convene to the open session. So can we have an open session roll call? President Bachman. Here. Director Bruce. Here. Director Hayes. Here. Director Radcliffe. Here. There is no reportable action for a closed session. So do we have any additions or deletions to the open session agenda? Staff has none. Okay. And no directors do I see anybody saying anything? So I'm sorry, this is not a public. It's an agenda item. No, I'm not for additions and deletions to the open session agenda. It isn't. So we're going to move on to oral communications at this point. Would anybody like to comment on any of the thing that is applicable to the district in oral communications? Deborah Lohan. Yes. Deborah Lohan, I wrote to the chair and the general manager and to the attorney to say that regarding the agenda item on the LADOC appointment, there's a Facebook page that says there are two vacancies and they will be selected in this August meeting. And it was posted on the website in a very hidden place and it was posted in the newspaper conflicting. After the end of the August 8th deadline for receipt of applications, the district website changed their notice to say that there will be one appointment tonight and two in September. And I protest that. There are actually three vacancies on this committee and I think the board has a duty to fill those as soon as possible. You have two applications. You have two qualified candidates. Therefore, my point was since you advertised for two openings and you received two, you have two vacancies, maybe two applications, that that should proceed tonight. And I wanted that as an addition to the agenda. And I see that you have chosen not to do that, but I'm making one point that it should be in that agenda. I expect that will be done. There's a very limited set of circumstances in which some kind of addition can be done to the agenda and none of those qualifications pertain. They're related to matters of emergency or matters that came up between the time the agenda went out and the time of the meeting. So any clarification from counsel to whether there is criteria regarding this? I am not aware of any legal criteria that would allow the item to be modified at this point to reflect two appointments to the agenda. So the circumstances of this item, the latter requirement will be addressed at the time it comes up on tonight's agenda. So anybody else like to speak on the floor of communications? Hi, I'm Tony Norton and I'm a member of the LADOC committee. I did a little bit of research on the VATI Act and that also pertains to assigning people to the committee when there's vacancies. Now is that something that I can, should I discuss that now? Or should I address that when we get to that, the item you're telling us whether or not you're going to fill those vacancies? Would anybody else like to comment on anything not on tonight's agenda during our oral communication? Okay, I see no one was raising their hand so we'll close out oral communications and we will move on to unfinished business. So the first item on that is the project list for the United States Department of Agriculture loan application. So I'll start to bring it up. All right, on the second we have a small presentation regarding this and tonight is a milestone for the application process because we are seeking board resolution to actually submit the application. We have representatives as I see here tonight to provide the presentation. As soon as my computer decides it's a good idea to do so, there you go. And at the end of the discussion, right at the end of the presentation, want to go over some proposed changes to the resolution so that the board has full clarity before the discussion happens, but I'll turn it over to Kirsten first. So the presentation that we're having tonight is a public information item. As part of the USDA application process, we wanted to be clear and transparent about which projects we're going in. We started this process and I'll talk a little bit more. We had a very long and lengthy project list and we've narrowed it down to six projects and there's very good reason for that. So the purpose of this is just to go through the six projects that are actually in the application package that we're going to submit. So the purpose of this again is just to present the final list of projects and then at the end, we will accept public comments that are related to any other projects and make note of them. So for those of you who haven't been at a meeting or through this whole process, I wanted to very high level go through how we kind of got here. So the district started looking at funding about a year ago. WSD was hired as needed basis just to take a look and we looked at state revolving fund loans, we looked at Prop 1 loans, we looked at grants and at the end of the day, what really made sense for the district was USDA loans. The big driver for that is the 40-year loans at a very low interest and most of the district is in the eligible area. So it worked very well and that was in conjunction with staff and board at the time. So we decided to pursue USDA loans and then we have a very long list of projects that we looked at based on the district's CIP. From that, we had kind of a target goal of what we were looking at to spend. We narrowed that down to that and then these two things, I have two bullets on here, but two things happened kind of all at once. One was USDA said we have way more money to get about this year than we thought we were going to have. Can you guys please get your application in this fiscal year. So then we kind of had a look and say okay how many projects can we get done and how many can we get environmentally permitted in this amount of time. So that was the driver on which projects kind of stayed on the list and which ones got dropped off the list because if they were environmentally complex, we just didn't have the time to get all the environmental done for this round of USDA funding. So because of the environmental issues that led to very quickly hiring an environmental consultant to get through the NEPA process, which is what is required from USDA. CIPA still has to happen, but as far as the application goes, we just need to have NEPA by the time we actually submit the application. CIPA needs to be done by the time of good construction. So they have been working fast and furious and they actually made all their deadlines. So right now where we're at with environmental is we just have a couple of regulatory agencies. Pardon my voice here. A couple of regulatory agencies are doing some review, but we expect that to be back in a week and then the environmental portion will be complete. In parallel WSC has compiled the preliminary engineering report which is if you were here at the December meeting, I passed around a very thick report that described all the projects in depth. It's a very important portion. It's most of the application that actually used to go in. So it's a pre-design report for all the projects. And so then during all that time as well, the district has been working on finances, figuring out what's actually reasonable for the district. We've had communication with Ford and so all of these have come together for the application package, which is where we're at. So once we get Ford authorization to submit the application, that does not actually require the district to take the loan. All it does is give permission to submit an application. So then we're going to finalize everything and submit. Right now Adam is going to take over and just discuss these six projects of environmental application process. All right. So as Kirsten said, I'm just going to highlight the projects that we have in the preliminary design report. The first is swim tank. So currently the district has two 20,000 gallon red loaded reservoirs that are basically leaking. And so we're trying to get in there to reduce water loss. And so we're going to upgrade the tank to a larger size, 62,000 gallons, be able to seal tank that will reduce water loss and just increase operational capacity. Then we have five pipeline projects. So the first is this high end road pipeline. So we're going to install a six inch pipe there and then an existing pipeline that runs through environmentally sensitive area, which is difficult to maintain. And with this we're going to be able to improve water pressure to the customers in the area as well as meet fire flow requirements. Third one here is the line zone pipeline. And so this is a pipeline that's currently six inches. So we're going to replace that with ball bench main, allowing for much greater capacity in that area. And with the greater capacity, it's going to give the district more operational flexibility. So we'll be able to transport water between different reservoirs and help them on their operations. Additionally, there's a portion of the pipeline that goes through homeowners yards, making it difficult to access and so removing the pipeline into the right of way in the street area, which shouldn't only make that problem. Next we have the Sequoia pipeline. So in this area, we're just upsizing the size of the pipe from a six inch to an eight inch main, which is going to allow for increased fire flow requirements and a reduction of water loss due to leaks in that pipeline. And then we have the hillside drive pipeline. So again, we're upsizing the pipe from a four inch to a six inch pipe and updating the infrastructure associated with that, so pressure reducing valves and all frequencies. In this particular area, the soil conditions are a little unstable, which has caused some issues with the existing part from movement. So we're going to be addressing that. We're increasing capacity in the area and it's going to allow the district to meet fire flow. And then lastly, we have the California pipeline. And here the district currently has a two inch main, so it's going to be increasing the capacity. We're going to replace it with a six inch pipe, which is going to allow for fire flow. It's reducing water loss for many weeks. And then we're also going to protect sensitive habitats. So the existing main again runs through someone's yard and crosses the creek. And so we're moving this into the street area to eliminate that problem. So that's the end of our presentation as far as the projects on the list. So if anyone has any project related comments for how you guys address them, can I just take notes for me? You can summarize the cost. What's the bottom line cost? So the final cost for projects actually happened. That's a key point to understand there, really. It is. Kirsten, could you ask the directors of comic person? Sure, and I have that. Okay, thank you. Yeah, I mean, this is for the long. It's not, you know, in fact, the money from this long doesn't come until the projects are all completed. So the actual money to come and Brian wants to come. Well, I just kind of want to jump in there because the resolution in the board packet is asking for authorization to submit a loan package for $8.5 million. That was developed last week. And that is on the sweet side of things. I think the actual project cost is on the order of 8.2. Yeah, it's just under 8.3. But here's some contact with me this week, earlier this week, and said, hey, would you like us to include the interest payments on the bridge loan in the loan application package? So make sure everybody understands that. We get the USDA money at the end of the construction projects. We'll get a big check for everything. We are going to take out a loan during construction to pay for these. And that loan is going to be a higher interest rate, and it's going to be a construction loan or a bridge loan. We are going to have to pay interest on that loan. That's interest out the door while we're paying on that loan. We can include that interest in the USDA loan. So because our main issue is cash flow, staff is recommending that interest be included in the loan and spread that out over 40 years. Yes, it's spreading out money that we've already paid, but it immediately gives us that cash back. We are estimating, through WSC and staff, we've worked out the numbers, and we are estimating if it's going to be close to $1 million. It's a fat number, but we want to make sure we're covered in tonight's resolution so that we have the ability to be flexible. The actual agreement's going to come back and that's going to be a firm number. For tonight's resolution, staff is requesting that the board consider a change of $8.5 to $9.4 million. That includes the interest for the bridge loan or the construction loan, whatever you want to call it. I just want to say, I think what we're trying to do is leverage an increased revenue stream into getting a lot of work started. And I think that's a good thing to do. It's been a long time getting these projects started. So what we can do to accelerate this is good. And what you're talking about doing, getting another loan on the interest, I think, is good because it will help us follow the next step. So it's going to be a while before we have enough money that's come in from all of the revenue changes to actually pay for everything. It's going to take loans of intervening time to get this done. And this technique is a lot like transferring a high-balance credit card to a low-balance credit card. You're still paying the credit card, but it's at a better rate. I'm really interested in the fact that so many of these projects, all of these projects, support improved fire flow and better infrastructure for us to be able to serve our customers in the unfortunate event that there might be a fire emergency. So that's a super high priority for me. Anybody? Yeah, I mean, well, I hadn't heard about the interest part of this. And I'm kind of philosophically opposed to paying interest on interest. If we can avoid it, how much would it be, do you think? It'd be about $900,000 as our initial estimate that we were able to put together this. For the interest on the bridge loans up to the point of inception of the loan, that's our rough estimate for that. The key component of this that's missing is Stephanie Hillster. She was unavailable this week. So you have two engineers trying to figure this out. And she's going to have to buy off on this before we actually submit the application package. And so that's one of the reasons why we're asking for a little richness in the numbers tonight, so that we have flexibility. We don't have to come back to you. Stephanie is going to authorize this and bless this before it actually goes in. Okay. I mean, the whole, you're absolutely right. The whole purpose of this is cash flow. And I'm kind of philosophically opposed. And I think Stephanie will be, excuse me, paying interest on interest. And I think we could afford, because we're talking over what, a four or five-year span here? Roughly. Yeah. So paying a couple hundred thousand dollars a year interest to avoid financing interest in five years should be affordable to me. And we don't need to have another million dollars to decide. And I just like to clarify, this is an upper limit. But if Stephanie comes in and disagrees with the numbers, or it wouldn't be a requirement, is that correct? We go with the numbers Stephanie bless. Okay. Bottom line. I'm not saying anything to Stephanie is unavailable. Let's go. You know me. I'm not going to vote against anything. You know, okay, I'm not a big plaintiff expert, but I'm not going to vote against anything that's going to stop or moving forward on this. Before we go to the public, one more thing that I think is really good about this is the upsizing of the lion type because we're going to be involved in groundwater management in the near future and that the lion tank is one of the, I mean, is the biggest tank, okay, our biggest reservoir and something that can help us move water in the direction of our south system or something that we need to do conjunctive use for. I think it's a very good thing to get done. And as I understand that, Mike is pretty bad shape. Director Bruce's comment that will affect every customer of the district for fire flow. Disaster reliability is greatly undersized and it's been a restriction in this district for a long time. So that project there will affect every customer of the district. It's a great project. Rick, these six projects, are they the highest priority CIP projects or are they amongst the highest priority? Amongst the highest priority, some of them have slotted because they were the right price too, but they're all high priority. They're all either leakage or flow restrictions like the lion, telephone drive, staff down there fixing leaks all the time. It's a very high groundwater and you go back in time. That's a class one area in wastewater, high levels of wastewater. So it's a water quality issue as well. The hillside or north pole decrease, ground movement, they're all the time on fixing leaks because PVC mains, they're high maintenance or flow restrictions. They have plenty more than these were. And I understand that we have to have the environmental sort of step in place before USD will look at these. So these were also ones that were achievable. They weren't some of the more sensitive, more complex projects, but they're still high priorities. So this was to get into this year of ready availability of money. The perfect example for that would be the Paul Creek Fish Letter with the permittory project that we have, but seven or eight permits that we were trying to achieve for that. There was no way we would met the deadline for the application process. No other director comments? Well, go to the public now. Anybody want to? Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you started this process about a year ago, it was, was it six projects at that time? And I think the cost was $5 million alone. Now it's $9.4 million. I would like to have a detailed explanation of why it's costing more for the same projects. I would like to have a detailed explanation of what materials being used and is this above ground or below ground? What's it replacing? So first of all, why is it almost double cost? I understand the interest. I don't really approve of that way of doing the interest, but I think we've been kept, but this thing is grown out of proportion. What's it going to do to our ambitious capital improvement plan that's been planned for the next three years? It's supposed to do $15 million. Is that supposed to, is that going to turn into $100 million? Have you projected all those costs? And why such detail, I'm going to say lack of detail until this point. And the increase in cost is out of proportion. Why would you submit a $5 million in projects and have them off and not have them current estimates on what the cost would be?  Why, what was the process? Please explain. Thank you. Why don't I get other public comments and yours will be memorable, but we'll come back to it when we get more public comments. Ms. Norton. I just have a concern about, I'm always very reluctant to accept a proposal that's given to me at the last minute as adding in the almost million dollar for the bridge line. That's something that I would really be cautious about and why doesn't that have to be decided tonight? And maybe Director Lee suggested that it would be easier for you so they wouldn't have to come back to you, but I think it should come back to you. I don't think that it should go to Stephanie saying that you all approved it. I think that it should be, it should be discussed with Stephanie before we entertain that additional one. That's my opinion. Mr. Bolds. Bob Bolds, Boulder Creek. What's the annual payment going to be once all projects are completed and we get the entire 8.5 million? Here's what I'm going to do. We've got a point. Okay, we'll come back. Yeah, I want to be uniform in how I do this, so since I've started the process. Okay, so we're writing the questions down so we can. Yes, okay, and you wanted to know what's the annual payments? Okay. Yeah, because I think what it does is it also directs us to understanding a little bit better about what the debt load is going to be for the district and how much additional capacity is or isn't going to be there relative to the rest of the projects that are on the table. It would seem given the 60% or so increase in costs here very, it seems to be happening just very quickly, that the rest of those projects, if they were calculated using numbers that were estimated a while ago, that those numbers may need to change as well. I know the projects haven't really changed over the last 15 or 20 years, but the numbers probably need to over that period of time. So I think that also needs to be part of the discussion relative to making sure that the district is not getting into any kind of a financial, an unstable financial situation. Thank you. Hey, Bob, I can give you an estimate, like a quarter of a million a year, something like that. Okay, Ms. Lawman. Yeah, Deborah Lawman. So I did kind of the same thing, Bob, and I didn't have done of looking over the history of it and how it's increased. And one of the, everybody agrees these projects need to be done. There isn't any emotional factor about fire protection. This is all practical things. This is what the district's job is to supply water to water protection and for domestic water. But I've asked this in finance committee meetings about, and I agree with Bob, we really need to know what that load would be taking on. And I've asked Stephanie if she was prepared to budget for the board that would project if we got $5 million loan at that time. How is that going to look at, how is that going to affect us for the next three to five years? How has been effected every budget and our ability to do other jobs? There are a lot more important jobs to do too, not just this set of seven and six or seven, whatever. We also don't know how much of a bridge loan you're going to get. Is it a three million? Is it a seven million? We don't know how much that is. What's the term on that? What's the interest rate? Actually, I don't even know what the USDA loan interest rate is. I believe it's a 40 year loan. Sometimes they're 30 years, but I think that I've read 40 years. Yes. Okay. So we're talking about indebtedness that's going to go on a long time here. I think we need a lot more budget analysis. And I agree with Bob, this is going to be a big burden for the district. And until we have that, I don't see how the board can really approve going ahead. And I know you haven't approved that yet. That's going to be coming up. But those projections are just as important as identifying and prioritizing these jobs, because in five years are we going to be totally in the hold? My other concern is in 2016 you hired a consultant in BS to prepare for your rate study, to look at the whole district and do staffing studies and need studies and all that. It prepared a whole set of ranges of rate increases for you to take. I mean color brochures, 11 pages double-sided, a lot of work went into it. And they emphasized when they presented this that this is all based on the district not taking on any new debt. Because the purpose of it was to get financially healthy and to have healthy reserves so that you could go out and apply for loans at a good rate. So that was a year ago. I mean the first rate increase step up is coming in October so it hasn't been that long. And I'm also concerned about that because you pay a lot of money for a consultant and they did a lot of work and massive studies of what the district's needs are and the district's financial condition. And now you're kind of stepping past that. And those are my concerns. Okay, anybody else? Thanks, Bruce, all the way from Boulder Creek. I just want to remind the board that back in 2015, the first year when Brian Lee was here, he recommended to the board that you postpone work on the fall creek fish ladder. So the debris removal that is happening that's getting approved right around now is only the maintenance since 2015. But actually in 2015, there was a major project of, you know, the reconstruct the fish ladder on Fall Creek. And this was a project that the district took on when it bought the system from Cal Am back in 2008. So it's been a 10-year project. And in 2015, the recommendation from staff was, let's put it off. And so now all you have to do is the little bit of debris removal, which is not the whole project. So there is a whole project. We're on the hook for a whole project here. Whenever we bought the system from Cal Am, this was what was in our future. And so this board and this district manager have avoided this. They've avoided it. They've pushed it off into the future. And now we've got a mega-million-dollar loan application because we don't just don't have the money to do anything here. So I just want to remind that you made this decision more than three years ago. This was the budget time in 2015. So it was around June of 2015, more than three years ago. You made the decision. Let's put it off. Let's put off the fish ladder. Let's do something else. In fact, what else was there to do? Everybody knows it's the tarry bureau lawsuits. So that's where you put your money in Pidlock. Any other public comment? I don't see any other public comment. So we're right back to the board and to staff. So do you want to pick anything from that? Or I mean original project list? We've been bringing information to the board on a semi-regular basis regarding the project list and the cost assessment for this project as late as June in the admin engineering update. We provided a fresh and cost assessment for these projects that showed about 7.2 I think it was for the latest numbers like that. Given the construction environment that we're in right now, I don't think it's surprising that numbers are escalating upwards. How it doubled. We were dealing with project numbers, cost assessment numbers, probably dating back to close to 2006 or 2008. I've been very clear with those numbers that they are not fresh all through this process, that we actually have projects on the books and are willing to spend the time to take those projects forward. It was important that we develop an engineer's opinion on probable construction costs, which is exactly what we did, exactly what we said we were going to do. So it's not surprising that the numbers have escalated extremely hard. It's unfortunate, but it's reality. I would say that there isn't a back home in California right now that isn't busy. That's the bottom line. We saw that last year when we tried to do the swim tank. It came out three times more than the engineer's estimate. That is the reality of the world we're dealing with. It's unfortunate that that is the way it is. The financial costs about putting a loan out there are rate increases that we implemented last year were developed to give us about two and a half to three million dollars a year in capital replacement costs. This loan would be based on what Director Hayes has provided about a quarter of a million dollars in interest for our repayment per year. I'm on the order thinking to be a bit closer to $400,000 to $500,000 a year, but half a million dollars leaving us two and a half, two and a half million dollars a year for other capital projects, which is perfectly acceptable. That's something that we built into the equation and we've always dealt with. The idea that we never anticipated taking on debt during the rate study is at and false. That was always discussed about how much effort we could and what our rate and debt ratios are going to be was always a discussion that was going to be there. We had every intention and we've been very public about the fact that we need to borrow money because we are a cash pourb right now to kick start the CIP program. So I think it's very important that everybody understand that we have always intended to borrow money. That was intended to get this process going and this project's going. If it's unpalatable now, okay, I think this is information how we could have used six, nine, ten months ago. The changing of the numbers, I agree. We're trying to get the board tonight to approve authorization to submit an application. This is doing nothing more than authorizing staff to submit the application. The actual application will come back to a board approval, assuming USDA accepts it. We're under a time crunch. This application has to go in within the next two weeks. So that's why we're rapidly trying to get this to resolution fast so we can actually move on this and give you the flexibility to make the decision later on. So the decision tonight is just we're going to make this decision so that we can make a firmer decision later on. Now whatever information you need between now and then, we can produce and provide to give you the confidence that this is the correct app to take at the time you actually approve the loan or approve the USDA contract, which will come to you sometime in the fall, I'm guessing. The concept about Falkirk Fish Ladder is absolutely absurd. We've been trying to get that Fish Ladder bill for years and we've been working hard to do that. We've had the permitting agencies who make multiple changes throughout the years and we kept the board fully informed on that. We were not prepared in 2015 to go forward because we lacked the permits. We had the permits pulled out underneath us from the last minute in 2016 and 2017 and we are trying to get those permits done so we can actually make the repairs. Moving forward without actually having the legal requirements to move forward, I don't recommend. I think that was a very unwise decision and I am a little hesitant to support anybody that wants to move forward in that regard. I think I did most of the questions. Adam, if I haven't, you could kind of refresh me on some of the issues that were raised if I've missed anything major. Just the project list of that inconsistent throughout, I think that was another question. It has been inconsistent. It's been constantly flexing project lists. We've been very flexible in making sure the projects that are accurate, appropriate and we can actually get accomplished. We started with a list. It's changed. We've kept the updates through the whole process. And it's been restricted by what we had available for projects to do that had doable environmental permitting, I think, with a large portion of that. Right. Well, again, I'm not a financial guy, but I do know that money is what greases the skin and to get things done. But I do think on a couple of points that were made, we were talking about really putting all the information on each project onto the website and including financial information. And I think that I really think that we have to do that. And the other thing I'd like to say is I really, because I'm not a financial guy, and this is why we have meetings with because I can tell there's two or three people out there that make some really good comments about financing. And I just know that it's a brainstorming thing. I'm all ears if we can save some money somewhere.  There was that one, that that seminar they went to a gene about the meters, there's grants available for installing. I know we installed them in La Pico, but we could possibly I think we need to look take a look at some, you know, grants and other, you know, low and more low interest loans, etc., financing. Thank you. I'm sorry, oral comments. No, no. Were you going to answer, were you going to answer the questions? My question hasn't been answered yet. Re-state your question. The question was, what example, my basic question, what is the annual interest cost once all the projects are completed? And I think I heard 250, but I did a quick calculation that seems too low. It is too low. And then I think I heard 500, but I don't know which one of them is actually accurate or if we if we have an accurate number right now. Do you want interest cost or you want the total payment? I'm sorry? Interest cost or the total? The principal and interest. So I'm assuming that when we get the 40 year loan that it's going to be an interest and principal over some period of time. Yeah, 40 years. What could be 30, whatever. What is the total payment that we start making as soon as the construction is done, we actually get the money? So it would be on a just a standard amortization, 453,156 dollars. Is that the principal and interest? Is that the number that? Yes. Okay. Yeah, I was, I got online and did an amortization. When Stephanie comes back, we'll be able to get that number confirmed. Is that what you're saying? I believe so. Okay. And 20% interest or what? So nothing is locked in until USDA actually confirms it. So his number is close to what we estimated as well, very close, like within a dollar or two. However, it will depend on how much is actually borrowed to give you the final number. I'm not sure I understand that. Well, so if you decided to, hypothetically, if you decided to borrow 8.5 million versus 9.4, you'll be paying interest on a larger amount because that difference is what you're interested in for each loan. So which was the number of John that you did? 8.5? Okay. I did 8.4. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. So we don't have the answer to your question is we do not have a solid number yet. You will have a solid number when the board actually approves the loan which we're waiting on information for USDA. So yesterday, including Stephanie, it also includes, we need numbers back from your state. Do you have any idea what the interest will be? Okay. Margaret, I believe you have. Okay. I was just going to suggest that we bring the discussion back to the Dias and not have chatter in the house. So everyone can participate. Okay. Please don't have one. Well, I just had a couple of comments based on public, particularly one about taking on debt because that was integral to the whole rate setting process because nobody's going to lend you money if you don't have the income to support the repayments. That was fundamental to having a viable rate structure. So we knew we'd be going to be taking out loans for a capital project because we would suddenly have somebody to show the bankers to say we're good for the repayments. So that's the whole idea between the loans for projects and this is just a different construction loan and then there's the sort of mortgage at the end, which would be the USDA loans. So I see it. And I just wanted to make a sort of comment, Rick's talking about the lion project. That's one, again, we went through the whole capital planning process starting the workshops in 2015. And not everything that was highest priority got on this list because the permitting issues didn't meet the timeline. But I think that is an example of something that's benefit everybody in the district and it fit into the permitting schedule. And so I think the availability of money this year gave this opportunity to sort of jumpstart a few of these projects. It may not match exactly that priority matrix that we worked on in the CIP workshops. But I think this is practical. It's a lot of important things done early. And just to remind the other directors that this is a staff report, it does not obligate funds, it just opens the door to make it possible. So I want to hear back from Stephanie and of course we're going to have exact numbers when we actually talk about the loan. But this is the direction to go to make it possible. And then Stephanie will be available to us to give us more specific information. And then I guess they have like the rate block in from USDA just again with the work. So I think this is a no brainer. I mean, it's a it's a back stop. It's something that would kick in five years from now if we need to use it. If that's the smartest thing to do, you know, at the time we have it available to us. We'd have 40 years of financing a credit facility basically to effectively refinance the projects that we are going to do between that and that. So it's important to point out the actual projects are going to be financed by Britslums, not this package, but Britslums that Stephanie and staff are diligently working on right now that are at different interest rates and have different interest costs and that kind of thing. The only thing I would be opposed to is just is taking, assuming we're taking interest from these Britslums and paying interest on interest because I mean, anyone who has a mortgage knows that once you at the interest cost onto your mortgage and that cost of the house, man, you look at the total and it's unbelievable how much you're paying. And if we were to do $8.4 million into this facility for 40 years, even at a great interest rate, it's almost $20 million. We're actually paying back over this period of time. And if there's a way to do it better and cheaper and save money, we have five years to figure that out. This is our backstop and this is a no brainer and we need to act on this now to get this. We can't slip this in the next month. We can't study it anymore. We got to do it in August, right? We got to do it. Yeah, so I think we should go ahead. And it doesn't, I mean, 500,000, we we're not threatening our ability to build reserves in any way by doing this. It strengthens our ability to do the reserves. We get project moving, construction moving. Right. And it leaves money on the table that we can actually start building reserves by. Right. And it leaves money on the table to do other projects outside of these lists. Right. So, um, any other board comment on this? Um, then we're done. With your approval of resolution number four, 18-19, as written with the change to a top bound of 9.4 million in the one, two, three, four, five, six, whereas there's three places, there is three places in the three places noted where 8.5 should be replaced with 9.4. Do I hear a second from you? Second. Okay. Um, could we have a vote? Okay. Dr., uh, Dr. Smallman. Hi. Dr. Hayes. Hi. Dr. Rackler. Yes. Dr. Bruce. Yes. Yes. Very well. I'm happy to see, uh, this district seriously addressing capital no, it's been a long time coming. Okay. Um, let's move on to the second item of unfinished for 2017-18 grander response and I thought to me, um, any, you got an issue? You're on my foot. You got an issue? You're on my foot. I'm not. You got an issue? Um, get out of here. Call the sheriff. Let's, yes, let's take a recess here for five minutes and hopefully we're grand jury, I believe, and, um, and then the copy of the actual grand jury report. So any, I'll look the council in case I miss something in that process. Um, so I think this is not a, you know, a big discussion point for the board at this point and, and then the second component of this is that we're considering whether to extend the ad hoc committee that was composed of myself and John Hayes that worked in order to develop this response and there's a, I believe it would be a good idea for the two of us to remain as a committee so that we can work with LADOC and the district and work through the implementation of this in the early phases of this and get to, um, you know, the six month, okay, time frame that we've set as the limit on much of this and get it in good shape before, um, I think we can allow that to then terminate and the district will run with a different paradigm for interacting with Olympic community and with LADOC in particular. So, um, bring it to the board first. Any comments on the implementation of the changes to the response? I have one minor request on page item, that's a page 20, um, and this is 313 and this is item F1 in the last sentence and this is just a minor linguistic thing. We have added a plan of attack and I would, for linguistic reasons, request that you, respectfully, request you change that to plan of action in keeping with our desire for a less acrimonious paradigm. Okay, the last, okay, in F1 on page 20, we've added a plan. It says the last sentence says we have added a plan of attack addressing the larger issues and I would request that instead of attack you just change the resolution. Oh, okay, I thought I heard something else. Okay, that's all. Anybody else in the, or want to comment or comment perhaps on that suggestion? I think that's fine. It's sort of a common phrase that everybody understands. Okay. Okay, fine with me. It's a better word. Okay, in any other, okay, comments about the rest of the document. So I, I like the change in the recommendation. We just added this as soon as possible within the next six months just to indicate acceleration when feasible. And that we set a time down. Yeah. Okay. Very well. And as far as extending the FAAP committee, kind of consensus, that's a good idea. I think we need some mechanisms to assess the appropriate one. Very well. Then I'll take it to the public for any comments on this. Of course I have comments, but last month, you've been taking comments from the public for several meetings and you haven't really taken any of the advice I've given. Last month you scoffed at me when I said this sounds good, but I wonder if you're actually going to do it. And it brings to mind the blue ribbon panel to study life as safe. We haven't heard back on that. That was a public promise as well. My observation is that I think the sport is having a hard time getting their head wrapped around this committee is totally different than all the other committees. And it by nature must be independent and it requires board and staff support only, not board and staff direction. All the answers in the response indicate that you wish to retain a very tight control over who makes decisions and what the outcome is going to be. And I think that it would be really healthy for the sport to just take a good step back. The grand jury says that LADF needs the authority to carry out their duties and I'm not really reading that authority given. It also excludes the engineering projects which I believe and I've stated before integral to this whole process. They cannot be separated. I accept that at this point you're not ready to do that, but that will be have to be fixed in the future and it will be included because it's a very important part of the oversight duty. At the last administration meeting there was talked about the form 700. This has to do with your wanting to do ethics training and how people find science 700. It's a declaration of financial interest and Brian Lee reported that it is not required of any public member of any other committee only LADOC and the reason he is not requiring it of any other committee is because he is afraid that it would scare people away from wanting to volunteer to be a citizen member of the committee. So evidently that doesn't apply to LADOC. I don't like that. I think if you want to require the form 700 it's not a big deal required of every public member or required of none. The board members are required to do it. Anyone who can make a vote to spend district money is required according to what I understand with the attorney's advice was and that it is not required of people who are doing recommendations and LADOC certainly has is making no recommendations on spending money. They're only evaluating which money has been spent already so it doesn't apply. I would like that removed. On formal training for an assessment district is not really news to anybody. I've been asking for this for two years. In fact I would like to finish my statement. Can we just wrap up your. In November 2016 the Little Hoover commission did a study for the whole state on how they could get consolidations of special districts going better what needed to be done. Lois-Henry and I testified at that and one of their main points was that districts needed training and expertise on how to do assessments and measures. So that isn't news. The formal training I'm working with the public is very much needed. I worked in civil service in two different places and quite frankly if my staff or if I acted on some of the stuff here we would have not lasted and I think that's really important here in a public business sector and getting the training is really valuable. How much how much more do you have? The ad hoc 20 seconds on the ad hoc committee. I believe director Baldwin needs to take a really big step back. You've been very involved in LADOC so far and what I think this committee needs is a fresh voice and a fresh start and I would agree that John Hayes could step in that capacity and in your recommendations you say to assign a board member as the liaison and I think you should go ahead and do that and you should close out the ad hoc media as soon as possible. This dust district is short on trust from customers especially on Pico and I would like to see these changes that say we trust you because then we can trust you back. Thank you. Would anybody else like to comment? No this is amazing. Right and I see Tony in the front row. Front row wins in this one. I'll catch up with the next one. Okay. I just one thing that I wanted to make the point out is that in the grand jury report they clearly said that they expected the SLB water district to work with the LADOC in coming up with a response to the grand jury report. So when you created your ad hoc committee I don't understand why you didn't invite members of the LADOC committee for us to be able to respond to those of the LADOC related questions and and I do believe that something needs to change. We need to have and there there is just no trust that if I feel the board treats us I they they just treat us like where we're their enemies and we don't want to be your enemies we want to work together we again I'd like to say that Lantico really appreciates the merger and this is not what we expected we want to work with you and we want to be able to spend our money fixing our our problems in our district that have been pointed out in this assessment district so that's maybe we can you can make that part of the response that moving forward we will work together so that's my final thank you okay um Lois Lois Henry I worked on this merger from 2010 until 2016 the reason that the former board members of this district put in a committee a five-person committee of people from Lantico is so that people of Lantico could feel comfortable that everything was being done the way it should be done that board or that committee I mean needs to represent the people of Lantico they don't represent you they don't need to fight you but they are there to protect the rights of the people in Lantico and what the merger was all about and unfortunately I've seen where some committee members are just wanting to be oh they think they think they need to kiss up to you and that shouldn't have to happen period this committee should be separate and they should be able to freely say what they think they need to understand the brown act they need to understand their role they need to be informed people and some people on the committee haven't really even known what the rules were for the assessment so it's would be nice if we had informed people on that committee thank you that's okay um Mr. Bolts yeah but I'm full agree so I I think when you read through the document any fair-minded person would say this the commitments such as they are being stated are very general in nature very wishy washy it isn't the kind of thing that you go in and say okay we're going to do this by this time period this by this time period this by this time period so that folks can actually understand to what level of accountability they're holding the board for actually doing an implementation this looks very much like it was written by pr handlers and politicians and people that are saying well we'll put it out six months and everything will be fine trust us it'll be all good that's that would have probably been okay two years ago but as of right now given what's happened over the last couple of years that's probably not enough but if it is all that you can do I think we understand that any other public comment yeah I just want to say that you know I tried to get in the room here it's kind of crowded tonight and Steve Yergovich is a spouse of a board member and he stood in the doorway and tried to keep me from I'm sorry but this is not actually addressing the grand jury well I think it is because then show me that access pretty quickly how to address the grand jury well I think the grand jury report is about transparency and about how this district does business and if you think one of your spouses can stand in the doorway and threaten to call the sheriff when someone comes here that's your trip that's what it's all about go for it anybody else um let me come back to you in just a moment sure okay um was there someone I think I saw Lou okay yes Lou Ferris-Sultin given the fact that there are findings on this grandeur report that were also on the grandeur report four years ago I would like to ask the question what like transparency Margaret was was wrinkling her brow so I'll just give you an example transparency what are you going to do to make sure that we really fix it this time for example I agree with Bob that it seems to be fairly general or motherhood in apple pie you do have dates but you know the specifics on actions and what the results are going to be is just not there I would like to see something that has an actual picture or draws or describes a picture of what success looks like when it comes to transparency and put that in the report and hold yourself to it thank you yeah let's go with transparency I didn't block anybody's way I didn't threaten to call the sheriff that's all I got to say anybody else okay I don't see any other hands up at the moment so I'm going to close out oral communications and bring it back to the board I I wanted to sort of address Lou's comment about details because I think that is important but I do think that's something that the full board needs to work on rather than have hot committee and so whereas I appreciate the desire to have an action plan and details is critical I want to be involved in that and not just leave it to the ad hoc committee so that's definitely something that I think the whole board should be involved in not that I don't trust the general direction of the ad hoc committee that's our responsibility as well and I look forward to participating in that process so I think one of the struggles that we have had as a board and as a district and the community has as well is grappling with what does transparency mean it's not just putting all the documents on the website that's not clearly not adequate to put transparency out as just here you can see everything we're talking about and everything we do so to lose point I think there's there's a deeper structural thing like the charter for the latter needs to be more than one sentence the parameters for their success needs to be more clearly defined everyone wants to do something that they can feel contributing and successful too so I would like to have as part of the ad hoc committees work going forward and with the latter and other committees that clear what are the parameters of success and how do we describe this so that everyone's clear on their role that's a part of transparency as well it's a transparency the mutual transparency of what we expect of our committee members board and public as well as what the public should expect as the outcomes of those committees I would find it quite reasonable for this to be what the ad hoc committee is doing and how the progress is doing on this to be a regular agenda item for at least six months I think we have agreed with the grand jury report and set a framework for doing this and the work has just begun and I I look forward to this I think we haven't had the structure to do this and we haven't had you know an outside voice giving us okay feedback on what we've done and I think this has really changed things um John do you I concur and I really I appreciate the feedback I mean I would love to have more detail in here and I think as we developed this we we looked at previous grand jury responses and struck a balance point between having lots of detail in here that way you know really lay it out like you would if you were you know in a big company and doing a plan you know kind of kind of thing and you know backing off on the detail dialing it back a little bit and giving us more flexibility to figure out exactly how we need to implement some of these things lots of people had different ideas so I totally Bob I appreciate what you're saying and others I appreciate what you're saying about you know there could be more detail in here and we actually had in various drafts more detail in here and bullets and implementation dates and those kinds of things but really wanted more flexibility and moving forward and let's see Deborah you had made a comment about form 700 and I don't know where you got that information okay so but us public members I was a former public member of finance committee and definitely had to do a form 700 that was a requirement Bob I assume is Bob still there Bob do you do the form 700 I presume um I do I don't I do but I don't it wasn't necessarily mandated as a requirement it was more like a suggestion so I went ahead and did it okay yeah me too I thought it was a requirement no but in any case we we did them and didn't you know have no issue there so it's the board manual that is inconsistent okay the procedures okay all right so I think that uh I'm chomping at the bit to first of all restore laddock to the proper number of members and secondly uh you know get a charter together and Tony and you and I talked about this many times with that more than a one sentence charter you know let's get a real charter and I've got a half a dozen examples of charters from similar committees to run by the committee once it gets together so that we can get a charter we can get a report format we can get the exact process for for producing the annual report and let's get going you know we're it's time to do a report let's do it so I'm really looking forward to that and hope I can stay involved in that I'll go to you in just a second but I don't want to say I'm sorry that light I did not have enough committee members to meet with a ladder we're going to fix that tonight I hope yeah okay and um and Tony I did reach out to you multiple times during the process right you allowed me to that was that was we couldn't have a meeting because you didn't have a form so that was the best mechanism we had for getting some input from you and we use your you know some of your book not not all of it it's the spirit of it is in here and likewise I've reached out to Marianne as well hi and I would just chime in that the board policy manual was currently um undergoing review and revision in the community but the issue of form 700 filing is certainly part of that conversation and I feel strongly that all committee members should file well you know I mean I work with Lois I wasn't quite involved as with she was with the merger committee for eight years on the Pico board and um you know I you know nobody could question how much I've you know chimed up it started when I first sat on this board about the search card and showing that that was unfair with the good help of director Hayes just basically to show that that was not working right but everything that Lois said is absolutely correct is just that that the latter is to do exactly what you stated um and um and then basically my feeling you know you could almost see me exploding right now and you know I probably should be really our rate because it started with the first year of me not being able to attend the engineering committee meetings by scheduling one meeting a month um when I was working over the hill during the day so I couldn't attend and I kept going on and on and on about hey I'm just here as elected official to provide you know what I think is a project management experience are we on topic here yes we are Gina are we on topic here bring it back to the grand jury bring it back okay that okay well I'm bringing it back right now is it my expertise as a project manager that love the long pico assessment district is going to go over budget about a million dollars and it's also a liability and I'm talking about we could have replaced those nine pressure reducing valves and the service laterals go out right after the assessment just no we need to decide whether we're going to what if any word that we're going to approve the grand jury report as it's here now or with um one small change I think it has been um suggested okay though let me explain the grand jury report is all about long pico I mean it's 80% long pico and it's all about how laddox performing and I'm just trying to explain to you that the failure of the way that the long pico assessment district has struggled along and they're they're responsible for overseeing it and exactly what Lois described about of monitoring that um to to to do that and that's how it relates that they you know you needed to have all that information um to move forward to to watch the projects and walk and see them move along finally thankfully we are we're going to replace four of the prvs we're going to do a lot of the I understand we're going to do a lot of things and we're about to release a contract for the um engineering design for the um all the tanks all the tanks which is a bit huge you will hopefully get on the board you will be you start to get the information and hopefully we can iron these things out as far as this stuff turn it just turn in your response I don't only have any comment like I said you know I've been I've been moaning about long pico since I've been on the sport and there's been a lot of really dumb political games with me to say we didn't we had a committee meeting and we didn't even vote on the recommendations we had a long productive meeting and we didn't even vote on recommendations we devoted to on one they got denied and it was about long pico and so you know I'm done I don't I don't really care send the send whenever you got in I don't even have any comments on this what about them well I'm just a follow-up comment um I think it is significant that again primarily about long pico and for I appreciate the general framework that they all can be set up and I think it's going to be useful having a quorum on that because that will allow productive working on that one but just going to want to reinforce that individual directors can act to make decisions for the whole board so they can develop recommendations with laddock and bring them to the full board and that's when we can discuss and you know maybe get some new ideas yet I don't have anything specific in mind I think that'll be informed with what the others bring back hopefully we'll get not just um glad committee members but maybe community members from long pico who are involved with laddock that have the time to come to a single meeting or two I'm hoping that we'll get because that the community is a lot bigger than you know than we've seen at public meetings so maybe this would be a chance for them to get their feet a little bit wet but I think there's plenty of um sort of foundation here which I think is in the right format and we just need to flesh out the details first from the ad hoc and the laddock people and then bring it back to the full board for a brief you know detailed discussion and provide some of those action plans again that that Lou was suggesting are appropriate so I think we've got the timeline set up we've got the people in place that can do the work and when it does get back to the board level I'm looking forward to having some of that discussion yeah if I could just respond to a couple things so in r2 if you look at r2 um yeah I'm sorry I'll speak up so in the response to that that really addresses the assessment district and there's some kind of new ideas in there that I hope you picked up on um we're going to make things a lot more visible as to the projects that are happening what's the dollar amounts associated with them what's the project status you know exactly what the schedule is for the project so that will all be published on the district's website that's part of our commitment here the the other part of the commitment is um we are creating the high level project summaries that's we are looking at I think is important so we're going to create the layout liaison to deal with any questions or issues related to this project status or priorities um and we've also said that you know that those projects are really the purview of the engineering committee which is you and ultimately the board but the engineering committee is kind of responsible for keeping this all updated so we're going to our goal here is to make the information about the assessment district just a lot more accessible visible so there's no confusion about what the status is about anything how we're going to spend the money how much money we need you know you talked about maybe it's going to overrun we don't know but there are projects also in the original engineers report that we're not going to do we already know that so the other thing we're going to do is create a process for when you have an assessment district like this it's important to you know if there are changes in the project list that happen you need to it's just common sense well the assessment district can change and there's going to be a process for that the gene is actually going to help create right that uh will allow us to say hey we're going to remove a couple projects here how big should the assessment district be maybe it's smaller than it is maybe we don't need as much money maybe we need more but uh it allows us to change the size of the scope of it if to keep up with that of course not if it increases it needs to prop to a team process right yeah but so there's a standard process but but it can go the other way or changing other projects within them yeah but there'll be a process which doesn't exist right now there's like if a project changes what do you do well we'll have a an answer to that so we realize we need a lot more depth around this but I hope that those things make you feel better I know what my sitting in on the latter meetings recently I felt very comfortable with the staff support to that okay committee and um adding a board member or two okay okay in addition to staff I think we'll get a channel that comes gets back quicker to the board and I think this is a really a sea change in how okay we're going to interact with this group of people so I really look forward to it it'll be a lot more transparent right and I think it'll be a lot friendlier a lot okay so I think there's a lot of good stuff in it it's what we do with this okay and I think there's been skepticism about what will happen and there's no way to resolve skepticism so do we want to do this meeting a couple of pieces for I think we still want to address the out from the people and make a so I would make a motion to approve the response to the grand jury with the minor editorial change as part one of the two part discussion okay the second part being okay I don't know that we need a formal vote on it but what do you uh on the on the report we need to do yes okay um we should be about what the change is from the word attack to the word action okay and or throughout anywhere I'm not sure it's just no no it's just not page 20 only one part of page 20 yeah so the phrase goes from kind of attack to kind of action and I think that's pretty easy to keep track of in the process so okay um I'm happy with that um just do it on the voice uh voice vote all those in favor say aye aye aye any opposed none good okay okay um good one that's done um and on the ad hoc uh in the ad hoc committee for the evaluation of the ad hoc committee for a very inadequate seed six months okay which would coincide with the conclusion of the stated planned activities to respond to the grand jury report and finding the report and I would make a motion that the existing ad hoc committee members director haze and president groffman constitute that ad hoc committee and they continue to fulfill its purpose guiding the response the district's response to the grand jury report for the next six months okay and you did that at 752 so we'll get that okay exactly recorded okay um okay um but I hear a second okay um any further discussion well I just I've just got a question in one of those and it made the r2 made the r3 you talked about the workshop style meetings I'm assuming that would be again the ad hoc committee that would be that envisioned is that or is that envisioned as the whole board just for clarification it doesn't like I was thinking um I mean I don't know that that's affirmative and maybe if it's not determinants then I'm fine with that I wanted to I like to keep things open until we have a chance for the warm detailed discussion I don't think that the ad hoc committee will exist any time that these public all right thank you okay it wasn't specified but that was kind of the way I was reading it yeah I think the workshops are regarding the annual reports yeah okay thank you okay bill oh I I think that I should be working on this committee with john it's I like the idea of a sticking I think we got a good process started john and I look forward to having you know the implementation phase not just the the planning the outline and hitting this question out so um are we getting public so I don't think we need to bring this back I mean to the public for comment on this so if there's no more discussion um let's take a role for all of us um Dr. Smallman no Dr. Hayes uh yes Dr. Atkins yes Dr. Bruce yes Chair Wolfman yes point of order I don't know what you just voted on it or have you just approved the final response to their address or no yes or no we approved the final response with one change and we also approved the continuation of this APOC committee beyond the conclusion of generating the grandeur response for a period of six months so that we can work together on the implementation of the response so again you did approve the response to separate understand you did approve the final report to the grandeur with a one word change with a one word change yes okay um so let's move on to new business and new business is either TNA the juvenile salmon and still they have it at monitoring program website so I well this is something okay oh you have something the district participates in watershed maintenance and restoration efforts throughout the entire sanctuary county there's multiple agencies that participate in that uh the county takes the lead on the number of these projects and this particular project is the steelhead monitoring program and the county prepared a website that is gis passive and it's a very beautiful website I cannot encourage people enough to go visit this website it is very impressive they won third place on a national or international international program through our gis the company the gis software um pretty college all right they won um this so this steelhead monitoring steelhead and salmon monitoring program has been going on for 20 years in san occurs county throughout the and um the data has been collected by don alley and we took all of that data from those reports and put it into a database and then it's linked to this very interactive website that um was entered into the 2018 esri storytelling with maps contest and won third place in the international competition under the category conservation environmental environment and sustainability category as one of the best story maps to illustrate efforts in protecting the planet's natural environment and ensuring the sustainable future of human life so it's a pretty prestigious award and I just we wanted to make sure that everybody could enjoy the website and I'm aware of the website it's very interactive and easy to use and I can learn a lot about the current status of fish and our butter shed and what we can do as a community to improve habitat for steelhead to bring them back to brother it's cool let's not forget what I mean last year um you know when you came out and in person requested to put a monkey wrench and fish monitoring because you needed you needed more resources to create this thing and now here we're sitting here against the night and it didn't seem like too much of a problem to come up with a award-winning website why you know my question is why didn't you just come out and um in the beginning and say hey look we need you know we need this and that to create this website without we spent I don't know board meetings I mean I'm requesting I mean seriously I want a letter of apology to me to Don from chair Bob and this is not acceptable I'm sorry I'm not gonna have a board member sit here for rates subordinate staff um well that's fine I mean we we did waste a lot of time putting back and forth on this bill I don't need to speak much longer but uh it's a matter of topic not time well I'm not even looking at this because you know we went through a lot of trouble and we we almost didn't uh take the fish monitoring project so do you understand how much work the county other agencies and our staff have put into supporting fish monitoring supporting the work of Don and ensuring that there is a credible communications tool to convey the importance of their scientific work okay one both of you okay the recommendation is it is recommended that the board review this memo and celebrate the awards support the senators counting resources program monitoring efforts in the San Lorenzo River watershed in partnership with other agencies we're going to disagree on things that are related to this but I don't think we should be taking away the um the congratulations to the people who have done this especially to the GIS people who have done something phenomenal in doing this um well I'm not celebrating for the reasons that I stated but you don't need to solve it but we need to okay but some of us may want to um and I um I feel very I feel that the combination of um Kristen working with this and working with somebody that I've never met yet Austin but with this fantastic group okay of GIS people with a county that is the most open sourced data for the GIS data of any place that I've ever found on the I'm not going to click on this until I get a letter of a follow-up say I want to reiterate something that Jen said 20 years of data collection that's invaluable and you know 20 years that shows real commitment um and what I believe this database is is it makes that that investment in that research and all that time available to people it's one thing to have that notorious three ring binder on somebody's shelf this makes the data available to people who want to use it it's putting all the agencies time and investment and including the investment of the ratepayers into the health of our watershed you know healthy fish or like canaries and coal mines it there's a direct link between our water supply and fish populations can I just say I hope that people visit the site because it's really important and 20 years of work by any number of people um I am happy as a board member my time four meetings and I don't recall that it was four meetings is irrelevant what I want to celebrate and it is we're celebrating award or not I mean it's great they want an award but that that data is available people and it's in a format that anybody can access I think that's phenomenal and I think it's a great return on investment frankly you know it's not just a dusty three ring binder it's out there usable and um I think congratulations are in order whether it had won an award or not lots of people have great efforts that are never rewarded it's nice when they are appreciated so I would definitely endorse that may I just say one like one fill fill in one more gap that may be built and quite understand from what's happened because we'll process and maybe there's other people who don't understand also but what ended up happening was this board and other water districts have chosen to fund both the monitoring and the development of this website and then we reorganized it so the county is not overseeing the monitoring program anymore it's now being overseen by the staff at the city water district water department and so that freed up time and space for the county to be able to work on this website so we reorganized we added some funding it was like ten thousand dollars from this water district and other water districts had another amount that they contributed to the website and so anyway that's that's how we ended up doing it and we're doing both the monitoring and we were able to do this website and so it was really win-win for everybody so in the end we all found a compromise and we all went one I mean don't make no mistake about it I'm all in favor of that but ask for the ten thousand dollars before ask for the ten thousand I need ten thousand dollars to make this website and everything everything would have been gone so much normally when you see something that works very easily and okay is very interactive there's a lot behind okay that that is the real need of it there's a database back there that's doing this this is a very inter friendly interactive website but it takes a lot of data collection to get to that and it takes the organization of the data into a database that is going to be useful for more than just this one particular instance it'll be okay this is a a firmly friendly public interaction and there will be uses usages for this data there are much more fisheries oriented um so it's this has been a big effort it's not just getting one nice website so um if there's no other immediate um okay more board comments I'd like to go to the public on this so um Lois well I've lived here 47 years getting close to 48 years and I remember the first time I went to Henry Cowell and there were so many steelhead so many you felt like you could wade in and pick them up by the arm loads it was incredible I go to Henry Cowell now you don't see that you just don't see it anymore it's it's sad thank you thank you let's go on yeah I'd like to say that it really truly is an amazing website and you might not get that just from from going through it it's done in a story map format and it is so accessible and it is so well organized that just to have any layman be able to come on and go through it and read it and then there's a number of you know maps and all of the data is linked to the reaches and the studies and to have anybody be able to come on and understand what they're looking at and accept and access so many years worth of data I mean it is truly a found thing to communicate to the public in that way and it's not an easy thing to do you know Austin and I mean they worked very hard to pull all of that stuff together and to get it into the right format and to to really make it available in a way that anybody can look at it and understand it and and really you know get a grasp of what's going on and and get invested in that and and I think you know the story map format and this website is just an invaluable tool to communicate to the public just volumes and volumes of information that have just not been accessible before and it's really kind of a miracle thank you um I want to come back at this anybody else want to comment on this yes okay I just want to remind the board that you have continually violated your water permit in Felton ever since this district acquired the Felton water system and every year that Brian Lee has been here you continue to violate your permit and if it doesn't rain by ox over first it'll be in violation once again so um I think you've exhibited that you are completely careless of this issue the the issue is that fish need water in the river in the streams and there was a public process 40 years ago that established the terms of this permit and this district has consistently violated its permit you have no respect for the state law so I think you should we should all celebrate the demise of Brian C. Lee by passing a resolution and and and saying that the district will comply with the Felton water permit for the benefit of steelhead and cocoa anybody else like to comment I don't see anybody's hands up so I'll fill it out public orals on this and I want to say Ms Gomez's comments come from a technical ability she's a GIS specialist with the county and knows what she's talking about so I value that analysis of what the quality of this work has been um any other um any more comments on as I say mine came from a non GIS standpoint and I don't really care what went on behind the scenes as long as somebody did the work and use that data and all that human work that has gone into collecting it into a usable format so very happy okay um I'm happy with this group of people okay there's no more for comment I think we'll agree that we're celebrating the award so let's move on to the next item on new business which is the multiple variants for 2018-19 this is definitely not here but Brian I think you're so explanatory this is a yearly function of the district we have a multiple user variance in our ordinances that allows for parcels to deal with multiple units that are providing service to two separate units or one unit or whatever we go through this on a yearly basis make sure the parcels that are in the database are accurate we actually send people out to survey these areas and every year we were required to bring this back to the board for approval of those parcels that meet the multi-use variance in our ordinances so tonight we're asking for the board to approve through resolution number three 18-19 to approve the list of parcels for multi-use variance for this year I had a maybe this is just a grammatical thing uh second paragraph under background the unit was found to be a permanent single family dwelling both units are occupied or because the owner failed to send back the necessary compliance form should there be another word in there because that is a that is a grammatical just for the sake of clarity it might be helpful to explain that this is the unit the unit or units were found the unit was found to be a permanent single family dwelling with both dwelling units or where both dwelling units are occupied my that would be my interpretation is that both units were occupied for standard residences so therefore they are removed from the ordinance multi-use variance so we have um no somebody got that okay plan we you'll get feedback to um Stephanie on I got concurrence from someone who probably participated in it oh okay okay okay okay um it's very well any other board public comment make sure didn't seem like anybody wants to comment on this um so going back here anybody care to make a motion approval resolution number three 15-19 multiple use variance intervals for 2018-2019 and I'll second that um there's no more discussion and um let's do a voice vote on this okay okay uh Dr. Smallburn hi Dr. Hayes yes director Bruce yes yes okay um let's move on the iron 10c which is the California special districts association 2018 annual conference um and the discussion and possible action is regarding the attendance of board members in the seat at that csba 2018 annual conference so this is just I hope people have reviewed this thought about whether they want to go to this um and maybe those who do might express an interest in that and I'll go to the public I'm absolutely interested in going there's some excellent excellent items in this year's conference agenda workshop agenda and I think to the extent that all board members can take the time to do this this is a great learning opportunity okay um anybody else I'll think about but I don't think I can okay I mean I think if I understand this correct we need to authorize if people are going to go to this and get reimbursed we need to authorize that but oh I don't know I would look to legal but I'm pretty sure the board can make a blanket authorization of anybody any of the board members that wants to go can go so long as they report back yes I believe that's right you know you could set limits of desire um on how many attendees there would be attendees or expenses otherwise the standard conference cost best travel for dean at the federal later this year this is another couple you're right Indian wells yeah Indian wells on desert there were several things I was able to attend a couple of local ones and I will be not in travel during that period so I know that I won't be able to attend that hopefully you'll get some good material and um yeah I don't think I've been to a couple of things so I think this is not something I did good stuff on there I look forward to I'm sorry but it's a good travel distance and more expense I'm for all the education you can get because we don't get a lot of training in this position so this the stuff but the reality is it's an election year and I think it would be you know maybe a waste to to fund all of this to go I mean three of us got three elections so it doesn't sound like so I would I would stay until after the election it's a great opportunity okay it is so maybe we often rise for it for for for two just in case somebody changes it in mind and I'm the only one who goes I will do my best to cover as many places as I can before we discuss it further I think it would be a tremendous opportunity for director Bruce's career and I think that you might want to consider allowing her to take mr. Yergovich along with her because he seems to be doing the board's bidding at the door here so very well okay would anybody else want to comment miss Henry okay I've I've been to this it's a great thing to go to if you can go go that's all okay anybody else I think I saw another end up that's my mr. Bears John being the newest board member I would think you should rethink going to that that's my recommendation why why because I think you can as you said get a lot out of it if your only concern is it's an election year I wouldn't I wouldn't worry about that as much as I would worry about being a new director and getting as much in education as you can in a short period of time okay I appreciate that it's a bull's bull's creek so John I promise that that I won't make this a campaign issue if you go and and spend it and spend the total of whatever it is $2,500 something like that for that you can rest assured get educated and rest and rest and peace when you do when you go anybody else thank you know other hands up at the moment so John have you been talked into going I will certainly consider we could we could authorize I believe that we should have representation there I think this is great looks like some great authorized three and two of us will probably go and if there's a third to change their mind then okay good job um staff is going to ask for a little clarification on page 86 of the board packet is the application and there's conference registration fees and then there's separate registration fees and I want to make sure that the board when they authorize this they authorize conference registration fees and if they want to have any separate registration fees I want to make it clear that they're doing that because last year there was a question where the golf games were going for that. You know what I found really useful was the SDRMA I attended the SDRMA session the monitoring one which is governance in this time it's governance that was well worth it is that an extra it's it's a pre-conference workshop okay they have a policy and procedure one they have a governance one those were a lot of information a short period of time I found those very they were general they were particularly useful for maybe something your position they weren't as as narrow and focused as some little breakouts but they were a great umbrella and they really covered things from people who are very up to date on the subject so I would recommend particularly for new board members that that would be a a useful addition to the main workshop sessions okay okay um anybody else want to go so I would like to a motion that we authorize travel and conference costs excluding recreational activity registrations but including one pre-conference session and the full cost of the of the event for up to three board members we like 12 25 11 20 and the housing costs okay um any further discussion um voice vote okay Dr. Smallman all right Dr. Hayes hi Dr. Atford hi Dr. Bruce hi chair balkman hi okay let's move on to item two which is discussion of possible action regarding the scope and budget for a contract amendment for the resource conservation district so between the two of you know what okay so in the equity that was in january of this year the district uh or the board approved the contract with the rcd the resource conservation district to acquire the permits to help to support the district in acquiring the permits for the fall creeper slider construction um at during between then and now it became evident that the timing in order to do the construction would take the full amount of time that we're allowed to be in the stream being a construction in the stream construction which is big july 1st approximately depending on conditions through october 15th which is a hard deadline so that's how long it will take us to reconstruct the fish ladder basically the whole time and so in 2017 the storms filled the the fish ladder the debris and we estimated that it would take approximately six weeks or three weeks or four weeks to remove the debris from the fish ladder and so in order to do the fish ladder construction we have to remove the debris from the fish ladder the year before because there's not enough time to do both the debris removal and the construction in the same year so we had to get all the permits in order to get in the stream in order to remove the debris and and so that's basically what this is for because the initial contact was to pay for the construction permits and this is an additional $12,888 that was required for us to develop the documentation to get the permits for the debris removal so this is just an additional to pay for what they've already done which they did on the old contract so that we can get it done we're going to start we're going to start removing the debris on September 10th this year and so and then they will continue to work with us through this fall and that spring to get the permits to do the to begin the construction on the fish ladder next July and the cost associated with the permit won't be reimbursable from FEMA right and all the costs of doing the debris removal will be reimbursable every five percent will be reimbursed by FEMA so FEMA has also received all the permits and so we are going to be starting construction in September so for the debris removal it turned out to be a two phase project and so phase one the debris removal 2018 and then phase two will be 2019 and we'll have to get another set of permits because the project descriptions are different and just for clarification this is again it's rcd but it's not the streamline permit because they say we can't use the streamline permit okay so there's again the full panel plans it's the full yes so it fairly safe to say that because it's spread out over two years the permitting is higher there's just inefficiencies in that process but it's necessary because we just are time limited okay in that stream okay at that time and it's just the way it is so that time the time that it will take to do the construction project was from a gap chart from the engineer who designed the construction project who estimated it would really take the full amount of time it's a big project okay any other initial board time then so it's not the permit cost someone it's all this is all people time the increases in hours this yeah this is the amount of time that it took for the consultants to develop the documentation yeah on this project on the delivery so and we'll get female money back from this for $12,000 that will be 75 percent reimbursable okay okay save any public comment okay opening up for oral say any public comment on this I don't see any we'll be crossing my fingers and toes that we don't get any more degree this winter it's generally a low erosion stream so you know for years we're really not a lot of debris filling the fish ladder because it's a very clean stream with not a lot of turbidity and there's not a lot of siltation happening there it's a very but because of the catastrophic nature of the 2017 storms which you never know when we get out of one of those but they're not that calm I mean this is fall creek which is pretty un okay impacted stream so it doesn't have a loose stuff laying around for easy okay it takes a big thing takes 2016 yeah so I think one of the most exciting things about this project is the new fish ladder requirements which will be next when that's rebuilt right and that the everything has to be lower and easier for the fish to get over our fish have gotten lazier or they're less energetic and they cannot clear a one foot step anymore they you gotta kids these days okay let me let me stick with um probably you know I saw somebody get back to you know just out of curiosity how long is that stream into well the fish ladder is going the debris the debris is right where the fish ladder is oh it's throughout the whole stream it's in the chambers of the fish ladder oh okay yeah okay so we'll be just rated that that jutsu from the fish ladder yeah from the actual chambers well I'm with Jenny I hope we don't have storms again and I know this needs to be done so get to it okay any other public okay I don't see any let's bring it back to the board any other more comments on this so I hear a motion no we're a quick comment they must have might um might be an engineering solution to stop debris on the grain and that's something you know dual looking at your time let's talk before the next phase sure it's protected I would leave approval of the scope and budget for the permit requirements for 12 fish big ladder for additional 12 thousand eight hundred eighty eight dollars okay um okay um no further discussion you take it um let's just uh take them on up or down okay uh Dr. Smallman hi Dr. Hayes yes director of course yes yes okay um well let's move on to ten e looks like a simple big item to the three this evening I hope people appreciate a little bit of my humor um so this is the Kiko assessment this could be oversight committee member appointment and it is discussion and possible acting by the board regarding the appointment of a new member so um the recommendation is that um the board review the attached applications and choose um one of the applications to replace Andrew River who resigned from um the lumpy glass assessment just a bit of oversight committee so any staff the initial comments I can memo is is complete and whole and staff is okay on this one I think I would like to go to oral's first so to give the opportunity for anyone to comment but including the applicants in case they wish to there's no necessity to but it would be a time that the um and you know I'm gonna ask the law I see and you'll be the first I want to offer this initial to the applicants in case they do want to speak so that the the the rest of the community um know that um just to take in all communications so would anybody like to um speak I would be happy to so just some business to take care of at the beginning I submitted this application in good faith I didn't realize it had become so politicized I was really really looking forward to working on progress for latter and I'm a technical person I'm a task oriented and the idea of working on this report was just amazing to me and I'm about to do it I think that tonight is a real pivotal point for this board because you have an opportunity to put two people on this committee and make it active almost immediately I know there is a I know there's it's not a secret that Jenny is the preferred applicant and I and she's very qualified as well if the preference was for me I would insist that you also appoint Jenny Jenny and Leo have been very active in the community they would share about four years and we have worked together on other projects and supported other projects on each other so I think we as a team as part of the bigger team would be really dynamic and I urge you to do that and you can do that because you did that already a couple months ago there was an opening for one person and then you got two applications and another opening came up so you pointed both at the same time without having to put any other notice out or any other fuss so I believe you can do it and I think it should be here um you have my application before you what I didn't include in there is that yesterday Ed and I celebrated owning our house for 40 years in Longpico moving in and in 10 days we celebrate 40 years of marriage to this very handsome man I love living in Longpico I'm very connected in Longpico I hear a lot about people in Longpico and I really love the open discussion we can be really firing and you can see Jenny and I can both be very firing and you need that because that's what people in Longpico expect that we're going to be dedicated when I was reading about these kind of oversight committees universally they said the real priority is they needed people who asked a lot of questions and I qualify for that I am asking lots and lots of questions I'm very friendly two things that I wanted to drink to your attention is on my experience on two committees while on the Longpico as a citizen member in the Longpico water district um 2011 to the 2015 I was on the citizen advisory committee this committee was tasked by the board to provide I need any more than three minutes and I think I think that's appropriate for the two after this five years I hope maybe please it'll speed along believe me okay this committee was tasked to provide reliable fact-based information about the proposed merger to Longpico customers included research website posts and organizing workshops we held workshops we extended out to the community to get questions we had an amazing website this website was cited by a lot of different government agencies and linked to theirs as an example of how you reach out to the community um it was a communication success our motto was just the facts because the biggest issue in Longpico is trust and I have to tell you even though we had a majority people vote for the merger a lot of them voted very reluctantly because they had to trust that the merger agreement would hold and involving the county in that whole organization was a big factor for people to believe this agreement was going to be held and it was going to be successful here so I think a lot of trust has been lost and I think it's going to be a need a really dynamic committee to build that back up and I think you and I both of us for that and you need us right away for the next meeting um I was also a citizen member of the grant and loan committee like I included this because I worked with two board members who were very anti-merger and we were about as opposite as you can imagine as much conflict as we've had here there was a lot worse there I petitioned to be a member of this committee and I needed both of their permission and they took a chance and the result of that is we did some really dynamic work we put together pages similar to what you have in your package tonight describing projects what they were how much they were going to cost photographs all of that because we went to workshops and we look for grants and loans we attended all kinds of seminars we brought stuff back to the board we made reports very similar to what the live-off committee does as a result of that we brought back a grant to the board and they did it for a person to come in for technical the tm back technical mechanical and financial report that's required to submit a state revolving fund loan we got that and he also helped submit the revolving fund loan all because we went out and we looked for it if there was any grant or loan that was out there we were going to get it and the reason it was successful is because we all agreed this was for the betterment of the district and we were able to each set aside our own personal differences and take the focus of what was best for the district as a primary thing the second page of my excuse me the second page of my submission now I turned in a PDF that was colored in your packages black and white and I don't know like it's a terrible copy and there's a reason I wanted you to have this in color I don't understand why my application was altered you'll see at the top you can see at the top return your please return your water survey I made these signs there are I think half a dozen throughout the canyon this was part of what we did with the over for the advisory committee the board said we need to find out really how people feel about the merger and so we put out a whole we made up a whole list of what questions we've had so far and we want to know what's your response where do you want to go and it was going to culminate in a workshop these signs got a 43 percent return of all households 500 we have 43 percent return and that is an amazing result appeared if you have anything to do with surveys of those 86 percent of the respondents said they were in favor of the merger eight percent said no and six percent said they weren't sure but we went out and right below there you'll see soon this year questions very small I'm sorry just the facts about the merger and a sign that we put up on the other side I work with this collaboratively with this committee and I know how to work collaboratively and I know how to communicate you'll also see a picture of a zyanic fire vehicle with two blue cubes in front of it this was for a workshop because one of the major questions we had was what's the difference between a long pico unit and an slv unit these are the visuals we know how to communicate this answered a lot of questions the latter committee is going to know how to communicate how to reach out how to communicate and I believe I have the experience and that's what I can contribute to this the rest of my resume is I have a being in the art content of the state university my major work experience includes a reservation as I said I've had a lot of training an amazing amount of training and how to work with the public and on collaborative workshops on brainstorming and how to come up with ideas and how to take a task to move to an action have a lot of training in that while I was on these committees I also had training on the Brown Act and the California Rural Association Rural Water Association on board member duties and how to start operating so I have a lot of deep background on that as well my husband and I have owned our own business for 32 years it was in solar hot water heating we were specialists in big systems and how to maintain them I wrote hundreds of reports to explain to owners about how their systems work how to evaluate how much money they should be putting into it what the cost of the return on it was so I'm very familiar writing reports and now retired so I have time but I appreciate your vote I really think you need both of us Jenny and I both have a lot of really strong points to bring to this committee and I think this committee needs to be enthused immediately and put it on if you're really sincere about what you wrote in your grand jury response that's going to be the only answer to how to move on up to my I appreciate it thanks yeah tough act to follow but I would like to uh echo a lot of the the points that that Debra said it seems like also a really exciting time um to be part of this committee I'm really looking forward to it being a working committee and and getting some tasks and working on reports and and having some trainings and and I'm also very task oriented and also um as we mentioned we've been in the canyon for about four years we we bought our house and moved in on earth day and when we did that our real estate agent told us yeah so there are these disclosures and there are these forms they have to sign because you need to become part of this water district and it's a little bit of a thing right now but they're merging with the bigger water district and it's going to be done in the bottom and so obviously that didn't happen and so you know I'm kind of scratching my head and wondering what's going on and I'm hearing this and that and I don't know what's happening and so I thought well I'm going to go to the next meeting that's coming up because I saw you know a flyer for it and I didn't have babies sitting we didn't really know anybody so I'm a little bit worried I'm going to take my daughter to this meeting and she's going to get bored and disrupted well she wasn't the disruptive person that he used to be worried about um and yeah so I don't take her and I would really yes we're fiery but something I would really like to bring to my serving on the board is to be collaborative and respectful and task oriented in fact oriented issue oriented and to take the personal out of it I want to get work done I want to work well with people who do that and share mutual respect and be able to you know communicate well and you know the work that we're doing and to get more people involved and you know to make it a more collaborative respectful process that we will be able to get more people involved that way. Thank you okay um we're still in oral communications at this point um would anybody else want to speak? I think this is really an opportunity for the board to move beyond the sort of generalities and sort of PR handler general nature of the grand jury response and actually moved to something very concrete. One of the things that this board and future boards are going to have to deal with is um sort of a generational change in the makeup of this valley. There's a lot of really long time residents here and there's also people that are going to be moving in over the next few years. I think it's really really important that this board and we've wrestled with some of this on the admin committee how we get people involved. I've reached a conclusion that the way you get people involved is not to turn anybody away that wants to be involved but there has to be a way for the board to find a place for everybody to serve and volunteer and I don't think that's particularly difficult to do in this case because there happens to be three openings on this particular committee and two applicants. So this seems like an incredible no-brainer to be able to to fill this role and I think it would be a really good move for the board. Something that you all are serious. I mean I know there's an election coming up and there's a lot of sort of really good feelings going on right now that the board wants to do just about anything possible. So I think this is a really great opportunity for you to follow through on that and I urge you to balance. There's a balance here of deep experience in this process already and a really new voice I think can bring a lot to the table and both parties should be honored with this appointment and I urge you to do so thank you. A little while ago you mentioned distrust, skepticism. I have to say if you don't pick both of these people if you only pick Jenny which I'm hearing is what's going to happen there's something really wrong here. Jenny's smart she'd be a good person but she's already on a committee Debbie isn't on a committee Debbie knows more about it than Jenny does pick them both they would be great but how can you set them and say oh we hear maybe some skepticism maybe mistrust if you only pick Jenny and then say you're going to put a new notice on the website saying you need two board members and asking to people to apply when you've got two people applying right now and originally you said you were going to pick two tonight now you're only going to pick one I'm sorry how can I possibly believe you have any intent of doing what needs to be done for the latter committee with that with this tell me and I know you won't tell me but I guess you'll show me by your actions. Well first of all I now have you heard of the Navi Act and it's my daughter who was from the city and brought it to my attention and it does require that you it requires that you do fill these positions as soon as possible one of the things it also requires is that you post the vacancy and as I I certainly didn't see it that it posted on your website until you what nobody knows about that link at the bottom of the page so why wasn't it on your main page it was buried about the vacancy it was on only on the if you click down on the latter one then you could see it so that just doesn't make any sense to me that you wouldn't you have the other two vacancies for the other committees but not our latter one so now you can check into that so that was a concern that I have but also you said Gina indicated that she doesn't see any way that you can appoint someone tonight but it does say in the Navi Act the legislative body may if it finds an emergency exists fill the unscheduled vacancy immediately a person appointed to fill the vacancy shall serve only on an acting basis until the final appointment is made pursuant to this section so I see a way of you appointing both of them tonight so sign on both and then later at your next meeting the one person who isn't confirmed one can be confirmed at that time I do see that I kind of one thing that I take a little bit of unbridge to is that that our committee our committee our hands were tied for so long it wasn't until Mr. Hayes came forward and and met with me and and gave me the idea of going directly to your to the finance committee that we were able to finally get any information at all we have been trying from day one we asked to meet with the finance manager and were told no that we couldn't meet with her because she was too busy so we have no information so that's why nothing got done we couldn't move forward but we have been moving forward and I feel really good about that I know that if these two ladies are join the committee that will with the health of what it says and your commitment to meet the obligations provided to you by the grand jury report will we're going to do great and we're going to be able to get the job done now let me just say one more thing here I'm sorry I was busy I always ramble as you know so I wrote down what I wanted to say about Deborah so I wouldn't ramble okay so you have two excellent candidates and both of them should be appointed what possible reason can you provide for why Deborah Lawland is not being appointed at this time she would definitely be the most knowledgeable member of the LADOC committee regarding Long Pico assessment district no one has invested more time energy and support of the merger of Long Pico with XLBWD we would be lucky to have her we would be harnessing her dedication to making LADOC a success from the inside out if you can only assign one person tonight then it should be Deborah Lawland Jenny Gomez is also a wonderful candidate and belongs on the committee but if a choice has to be made between the two it should be Deborah and if you make another choice then you we deserve an explanation as to why but maybe with the help of that act you can just go ahead and assign them but thank you um I believe I saw Lou at the end of the or maybe I'm okay no no okay anybody else okay I don't see anybody else with their hands up so we're bringing back to the board would you like to comment on sure yeah and I will admit I was not conversing in the maniac before I reviewed it after was raised in this board meeting the most important aspect of the maniac that I see here aside from the requirements annually post lists of who holds the various positions is specific notice requirements for filling vacancies on the board and I think if there's any concern as to whether the district has satisfied the specific requirements to post a special vacancy notice in the office of the clerk and on the website or at the library and in other places directed by the board then the most conservative way to address that would be to make sure that those notices are posted and address all vacancies at the next board meeting I do not believe that the emergency provision applies I mean appointing one member would satisfy the form requirement but I don't think meeting the form of the laddock constitutes what's typically considered an emergency under the code um however that is a discretionary finding of the board and we could just the board could cut think of some reasons why it would be an emergency to open it tonight that could be considered by the board okay um I'd like to get a little staff okay before we come to the directors um when can we get a basis for what the posting you know did the posting fulfill the maniac reporting is there any question of that okay so I was under the impression the maniac only applied to four vacancies not subcommittee vacancies so we did not follow postings at the registrar voters it was posted on the website that we had on the website and the laddock page because we assume that's where all the people members go for their information so we did post it it wasn't happening it was an opening so we did have that on the website but we did not post it at the registrar office it doesn't have to be at the registrar's office special vacancy notice posted in the clerk clerk office of the local agency on the website or at the library and in other places designated by the board I don't think we had posted it in clerk of the local agency I assume would be we would have it in like the bulletin board at the front or something like that one that was recently I would I would stretch to say that we did that did the website we did the website no on the laddock page I mean nobody and I'm sorry nobody goes there only we we on the committee know about that little tiny page and the first opening was posted on the main webpage and the second time on Facebook and Facebook it says two openings I have a copy right here yeah sorry two openings to be decided tonight so let me get the legal I'm hearing that the notice wasn't posted in the office of the clerk and so the appropriate way to follow the matty act would be to post the notice of all now we know there are three vacancies post the notice all three vacancies as soon as possible in the office of the clerk and on the website or the library and then proceed to fill them with but it wasn't done last time when you appointed two people so those people are no longer valid either hello now what are you gonna do are you gonna do the right thing or are you gonna just funnel this but we've been we've been presented with a legal requirement here I think I'm sorry I'm sorry Deborah I'm sorry Deborah no okay um we're back at our discussion with legal um so what is he's not sorry I mean it seems to me that that we need to at this point fulfill the legal this is not this was unexpected okay but I think that we need to do this right I can't see that there's an emergency I mean you know when you look at additions or deletions to the agenda their emergencies are serious emergencies um but I think our choice has to do to to get to meet the letter of the law on this um and we haven't in the past okay if there's been anything you know we've been it's been brought to our attention okay we should do it right right may I base the detention of the chair a point of order that means that every citizen member of every committee is not valid that um I'm sorry Deborah but okay that would be something that we would end up I would ask that question in not in this I can't imagine council being able to analyze this in this um okay this quickly what would you okay let me get any other step okay I would recommend we follow a conservative approach that not only honors the letter of the law but also affords us the opportunity to do additional outreach and to ensure that there are three vacancies filled yeah I mean we we have only two applicants at the moment for three vacancies so we need to do more um other um other board bill oh whoa I I couldn't understand the reason why you know there wasn't why we couldn't it's set up tonight to to give both Debbie and Deborah uh for them so obviously it sounded like to me like we we messed up on on doing following the procedure on um I don't know if there's someone tonight that we can say obviously Debbie's way more qualified so I you know I vow if there's any way for her to to be appointed tonight with Jenny you know simply waiting another month or taking this conservative route and just just say hey let's just try we'll try to get a third person then hopefully in the meeting in September we can we can fill a lot of you know with the I guess we can't make a decision possibly tonight you know probably with the most highly likely that the both miss Gomez and miss Rowan are going to be the next to but you know because it sounds to me like we just messed up on you know on the proper procedures of and you know maybe we have in the past me when we had a learning curve to learn I haven't you know I guess what you said go through the um registrar and all that stuff but we have I mean we had a lot we had a lot of movement or take what miss um what um what Tony was saying about too there might be some sort of thing to that where we can where we can appoint Debbie tonight and then and then go through the procedure to to get miss Gomez uh we need we need to get people ASAP on the board so let's not try to delay anything and you know I'm sure glad that they're we have these two people willing to be on that one do you want to clarify um just want to make a response from Bob still here not but I appreciate what he was saying that sort of the generational shift I think that every member of the community should be equally welcome um I lived in the old old town and if you hadn't been there since like the 19th century you didn't count and so I think it's great to have both long-term residents and newcomers involved and frankly anybody who wants to participate is is going to be great so appreciate the diversity and the applicants but I also um now that the that these matty act has been brought up I do think it would be responsible to guard the side of caution and um repost appropriately and that would be my my preference my only my only concern would be are there any issues that are coming up for the district we're having a forum of the latter is going to be essential between now and sometime in september when we both have the opportunity to panel you know hopefully fill three vacancies and then the lot has a chance to me is there any in anything that will create a pediment or bottom up if we don't my belief is that there's nothing of that urgency I mean we have a quarterly report coming up in september is that correct okay the quarterly report is supposed to occur in september at the September lot of coming running so there will be without a form there can't be anything I think that's unacceptable okay um price to pay I mean I think this is in a lot of ways this you know ad hoc was the subject of the grand jury findings and I think it's imperative that we get it up to speed as fast as possible and further delays are just really unacceptable so maybe this kind of is an emergency I think and I'd be willing to vote for both of them to be on there right now uh I've worked with both of them they're great we're lucky to have great candidates I would love to have both of them I could question for Gina about definition of emergency because we had this issue with one of our spring project and where we had to the immersion he had specific legal definitions and we weren't able to approve an expenditure because it it wasn't didn't represent a legal emergency and I don't remember the details but we were constrained at that point and even if we are constrained I mean we could pre-appoint them and then let's go through the process of the postings and everything but we have our two next you know appointees ready to go and join the committee but let's let's move forward a question about if the process hasn't been followed in the past and we haven't followed the maniac to the T for the current posting is there a legal liability we're exposing ourselves to that is has some significance that we should be aware of do we have the opportunity to provision re-appoint and ratify later with perhaps a third potential appointee I don't see a high likelihood a high level of legal exposure I think the ratification is an appropriate step that I was thinking about in the court looking at the statute and trying to understand what to do with it um with respect to prior appointees if these procedures haven't been followed I think ratification is a step that could be used to cure um I haven't really had an adequate amount of time to analyze this so it's something to consider well okay one of the I want to bring in one of the thoughts I've had in this process is that we have a significant reset on this okay on what I'm going on and we have had some we have had two resignations okay um there's been some um concerned I mean yeah two recent ones I mean two that were not the they were a choice not the government moving out of the area and I would like to be able to communicate to the people's community that there has been a significant change in how we're going to handle things and reach out directly okay and do a direct mailing to the entire community that they're okay we have a grand jury of response available and that we want to solicit um applications and I'd like to have a significant number of applications I mean I I think that might well I don't know what that will produce we haven't had that experience and this is something that is doable for a community of five hundred people that might seem you know overkill for one of eight thousand okay okay so um I think to be safe on that okay that we need to postpone this okay go out and solicit okay applications from everybody explain okay what this entails to some degree you know we won't have a full charter at that you know at the points but we will have a broad okay we'll be able to say something about what it entails and I'd like to come back and and then consider the two of the applicants we have today with at least one more person okay maybe three and then more than there so I think it's one thing to have made appointments in the past not in compliance with the mediac because we didn't know about it I think there's a certain risk now that we're aware of the mediac requirements if we go ahead and make approvals with the full full knowledge posting wasn't done in compliance I think there's a legal risk there not a significant one but it doesn't have to be significant to cause problems down the line so I think it would require that quarterly report be pushed back till October but and I had not even occurred to me to do something like a direct mailing that's that's sort of a which is a well it's it's a novel idea but again you know in the view of the grand jury report um maybe it's not totally out of range but how much is that going to cost you already posted an impress banner on facebook on the website well I think there's some people who don't think we've given it enough publicity no there's some people who think you've never let's not let me just finish my comment at some people who obviously are concerned that there wasn't enough exposure or that was hard to find um others of you that seem satisfied with the publicity um but my concern is what does that knowledge that we are now in possession of have to do with our legal liability if we continue with this process in light of invalidate the last two appointments because they were done without following the maddie my point is we were not aware of the that is exactly the point that I'm making now that we are aware of those provisions in the maddie act now we know that the correct procedure to be followed um I do think that it's a slightly different position you know that we didn't know before it was done um innocently uh inappropriately now that now that we are aware of those provisions um I think it's our obligation to follow them you know we're never going to satisfy everybody here there's there's going to be people who are unhappy with whatever our actions are so I think that's for sure my inclination would be to follow legal advice on this one so I'll go back to Gina and just see what your reaction is to my concerns if the notice wasn't posted in the clerk's office this is something that can be resolved through the course of this process it should be done unless a final emergency is made can you clarify emergency I have not had an opportunity to look up the definition in the past if it had something to do with the peril of life and limb kind of when we were talking about expenditures for the fish lander it varies by context so in that context it was health and safety type emergencies usually emergencies that result from fire or flooding etc I briefly looked at the definitions in the maddie act and didn't see the definition of emergency would there be circumstances I guess for an appointment I mean if you had a board that could need and you needed to make you know the governing body didn't have enough numbers and you needed to get to you know a decision point where you had something serious that was going to get consequence but that seems something like that seemed to me like it would be an emergency I think it's a clear example would be that we have a penal code in post deadline for submitting a response to the grand jury before if the board well can't do this for a board member but if the committee had the authorization to sign off on that report so that they couldn't meet the requirements to penal code that might be an example of emergency but I but I can't define emergency for you I didn't see you in the maddie act and I haven't had an opportunity to research it try to piece together a more substantive definition well I you know I understand what you're saying John but do you understand my concern about now that we're aware of this if the circumstances may be somewhat different yep and that's my concern is it wasn't a deliberate oversight um can they serve on an acting basis that it's an emergency because we do have to work on a grand jury response the community wants it from you know and that's what we're concerned about emergency because when we had we I was in it's unfortunate that there's no definition there in the maddie act because I was surprised and how stringent the conditions had to be for an emergency for related to this other project um so it makes me kind of skeptical a little doubtful and it would be you know I I appreciate your suggestion of like direct mailing but I do think that would involve a longer delay than than following the requirements the maddie act which are simpler we just have to make sure that we're in compliance with that and perhaps the supplemental social media type outreach but as long as we meet the requirements of the maddie act we could get turned around quicker and it wouldn't wouldn't be expected what's the 10 days go ahead no it's 10 days not that they only ask to be posted 10 days and then you can assign some could we could we post it do a special meeting in 10 days or so step all hello step all three work hard to find another candidate I think we have to reach out very aggressively in order we've only got two people at this point you know we have okay two qualified people but we don't have another but we don't we can't we haven't reached out well enough to get a full compliment on it and we need to do that volunteers are hard to come by right I haven't had any applicants for the uh finance but it's and and in in mind of that what would the difficulty be with the provisional appointment two applicants to none conduct an outreach campaign so that at the next regular meeting we can have a review of any additional applicants for the remaining vacancy and a ratification of the two candidates who are in position. Good idea. Gina did you get the ratification process with the appropriate here? I mean do you see a problem with that? I don't I don't it's a little tricky to I'm sort of being asked to get legal opinions on the slide. Yeah um oh hello the ratification could be an issue here because the issue is you know this to other community members so I have a problem with some of these provisional well I mean the board manual doesn't really make any it doesn't say you can. Yeah I mean I think something you would be under the board manual something you would be appointed to the committee or not. If you make a ratification aren't you making a de facto appointment and you're intending to okay to make an official later so you've actually done the deed again when you make the ratification and that's subverting the intent of the okay. I can see where ratifications might legitimize appointments made prior to our knowledge of the matting act. Correct. That seems to make sense but could now that we're aware of the matting act. And the two applicants could be appointed this evening to fill two of the three vacancies. Yes. And we could as Jimmy uses the term cure the fact that we did not post a notice in the clerk's office and it was you know a 10 day period and in the library whatever else we needed to do but that ratification to use the term would cure that logistical lapse that administrative lapse of not having it in the window of the office. This is strange to me I think and again the actual item says one okay that we haven't changed okay that we're going to ratify one two this is getting very why would it only say one when you had two and you've got three vacancies. It's in the agenda as one. Who wrote that? Why? You applied it to you when it said one and two months ago. Mr. Chair. No no come on okay this is something we have to work out among the board about whether there is a way we can proceed on this. This is it is difficult enough with five board members trying to figure out how to do this. I have a recommendation as much as it chaps my high to draw things out because I prefer moving things along but because there was miscommunication to the community about the number of vacancies that Facebook post contradicts the current agenda because there are three openings there are two candidates in the whole new group. I recommend that we stop this at the moment freeze frame this and as you suggested go back out to the community resell this for the three vacancies and consider this fully again with all applicants after having followed the Maddie Activity in a September meeting. If that was a motion I wouldn't okay I wouldn't suck into this considering for discussion so I make the motion for the purposes of discussion. For the purposes of discussion I like that because acting that way I think protects us legally and also I think it's th