up and I'm in this. I'm going to let Mark go first. Oh well I just kind of tend to go like I have my little thing that I go out of the medical and Jamie started the first was first on the last issue. So you're you're up next. So I'm trying to be fair about who goes first. But if you want to defer to somebody else. He's no no. Bob you're up. Okay. I do want to because you know last meeting Mark I think I did one time. Yeah. Yes I do want to echo what. Gail said about the. The budget here. You know. As I've said many times and probably will say again in the future. The rate of growth and operating expenses is really in my opinion one of the key areas for the district to focus on and so anything we can do to continue. Reducing the rate of growth and expenses is really great and I commend you. Andra and all the senior management staff I'm sure that we're involved in that we're working hard to put that together. I don't know if that's me in the background there's nobody here so it might be the mixer. I did have a number of point questions that I'd like to go through. Starting with so headcount still at 35. I think we're at 34 now so yes it would be 35 and fiscal year 2223. Okay. On page 25 department 200. You mentioned a temporary finance position from a temp agency is that a backfill for a vacancy. I will be on leave so yes that's the intended. Okay. Thanks for clarifying. On page 28 on the capital budgets. We're even with the significant increase from 75% coverage in the budget to I guess 97.5% now. We're seeing an increase in the in the budget. The cover that and the question I have is is there still going to be enough in the not enough money in the $15 million 2021 loan to cover all of the non CCU projects that were on that list. Yeah, all of all of the $15 million loan projects will still have their funding allocated to them like they initially were. Okay, answers your question. Yes, just to make sure that nothing had to fall off yet because I know when we talked about it when we approved it there was a possibility depending on how this shook out that something may get dropped so it's great news if nothing gets dropped. On future reports like this which are really great I always like to just go for the operating margin number. So putting page 38 which is the summary at the as the first page would would be really helpful on that slide I noticed that if we back out the fire recovery surcharge from the operating income. We get down to a bit over 3 million. When I compare that against our current year to date numbers which are in your budget finance report later on. Which is showing through February we're at 1.2 million again excluding the CCU per charge that means we'd have March April May June four months to make up. 1.8 million in margin it is there a plan to do that. That is something I would need to look into further and get back to you on. I don't have an answer for you on that tonight. Okay, yeah, so I think it's going to be important if we're going to be doing these adjustments that everything get updated for the. The actuals that we have it looks like we're we're working here from the budget to maybe just making the adjustments without having rolled in the actuals yet. I'm skeptical we can make up that 1.8 million but I really really hope we do and I'm hoping that that you and Rick can show us how that how that happened. Okay. That that was it thank you. Go ahead Mark. Okay, thank you. Thank you. You mentioned the Coastal Conservancy Grant at 200,000 and I saw that as revenue but didn't see an offsetting expense is that related to what you said that that should have been allocated to the 21 22 budget. Yeah, exactly. So this this is looking at fiscal year 22 23 adjustments. And so it was found that all of those expenses are going to be incurred in fiscal year 21 22 and we'll be receiving the revenue and 21 or recognizing the revenue and 21 22. So there won't be an adjustment for the expenses in fiscal year 22 23. So that takes that 200,000 moving it back to the previous year rather than what you're showing for 22. Okay, so making that correction. The the proposed and I thought I read it was proposed temporary finance manager position. What's the process with us proceeding with that. I have concern with the fact that what a year ago, or less, you were now back filling for Stephanie, and now you're going to be gone. When do we discuss this further, whether that gets real. You want to take that, Kendra. Yeah, please. We're going to bring that back to the next budget and finance committee and have another discussion and see if there's or will take a recommendation to the full board. Okay, we wanted to put together a more detailed information for the finance committee of what this position would do. It is a high level management. It would be a high level position in the finance department. Kendra has been working with existing staff on training for her absence, and we have been reaching out to temp firms to try to get some information of what's available at the same time and we plan to bring this back. All right. Thank you. Lastly, the three point, believe it was 3.2 million dollar grant for from Department of Water Resources for Brackenbrae for springs. I see that recognized as revenue at this point, but no expenses and understand we haven't spent any of the expenses yet. However, we don't get reimbursed, or we don't get anything from the grant until we spend the money. So I think recognizing that as revenue at this point, I can understand the logic of that part of it. So the expenses are it's in the it's listed in the capital budget. From our from my understanding we were planning on having that completed next year is that correct Rick. I think that I was talking with Josh about that. Brackenbrae for springs we're planning on having that completed next fiscal year. Yeah, yes. Yeah, so that you'll see you'll see a line item on the capital budget adjustment for the Brackenbrae consolidation. And so that's why we're I missed that it was part of expenses. I'll go back and look at that. What is the amount that we're showing for expenses then it's in the capital budget for the amount of the grant. Okay. And the fact that I've expressed like, and that Rick has indicated, we're short on that. How do we begin to address that in this budget. Well, we're sure we want to we will not move ahead and expense into the construction phases until we have more detailed from. Okay, you are okay submit again to DWR once we have bidded project in hand. Okay, for their. If we haven't recognized in expenses then at that 3.2. It's a zero song. Okay, at this point. Okay, thank you. Right. Jamie. Thanks. So I wanted to speak to the recommended increase to the admin of the outreach budget being made by the administrative committee. If I could for just a moment. I, you know, think, I mean, obviously it's a small number in comparison to the overall decrease that we're looking at for this fiscal year budget. But I think more to the point and it sort of speaks to the, the issue that frankly, our director Hill brought up that there is this, you know, substantial amount of work happening that is exponentially increasing as a result of all of the recovery work that the staff is doing related to the fire or mergers. And in particular one of the areas where I think that I've heard brought agreement on the board that we need to be doing more is in explaining to the public. The complicated issues and choices that we're going to be facing around some of the, the, you know, construction that we want to do for a CZ fire recovery. And, and so I think that we are limited in our resources and the only way that we're going to be able to, you know, do that is if we invest a little more in some kind of a consultant or, you know, community outreach organization who can help us do some of this work to, you know, get the feedback from the San Lorenzo Valley community about these complicated choices we're going to be facing related to these projects so I am very much in support of increasing the budget for this purpose. Any other comments by members of the board. Rick, go ahead. I just, I just wanted to give a bit more on what Jamie just mentioned on outreach we will be bringing the admin committee's recommendation to the full board on our outreach program and the formal request for an increase in budget to I do believe the first meeting in May. Any other comments by members of the board. If not, I'll go out and see if there's any comments by members of the public. And if there are please raise your hand. I don't see any hands raised. At this point we're not being asked for any action. This was advisory to the board and to get your feedback so we'll just go ahead and go on to the next item on the agenda, which is the waters part grant program. Yes, yes thank you chair and I'll ask the environmental planner to present this item. Okay, thank you Greg. So this item is asking the board to sign a resolution committing to the water smart grant for the $100,000 grant towards replacing our water meters for my technology. This is a 5050 match, but we do have a budget allocated for am I meter replacement already. So it won't change anything as far as our budget. We are looking to appoint Rick as our signatory and then myself or the environmental programs manager as the point of contact for the grant. So pretty straightforward requests that we just have to appoint the district manager is our rep on this, but are there any comments from members of the board.  I'm going to get a two sentence description of how these meters work. Why are these benefiting us, are they different than the badger meters that we've heard a lot about the last several years. These are the badger meters directors falling. These are the smart back. Okay. Am I is the technology. Okay. All right. I'm going to put the badger meters. Okay, any comments by members of the public. I mean, this is good news. All right. So would any members of the board like to make a motion regarding the resolution. Oh, go ahead, Jamie. I did have a motion to approve the resolution, but I did have a question. Oh, good. Yeah, I'm just curious if approved, like, how, how much further down the, you know, am I smart water meter road does this grant get us. It's approximately 600 meters. Okay, so I will move the resolution. I'm looking for the resolution language now. Sorry. To appoint the district manager. Thank you. I'm going to move the resolution to appoint the district manager. As the representative to be signatory and point of contact. Where the water. The resolution. Yes. I have a second place. No second. Thank you. All right. Any comments further comments by the board any further comments on the motion by members of the public. Seeing none. Holly, would you take a roll call vote please. Is it may hood. Hi. Vice president Ackerman. Yes. Director false. Yes. Director Hill. Yes. Director Smalley. Yes. Okay. I'm going to move the resolution to the second place. Passes unanimously. That brings us to our. Next item of new business, which is. S LBWD financial obligations. This is an item that Bob asked to put on the agenda. And so I will let him. Te it up and take it away. Great. Thank you, Gail. And thanks everybody. Thank you very much for joining me. I assembled this information with the objective of providing additional transparency for a community. The owners of the San Lorenzo Valley water district. So they can have a better understanding of our financial position. And some presentations in the board packet, I won't go through each slide one by one, but I want to highlight a few things for. the topic or not. If it does then the second request would be to select how to do that. I'm not requesting we discuss solutions today or anything like that just whether or not we wish to pursue it and what the path would be to do that. Committee, staff action, what have I broken out the presentation into on the financial obligations in the two sections and summarize those in both tabular and graphic format. Section one shows the accumulated obligations to date totaling about 29 million and it also assumes that the fire mitigation around our facilities and the CZU recovery will be handled by grants and the surcharge respectively and hopefully that won't change. Section two shows the capital spend required each year based on the capital asset inventory and associated lifespans and this was built using a top-down approach which provides a broader view of the capital infrastructure. It also includes other items that are in there by board policy and also includes debt payment which I'm assuming are going to be about two million a year for the indefinite future and that totals about 8.8 million so to be specific this would include the assumption of replacing one one-hundredth of our pipe inventory each year or about 1.9 miles assuming a hundred year lifespan for pipe and current cost is about three million a year. Section two also includes a couple of backup slides and pipe inventory and costs and section three shifts to looking at a subset of section two strictly capital assets by doing a couple of investment models and for simplicity I only did two one was a level amount of capital per year which is just under five million and the second one is an irregular line the orange line is an irregular line which corresponds to spending about 50 percent of the level a level option per year for about 75 percent of the life of the asset and then a shifting to making up the rest of that in the last 25 percent of the life so as you can see it results in some spikes and particularly at the end of life which is driven by the pipe it results in some pretty large spike now please note that the area under each line is the same it's just a matter of how those costs are distributed over time this model could be further refined by using the actual inventory I don't have the spreadsheet with all that data but we could take that with the ages and put together a third model of where we are based on historical spending and what our inventory looks like to see what those lines are going to look like going forward to give an idea of what that means if we look at the current water master plan the 20 year spend that was in there was about 75 million if you look at the level option on section three that totals about 95 million so about 20 million more than is in the water master plan and if you look at the irregular option that's about 47 and a half so you can see that depending on the investment model you take what the state of your inventory is at the time you can wind up with some very different and in some cases perhaps under investment in capital which I think has happened over the last 30 years and is currently being addressed by district staff and this board so that's the overview I'm happy to take any questions and hear comments on the board as to whether or not we wish to pursue this topic further thank you okay thank you um so let's go ahead and ask we'll go in my alphabetical order again um Jeff you're up first if you have a comment you're muted okay my first comment is Bob impressive analysis I obviously put a lot of work into this um and I certainly agree we need to be transparent with our finances and do long term a long term estimating where we're going to be um I think we you know we need to keep in mind that this is I don't think I've seen this sort of analysis before from the board or from the from the district and I think we need to experiment with it a bit before we get too far into it but I think the most relevant comment I can make is that with the finance director about to leave on several months of eternity leave um you know my recommendation on this is going to be to bump this to the finance committee and let us wrestle with it for a while and and go from there because I hesitate to put this the burden of this kind of analysis on the staff while she's gone so yeah and can I respond to Gail just really yes you may so uh Jeff very excellent comments and that and yes one of the things I neglected to say during my introductory comments is that you know these numbers are my best research based on open sources with one exception and so it is very possible that these numbers in fact it's probably almost assured that there's some numbers on there that need to be refined updated what have you so um sending it to committee would be you know obviously a way to a way to go about doing that yeah anything more Jeff no I just you know it's like I said that it's a nice approach it gives you a long-term view but of course you have to keep in mind that the long-term view based on uh but I guess I would call statistical analysis um doesn't always reflect you know the short-term view of we just lost a pipeline and we've got to spend a lot of money on it and so um you know we've been operating on his infrastructure investment model side we've been operating in the on the orange line rather than the blue line and the blue line is is useful to understand that I'm not sure how with the kind of budgets we have we would move to the blue line from the orange line other than for purposes of understanding where we are so no no solutions yet yeah mark you're muted thank you gail um similar to what Jeff just said I'm an impressive analysis of the information bob uh I commend the amount of work that you obviously have to put into this to get to that point um one question that I do have on it is on in section three uh where you present the two different infrastructure investment models um is is your thought to go more towards um a combination between these two uh between the level and and the irregular to come up with a more realistic here's where we think we need to be spending over the next x number of years um so um not talking specifically about solutions but in terms of perhaps an approach yes I think we might be getting at right yeah yeah that's I'm looking for approach not a solution at this point no yeah so I mean one of the things that that occurred to me when I was creating these is that I was kind of operating you know as Jeff said in kind of this model orientation and models are just that you know they they they do have to be adjusted as you go along for the circumstances that you account what I didn't have was spreadsheet information or database information on the current state of the infrastructure so what I was doing here on both models was assuming everything starting from year zero as being quote new right and that that just doesn't reflect reality what what needs to happen is we need to go back if we want to pursue this one of the things that we that the budget committee or the board or whatever could consider doing is taking the existing actual metadata for our inventory age size etc and roll this in to an updated model that would along with historical data of what we spent yeah that would give us where we are on the line is it above below etc and then that would give you a foundation for how you want to go forward either a modeling or or not um so yeah um okay that would be that would be a way to approach it sure yeah right right truth the model to actuals exactly and begin to uh what refine to come up with an actual model versus here's the theoretical but right this is a framework that you're putting out yeah and yeah and I think there's there and there's implications for you know for all sorts of models um and really really what it is is I think the board perhaps looking at this from the point of view of making decisions using explicit information as opposed to implicit or heuristic information basically what it comes down um to the uh current members of the budget and finance committee um is what Bob's proposing within the realm of what the committee can take on or is this a uh an overwhelmingly large project that would need to be farmed out to to a consultant on a very on a part-time basis or or I don't know or an ad hoc committee or something or or yes so gail as the I guess my response is is that especially if you're asking to um take these models in section three and actualize them in terms of where we are in the uh use life you know of all the different pieces of equipment that we have throughout the district that's a huge amount of work and uh so I that and whether that's something that actually the budget and finance committee should do is is not really you know it's not really our purview I I um because many of those things have more to do with what you know the engineering staff would say about the state of our infrastructure than it would um so uh but let me make a gail can I can I just respond to the the assertion that it's a huge job yeah it you know it's a job but if you have the inventory model with metadata of at least a um age on the pipe or estimated age because I know we don't have exact everywhere and especially for pipe current size that you would need to upgrade it it's actually a pretty straightforward calculation doesn't take a lot of time to do trust me I've done these kind of things before so I it's it's not it's not as overwhelming as you might think if the data is in the spreadsheet format already which I think it is from the inventory I don't I don't know the state of the inventory and I'd have to ask Rick about that but I guess I I'd like to take a step back and ask what what are we trying to you know you you can get all that information but what does that tell you and how are you going to act on it and I've never been somebody who says you should acquire information or data unless you're going to act on it and one thing that I I guess I would dispute is this idea that um you know you've got these two models and and part of this is maybe has to do with um spending more than 40 years in academia where usually when you do things it's based on because you got a grant or because somebody gave you a lot of money and what I see for the district is that um you know as Rick says there's never a good time there seems to be some kind of catastrophe that hits us every few years and that most government agencies now are operating in terms of depending on large grants to do a lot of their infrastructure and so I think the idea that we could just simply you know create that blue line by somehow either raising revenue which would you know to bring it up to the five million dollars Bob is talking about would be a huge increase in uh water rates which I don't think any of us would advocate um and so in my view we are stuck whether we like it or not with with a the real world which is that we will often be controlled in terms of our expenditures by what grant funding is available and so I don't think you can reach that blue line and so I so there's that that we're we're dependent on that and then the second thing is that there simply is not within our budget the room to for example lower our expenses uh you know we're a small district yes we can um eliminate one position here or and restructure things to save a little bit and staff money but we're not going to find millions of dollars in staff reductions simply because we're already painfully lean and so I I have a hard time seeing Bob how we're going to actualize this in the real world and if we're not going to uh you know actualize it why should we be spending staff time you know acquiring that that data it's a fair question I think there's I think there's a couple really uh good reasons for it so you know there's there's funding which the community controls um and by control I mean that the community is willing to give through either um the money it pays for water um or bonds uh that are placed on property values at Valoran um bonds and in order for the community to make informed decisions as owners what great payers in that role but as owners they really need to have a very clear picture of what the financial position is of the district both from a operating point of view and long term what kinds of things need to be handled because and the same thing with the board because without that you tend to lose a sight of what you have to be doing over the long term and for us as board members you know our timelines have to be in the in 15 20 you know 40 year horizon and so without this kind of long term planning I don't know how you make those decisions very well I would say one of the one of the one of the things pass boards dropped into was by doing annual budget just year to year you you lose sight of what's coming and I think that got us into the infrastructure hole that we are in or or worry on maybe a couple three years ago that is being corrected but it is a long term sustainable thing and so um I just don't know how you can make really good decisions about either our multi-year budgets where we're going to put capital into what have you without having this kind of long term view I I disagree that it's a heavy lift it is a lift but it's not if if the data is available and we do have to go to Rick to find out it's actually a very straightforward calculation to do and I think it would be incredibly valuable for our community to understand what we're facing last thing I want to say is I get it about grants right now but grants and infrastructure spending at federal and or state levels is very temporal very transient um it's here today and it's gone tomorrow depending on who's in charge and what they plan to do and at the end of the day this water system is ours and we need to make sure that we are organizing ourselves over the long term to ensure that we can sustain our water district without relying on the kindness of strangers all the time because that kindness may not come our way when we actually need it to happen. Jamie? So I I guess one one of the things that I would be interested in learning and first of all I appreciate um Jeff's recommendation that the finance committee um perhaps grapple with how to approach this um and and what parts of this might be you know a reasonable lift for um the water district staff to take on um because I I think that one concern I have is um that sometimes we are trying to fit a round peg in a square hole right and the way that we look at things and and um I think you know I I appreciate um that the the lens through which director Foltz wants to take a look at some of our financial obligations but I I think that there are are you know unique factors that um make uh the the you know concerns that we're facing different than those that you might you know grapple with in a private sector business right and so I'd really be interested to know are there other similar water districts who take a similar approach um and and and you know what does that look like in terms of application because from my point of view I think you know I I agree that we need to be transparent and and open with the community about what our financial obligations are I think that we're doing that you know I think that that we um have talked about our our you know capital obligations um you know the the rate of growth in terms of operating costs and you know we we are continuing as a district to grapple with those what makes our situation unique compared to that of a private sector business is that we have to continue providing services to this community but we're in a in a no growth environment where there's not an opportunity to bring in outside capital um as you might have in a more typical metropolitan community where you've got you know construction projects um that are doing new building and infusing not only new capital into systems like ours but also you know new plants they're they're literally rebuilding some of the plants as they're doing some of those construction projects so we don't have the benefit of that we have a shrinking system we we know as was pointed out in in the um you know operating budget report earlier um that we thought that we would be um you know reconnecting 100 uh cz u uh properties and we only reconnected 75 so not only have we lost connections because of cz u but we are not restoring them at the rate that we had hoped to so we have a shrinking system that that has to sustain all of the costs of the system um you know and and i appreciate the concerns about you know how we we uh operate in the most efficient manner but we have 35 staff people and and i i would you know take a look at the um scale of work uh in terms of each individual staff person that has has increased as a result of the cz u fire um i don't know where you would look for additional efficiencies if that's where we were looking to cut so um i appreciate the concern that the director folds is raising i think we all share it and i appreciate the need for transparency to the public about this um but i'm just not convinced that the approach that um director folds is presenting is one that you know best reflects our actual circumstances and so i'd really be interested for the finance committee to look into um you know how do we answer some of these questions in a way that you know other similar water districts have had to answer i would um i would say jamie you make a lot of very fair points about the nature of our community and being in a no growth um community is um you know for a lot of municipalities it's not a normal thing most communities have some level of growth um but there are private sector businesses that are in what are called um stable markets um where you know really the the businesses aren't growing that fast if they're growing at all and in some cases they're shrinking and so there are things that even private sector businesses do when you're in that kind of a marketplace um to to address that um and and even over the long haul um i would say that i think when we talk about we're shrinking i mean yes there's a 25 delta which is about 0.3 percent of our overall subscriber base but i expect that those the rest of those hopefully assuming the county doesn't torture the people trying to rebuild as much as they have been and they do find some solutions that that we can get everybody back online um and you know with some of the um uh other opportunities in the scots valley side of our district there might be some opportunities for some some growth there as well um so again not proposing any solutions at this point in time i guess from my point of view i value understanding where you are financially um because without that the decisions you make are not fully informed decisions they are partially informed and when we're talking about something as critical to life as water over the long term uh and the challenges that we're going to be facing that the next generation is going to be facing um over the long term we need absolute clarity around and uh or at least as much as we can get in order to make sure that we are making good decisions for our children and grandchildren the people that come after um i i think it's a generational compact in that way chair mayhood could i clarify my i just wanted to quickly clarify my comment about shrinking usage um before director hill makes his comment and and what i meant by that and i agree i understand what you're saying bob i agree i would like to see all of the cz u fire you know homes restored um but we we have seen historically um shrinking consumption of our um water resources in san lorenzo valley regardless of population totals over the last couple of decades that's impacting our overall budget and in addition to that we have an aging population and we know that as people age in place they have smaller families fewer people living in their homes and so they're using fewer water resources and so those factors combined are going to mean that i suspect we're going to continue to see um less water consumption in our community even as we see these um you know people moving back on to their properties post fire not that that's all that i wanted to say thank you chairman okay so go ahead i'm looking at this i think and when i first started looking at this i thought is director false telling us we should do the budget like this but no no um and i took some notes and one of my notes says top-down model seems appropriate for long-term planning but not for near-term budgeting near-term budgeting is a bottom-self planning it's water what's our current situation and what do we have to do to keep providing water this year and the next year to the people that we serve and so this model is to answer the question of where are we five years from now or where do we need to be five or 10 or 15 or 20 years from now and if we use this sort of model and i i don't know whether we're going to or not but if we use this sort of model we have to be very careful to explain it very well because here we are the board that looks at the budgets and we're kind of looking at it and saying what is he trying to say to us and i you know we want to we need to explain it very carefully if we make numbers like this public because someone's going to look at this and say well you're not spending enough here why don't you spend more or you know they're going to look at the chart and think it's a you know a roadmap for the next couple of years year by year and it's not it's it's what's an average of five or ten years worth of growth for us do we think is going to happen and one of the things we should do to follow up on Jamie if we do build a model like this we should build in a series of variable assumptions for consumption goes up consumption goes down things like that i you know the question is you know this this doesn't have anything to do with the next year's budget it has to do with where do we have to be five 10 15 years down the road and to that extent i think it's a good idea but you know there's a lot of a lot of work still to polish this up and make it a useful tool if i could say jeff i i think your your point about models being good for long term not short term it is true i think one of the other things that this model does bring to light is and when i focus on a lot in my comments about finance is what our what our operating margins are because the operating margins is what drives your ability to borrow money assuming you're not going to go for an ad valorem bond and it also gives you an indication of what kind of capital obligations you can meet with your operating margin so in some ways they would be intertwined but yes absolutely you don't use long term models as the only mechanism for building a short term budget they they kind of go together okay jeff you still have your hand up did you want to add something no i'm sloppy about you know about doing that um let let me go out and see whether uh any members of the public have anything they'd like to comment beth thomas oops beth you had your hand up and then okay all right let's let beth speak holly can we get the ctb folks to Patrick can we get uh there we go thank you thank you director mohoom um i i just like to uh make a couple of observations uh the public does pay attention to what happens on a long term basis and sometimes it's looking backward and that's where i think we've gotten into trouble in the past because they do look at things like how long the the detention center tank was leaking water for you know years uh i i think also the value of a long term plan whatever the model ends up being is that the board the constitution of the board changes the composition i'm sorry of the board changes if you look right now we have three new members a little since the last election uh if you don't have some kind of a structure that helps guide that and you have such turnover of board members then it is very easy for these things to you know be based on you know the budget for the next six months or the year or whatever whatever it is i think it's important to look ahead and to have some kind of a guiding structure um because we can't count on all things being the same for for your period of time thank you thank you bet any other uh comments from the public not we'll go back to the board and see if there's any other comments um or whether anybody would like to make a motion about anything Bob i just like to make one comment before the board takes action or not regardless of which way it goes that's why i wanted to get in before anything happened i want to thank the board a lot for your attention to this and what i think was a really excellent discussion about this topic so if we don't do something now we might you know do it later but i think this kind of discussion periodically is really really healthy and and really good for the board as it particularly as we start moving into the next budget cycle so thank you for for your time on this and thank you for putting all that information together as you did okay any other um comments or motions or anything that want anybody who wants to do mark yes um i've heard uh our newest board member for all of the what two hours now uh appigning to um the the benefits of having this very forward-looking model um with bob saying it's not that much effort to put something like this together if we have the data i don't know i don't know whether we have the data or not from my view this is a pretty heavy lift but i am fairly uninformed of on financial modeling what i would like to suggest is is it appropriate for the budget and finance committee to assess what and with discussions from staff assess what would this take to come up with a a realistic capture of information that we have in house to be able to get there so i i don't know if that's uh a motion a suggestion yeah no i i i think that that's reasonable mark that that and basically asking uh the budget and finance to assess that and then come back to the board yes report um because i think you know it'd be hard tonight to try to figure that out right i mean i'm not i'm not expecting that what we need to talk to rick to to josh to everybody yes so if if you want to make that a motion to recommend go ahead say say it the way you want to say it okay i'd like to motion that um we forward the information that bob has provided to the budget and finance committee and have that committee assess the data that's available within the district how difficult it is to get that what's there what's not there in order to be able to put together a model um like this and i would hope that based on the questions from director hill and what appears to me to be the knowledge of it there's somebody uh knowledgeable on financial modeling there that would be able to better guide this discussion on the on the committee is there a second i'll second it no one else okay is there any discussion of the motion jeff you look quizzical no okay all right all right how about uh members of the public okay um we have a motion on the table go ahead holly and uh ask for a vote president mayhood hi vice president ackerman yes director foals yes director hill yes director smally yes okay the motion passes unanimously all right um we now come to unfinished business and the first item is long service line agreement go ahead gregg yes thank you chair um at the last board meeting you saw this uh request for the first time for a long service line agreement for apn 077-032-25 um inadvertently the agreement was not attached to the memo tonight you have the memo again and the agreement should be in your packets for the long service line evidence for your review may i just say i apologize for the um that there seems to be an extra line in that item on the agenda when i was cutting and pasting i missed something i apologize will you agree the agreement's attached um okay bob yeah i so when i was looking at the agreement it looked so i in the almost four years i've been on here we've done a number of these and when i was looking at the agreement it looked um different so i went back in history and on the board meeting of december 16th 2020 um i recall that we and i validated by looking up that we'd actually made some changes to that older agreement to eliminate some of the ambiguity around the term of the agreement and also to eliminate the restriction which i i find personally objectionable that a person on a long line service agreement can no longer participate in discussions surrounding infrastructure that might directly impact their property um we we had had a fairly lengthy conversation about this and at the time the board had adopted this new template for the um i believe it was for uh steven hunt on western states road and it was my understanding that we were going to use that agreement as the template going forward um because it does clear up a lot clean up a lot of things i think even gina might even look at it uh and and cleaned it up right now for example the term of the agreement the maximum term is eight years the way that it's written which means after eight years it would all expire anyway i don't think that was the intention of the agreement certainly wasn't in the re in the reworking of the term um so you know the board could certainly proceed with the long line agreement previous but it would be then going back to something after we had already changed it for the last one that we did rick or gina do you want to address this i'm trying to pull up that director folks i i know that these agreements have had an issue with board level in the past i'm not sure what changes have been made i'm not and i'm not sure district council um well for for example section 11 was stricken entirely from the agreement in front of us in the current agenda if you compare that against the december 16 20 it's simply not there gina do you want to comment i i do have word versions of the documents that we did in um late 2020 and early 2021 so okay you have them but are you saying that um i guess my question i guess what bob's asking is um our is there some reason that we went back to a previous version was or is that just an accident or or was it a judgment call that we wanted you know that the changes that were made in december 2020 were ones that you didn't like and so we went back to a previous version i guess that's what i'm trying to understand i don't think that's the case i i think was as i recall that section section 11 was the it was an issue with the time and we're talking about removing that from the agreement and great great josh was josh the district engineer now was not the district engineer at that time so that could be the reason for confusion and the use of a different document he could exactly right there's my thoughts is that he pulled an agreement you know from a previous one um and we didn't catch that and i'm and i'd have to go back and look at the the reason the term is only five years um well with an extension for three more but that's it right holly you see there were that that language was changed in the december 2020 document right and holly would use what josh gave him or gave her she wouldn't have okay holly did you want to comment well i i did want to make one comment and that was um at the last meeting um bob asked if uh you know this was urgent and um josh said no it wasn't but in the meantime i've spoken with mr clark and he's nearly out of water this is very anxious this is an emergency he needs to get that get the pipe in the ground he's going to put it in tomorrow if this goes through he's set up for that so just for your information uh if we proceed with this tonight because we certainly don't want anybody to go without water can we then um terminate an agreement and substitute the new one yes and we'll work with council um and we would not let this individual run out of water especially as it appears that we're moving forward um yeah because i want to do it for sure i mean this is a no-brainer that the conceptual okay well let let's go is would anybody like to move that we adopt the resolution because it seems like we need to do that so that this gentleman doesn't have a problem with water and then we can come back and redo it if necessary mark yes i'd like to make that motion we approve the resolution with the um um addendum that we do revise the agreement so that it reflects the most current language that apparently was agreed to back in 2020 when this issue was discussed previously as bob is pointing out i'll second that any further description about from the public seeing none holly would you take a roll call vote please president may hood vice president ackerman yes director false yes director hill yes director smally yes the motion passes unanimously um the final uh item uh well is uh remote meeting authorization um this is well go ahead jena i think i'll let the memo speak for itself unless uh any member of the board public has questions around yes the um the ask is the same as um as always which is to uh that the board adopted motion ratifying and re-adopting the attached resolution number four 21 22 okay so i'm going to move that we ratify and re-adopt the attached resolution so that it continues in effect for another 30 days second second okay any discussion by the public hearing none seeing none go ahead holly and today may hood hi vice president ackerman yes director false yes director hill yes director smally yes resolution passes next we have the consent agenda um anybody want to discuss that if not we will go on to district reports any comments or questions on district reports from members of the board mark yes on the environmental department status report um carly you mentioned the conjunctive use draft from rincon that was being presented to the e&e committee in april i don't believe that happened what's the status on that that's correct i'm sorry that was it must have been a typo there um it looks like well we're in line right now to be able to bring the project description to the committee in june um with the upcoming committee we probably won't have it ready in time um there's quite a bit internal conversations happening about our negotiates negotiations with the city of santa cruz and then also how we want to operate when we move forward with the expanded conjunctive use okay thank you i have a number of um questions do you want to go through one report at a time or just all the report go ahead um first question is on engineering report the felton heights tank project um rick i think the there was a community meeting being organized is do i have that right and has that taken place if that was the goal we have been working with the community of felton heights over the last few weeks um and working with the property owner that is offered the the new tank easement i've met with the president of the homeowner's association and other folks uh out in lost acres we're looking there's concern with the the existing tank site or the the not the existing but the the proposed tank site there's concerns and the property owner asked if we would look at a potential another location so we have been looking at an alternative location to the proposed location which is basically out of sight and out of mind of the neighborhood further up on on this person's property um engineering and operations were out there this week they've looked at it they're going to shoot some elevations to make sure to see if the elevation will work for us and if the elevation will work for us we will go back to the property owner and talk about a alternative easement but we are working in the neighborhood i'm trying to move this project ahead have we done a lot of engineering work on or environmental work on the proposed the current proposed tank site no we have not that would be the next step once we obtain the easement then we would release the environmental um tell me an ism nd would be most likely on that project okay great thanks um uh carly a couple questions on well actually a comment and yours thanks for breaking out the year into a separate column on the grants so that'll make it easier to do the pivot i wanted to do and um on the pgne work which um looks like it's been completed uh is is there a place i can go to see where it is in in the watersh- olympia watershed so i can go take a look because i'd like to see the the result yes definitely um so if you're familiar with our olympia watershed uh very close to well one which is kind of near where the horse gate is to go on the upper loop trail if you go to the right from there if you're facing the well you can see all the planting that they've done um as well as the broom removal and if you walk a lot of those paths that were in the past very inundated by a french broom you can see that there's a very clear difference just looking into uh the forested areas where you can actually see in there um there's no longer the broom kind of taking up all the extra space so that's that's really great fantastic and hopefully we can keep that one up sorry you sent him a map carly for that location so it's easy fine yeah thank you i appreciate that um i get the next one is in kendra's report i see we have a small uptick in our um uh rearages but it's not huge so as long as we stay relatively stable i think we're we're at least treading water until some of that gets resolved hopefully through uh state money on the there there was a question kendra on page 94 the operating analysis february 2022 okay so i i'm not sure what the takeaway in this is i'm i'm and maybe this is just the something i hadn't noticed before and and it was looking at it again today but it looks like the comparisons are all done um against prior year but it doesn't look like there's a comparison of where we are versus the budget uh at least in this one and i and so i was kind of wondering what the takeaway is for this report what should we be focused on uh in this report as the key items because just looking at a percentage of current month is i mean it's great but i you know i'm much more concerned about percentage against budget particularly when it comes to water usage which i know we are behind on so are you saying you would like to add a column comparing against the budget for that particular month because there is a column to the right comparing against the budget against the annual budget um but are you interested in looking at what it should be for that particular month well yeah because when you look at the annual budget you know there's a lot of variability in water use right it's very seasonal and so i i can't if you're looking in february and you're comparing it against the full year budget you know great where it's 64 percent does that mean we can get 36 percent in the last four months or or not and right and i i'm it's a little hard for me to really assess how we are relative to um that particular point in time um now i guess the question is if you don't have the information available or it's a huge lift and that's a different thing but i it was just a little bit and i think i probably focused on this because of my earlier question of can we make up that operating margin in the last four months and so that's why i focused in on this and then i saw but i can't really tell exactly because we're comparing it against annual it's not an apples and apples comparison right so we do have the data the monthly data for what's budget like budgeted units um so i could add that into the report um but i don't know i maybe the budget committee can take a look at report formats too at some point is um might be another idea too but yeah i would help me but i don't know if we can help everybody else and i don't i don't want to make a demand that might not be helpful to everybody else so okay okay on the page 96 on the operating analysis year-to-date trend um you know we are including the surcharge in this report and from an operating revenue point of view you know the surcharge is in that kind of funny area because you know officially according to GAAP it's operating revenue but according to board policy it really can't be used for operating expenses so it's really not operating revenue at a practical level um and i just found that when we included in these reports like this it distorts where we actually are on our operating margin which again for me is is is critical um does that make sense i i'm yeah yeah um so i could put something under operating income excluding fire recovery surcharge to kind of show yeah i mean just adding a line and that would be fantastic okay um the report for for um james uh james i know we're in the middle of our annual flushing which is is good do we capture the approximate amount of water that's used for flushing when we're looking at our water loss for for the year yes we do we calculate that by gallons per minute as we're flushing the hydrant by the time that we are flushing the hydrant okay great um on the meter replacement program it might be great i think this kind of gets to question jamie asked earlier if we had some historical graphs on uh how many meters we're installing per year or per quarter or something like that i think that might give a sense of of of where we are and maybe relate that to the total number of meters that we have um i i think it's moving to the badger meters is just going to be great for the district overall and it just might help provide a little more contact yeah as stated in the last board being with meter report i mean on average we're doing 500 a year okay i mean but yes i could definitely put a graph together of how many we've done each year um on the maintenance issues it would you know again this goes to looking at operational metrics um i don't know if there's any way to normalize this information to make the maintenance issues you know small medium large what have you try to figure out how much of those you're doing but it you know i like the fact that we have the maintenance issues identified i just don't know how to look at that from an operational metrics point of view um how i format that is just to kind of give an idea of the time spent by the maintenance team of with all those projects going on and then all the other stuff going on with meter change out and the normal projects you know for the month that's gives an idea of how much time is spent and where the time is allocated well i you know and i understand that it doesn't have any specific time in here necessarily but i get what you're trying to get to i would be interested in yes understanding what percentage of the staff's time has been on on maintenance issues versus you know construction or infrastructure or what have you i i i can't really get a sense of that from from the report as it's currently stated other than you know you've done 16 leaks and and these items it it's hard to gauge what that means relative to staff utilization understood okay that's it thank you are there any other questions or comments on the district reports how about from members of the public then if there are no objections i think it is time for us to adjourn and thank you all for your efforts tonight hi everyone so cedric i have nine ten for adjournment time thank you very much