[0:00] Good morning, everybody. I'm very sure Richard Santos and welcome to the Santa Cruz Valley Water Jiffy Board of Directors meeting.

[0:08] The chair Mr. Mayor will be meeting this in close session. I don't know, director Jim Bellv had a call in he has some medical appointments.

[0:15] And madam, with that we'll call the meeting to order.

[0:18] Thank you, Director Ballard. Director Eisenberg.

[0:22] Director Shua, Vice Chair Santos, Director of Aurella, Chair Estimera, you have a

[0:30] quorum.

[0:30] Thank you.

[0:31] And we wish a happy birthday to John Burella

[0:35] and it was four hours later I was born.

[0:39] So that's, that's right.

[0:42] You got it.

[0:42] So again, I'm glad everybody is here.

[0:45] We have plenty of work to do today.

[0:46] We're going to be going to close session to have labor and negotiations.

[0:52] Legal counsel in the comments.

[0:53] So with that, we'll see you all at one o'clock. Thank you.

[3:15] Good afternoon, we'll call our meeting back to the order.

[3:18] And let's see, we'll have a.

[3:24] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll sort of get on to your council.

[3:27] I would just expect to item 2.1, the board met in close session with all directors,

[3:30] except director Bell participating and no reportable action was taken.

[3:35] Thank you.

[3:37] We'll move on to.

[3:39] 3.1, pledge of allegiance.

[3:41] That's the way the ballad to lead us.

[3:49] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

[3:54] And to the power of it.

[3:55] From which it stands for nation and by the God.

[3:59] Indivisible liberty and justice for all.

[4:02] Thank you.

[4:10] What is it today?

[4:10] I don't have any requests.

[4:13] At this point, so we won't make any adjustments.

[4:15] We'll move right along at 3.3.

[4:17] time open for public comment on any issue that's not on our agenda.

[4:22] Not as a time for any members of the public that might want to address us on any issues that are not on our agenda.

[4:28] Do we have any requests, Mancler?

[4:30] Thank you, Chair. We have no request to speak online or in person.

[4:35] Yeah, and we'll move right along to 3.4,

[4:42] conduct a public hearing to consider adopting a resolution

[4:45] of necessity relating to the opposition of real property interest from the city of San Jose and

[4:50] necessary to complete the Coyote Creek Protection Project with a pretty large number of projects.

[5:00] afternoon. As chair, I'd like to welcome everyone attending this meeting, the public hearing to consider

[5:08] adoption of a resolution of necessity relating to acquisition of real property interests from the city of

[5:13] San Jose to complete the code, quick blood protection project is not open. The hearing will be conducted as followed.

[5:22] First, the board will hear from valiant water staff providing facts that will support the findings said

[5:26] in the resolution of necessity.

[5:28] Information provided by staff will be incorporated into,

[5:31] will be a part-up and informed by deliberations for this hearing.

[5:35] After the presentation, the property owner will have an opportunity to address the board,

[5:40] regarding the findings that are set forth in the resolution in necessity,

[5:44] then the board will commence the hearing.

[5:47] The hearing is the time for public comment.

[5:50] I will call a speaker in the order that the speaker request will receive.

[5:53] Each speaker shall have three minutes to address the board regarding the matter.

[5:58] At the public comments are received in the property owner, has been afforded an opportunity

[6:02] to address any outstanding points made during the public comment period.

[6:06] The board would then close the public hearing.

[6:10] The board may discuss the finding, supporting the adoption of the resolution and necessity,

[6:14] and made that request, the highly water staff, and the property owner.

[6:18] Finally, the board will make a decision on whether or not to adopt the resolution

[6:22] in necessity, approval of this resolution requires a two-thirds vote, five hundred and seven

[6:28] of us. Anyone wishing to address the board may do so by filling out a speaker card

[6:34] is submitting it to the clerk or use the raise hand function in the Zoom meeting application

[6:39] to identify yourself in order to speak. Speakers will be allowed at three minutes and due to the

[6:45] number of people attending, tonight's meeting only once speaker card per person will be accepted.

[6:49] speak, speak cards of value from the clerk.

[6:55] Value water will now open and conduct the hearing for agenda 3.4.

[6:59] The proposed acquisition by eminent domain of properties,

[7:02] located at the various locations in San Jose,

[7:04] including Watson Park, Maverick Service Yard,

[7:07] William Street Park, Selma Alinda Park,

[7:10] Coyote Creek Park Chain and Kelly Park owned by the city of San Jose.

[7:13] I invite Madhu to Maluru to the Deputy Operating Officer Watershed Design Construction to commence presentation for the City of San Jose properties.

[7:25] Thank you chair. I just wanted to introduce Madhu as you commented.

[7:30] So I'm going to turn it over to him. You're entering your manager for our watershed design construction. Thank you.

[7:35] Thank you.

[7:38] All right. Thanks, Bowenie.

[7:39] Good afternoon chair.

[7:40] Mr. Mera and members of the board,

[7:42] my name is Madhu Tamiluru,

[7:43] capital engineering manager

[7:44] in the Watershift's Design and Construction Division.

[7:48] So, in the following slides,

[7:49] I'll provide information to support the findings

[7:51] set forth in the resolution of necessity

[7:54] for the subject properties within the Cytclic

[7:56] Fred production project footprint.

[8:12] The findings to be made at this public hearing

[8:14] are first to establish the public need for the project,

[8:17] then to establish that the project is designed

[8:20] in a manner that is most compatible

[8:22] with the greatest public good and least private engineering. Then we need to determine the

[8:28] properties necessary for the project and lastly to establish the offer made to the property

[8:33] owners is in accordance with the section 7267.2 of the government code.

[8:44] The first finding is to

[8:46] establish the public necessity for this project. The project is needed to protect the properties

[8:51] along the KIT Creek from Montague Expressway to Tally Road,

[8:55] against the flood levels that occurred in February of 2017,

[8:59] and that flood is approximately equal to like a 20-year flood event.

[9:03] The other benefits of this project include preserving the creek habitat and reduction in the

[9:08] long-term maintenance of the creek.

[9:13] On this map, you can see the extent of the KIT Creek

[9:16] flood protection project. The project was divided into two phases in response to the federal

[9:21] energy regulatory commission order are also referred as a forecorder in February of 2020.

[9:29] The phase one part of this project is referred to as a high degree flight management measures

[9:34] project and the construction of it is complete and the board accepted the work on June 24 of this year.

[9:42] And the phase two project is referred to as a high degree flight protection project and the

[9:48] Construction is expected to begin in the early 2026 and the combined fluid production project

[9:54] extends from Montague expressway in the north to the Thali road in the south.

[10:00] And it consists of like five different reaches. So, and this particular public hearing is in regards to the properties located in reaches six, seven and eight.

[10:15] The project design is constrained by the geography of the creek. The vast majority of the creek flows through the private property and some park lines like public parks.

[10:29] This leads us to our next finding that the proposed project is planned, located and designed in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private engineering.

[10:40] This was achieved through a holistic approach using the

[10:48] while preserving the existing habitat as well as avoiding the private structures and

[10:54] loss of usable space in the public parks.

[11:00] As far as like sequer compliance,

[11:02] value water as a lead agency, prepared the environmental impact report and the project

[11:07] on the EIR was satisfied by the board on March 11th of this year.

[11:17] And the project this project requires like 62 property acquisitions in reaches 4 through

[11:22] 8 and the subject resolution of necessity is being proposed for 13 out of those 62 parcels and

[11:29] all these 13 parcels are owned by City of San Jose and they are in reaches 6, 7 and 8.

[11:39] As I said, like the 13 properties are necessary total out of 62 13 properties are being considered under

[11:47] this resolution of necessity. The flat protection elements will be constructed on these 13 properties

[11:52] And a portion of the properties will be needed to be permanently available to be able to maintain the flat protection elements after construction, so which is referred as a permanent easement.

[12:04] And the construction activities also require that a separate portion of the properties be temporarily accessible to construct the flat protection elements and access the construction areas referred to as a temporally construction easement.

[12:17] This map shows like where the subject properties are located in the project reaches.

[12:23] The red outline highlights the general area, where the properties are located.

[12:29] Properties being included in this resolution of necessity are in the Mayberry service yard,

[12:34] Watson Park, William Street Park, Selma Wolinder Park, Cytically Park Chain and Kelly Park.

[12:42] In the next few slides we'll look at each property each parcel in more detail

[12:46] and talk about the land rights needed in each of those parcels.

[12:52] This slide shows details of the proposed easements at the Mavari service yard

[12:57] to orient yourself like not this point into our top left corner of the page, Mavari Road

[13:02] is shown on the upper left of this map and highway 101 is shown on the bottom right of this map.

[13:09] So the proposed flood walls are shown in green line and the berms in orange line and in the

[13:15] your slides. You'll show the passive barriers, which are shown in the magenta color and all

[13:20] these colors are consistent in the next eight slides. And the temporary construction easement

[13:26] is shown in purple and the permanent easement are shown in red color in the next eight slides.

[13:34] And this slide shows more details of the permanent easement proposed easements at the

[13:45] and Highway 101 is on the top left corner of the map.

[13:53] This slide shows the details of the remaining easements needed within the Watson Park area.

[13:59] So, not this pointing up on this page, Jackson Street is shown on the top left of the map,

[14:04] and the not 22nd Street is just south of the larger park area.

[14:11] This slide shows the details of the proposed easements at William Street Park,

[14:16] and the South 16th Street is shown on the bottom of this map,

[14:19] and the East William Street is on the left-hand side of this figure.

[14:23] So, the proposed flat walls and the proposed flat wall at the William Street Park is shown as a green line, as I mentioned earlier,

[14:29] and the park will have like a lot of passive barriers installed along the western and northwestern side of this park.

[14:37] So, these passive barriers will provide continual access to the park for the public after the project is completed.

[14:42] So,

[14:48] this slide shows the proposed improvements, proposed easements along the Nartend of the Salma

[14:54] World Interpark, which is on the other side of the creek from the VLN Street Park.

[14:59] So...

[15:00] The flood walls and passive areas are proposed as flood protection elements here.

[15:08] This light shows the remaining parts of the Salmawal Interpark owned by the city of San Jose.

[15:13] Woodborough drive is on the top of this page and the CITICRIC is at the bottom of this page.

[15:26] And here.

[15:29] This slide shows more details of the proposed easements on the Category Part Chain.

[15:35] Story Road is shown at the bottom of this map.

[15:38] The proposed flat wall is shown in the green color, along with the necessary easements in this area.

[15:45] Finally, this slide shows the detailed map of the proposed easements at the Kelly part.

[15:50] Not this pointing up on this map, but in group drive is shown along the bottom of this map.

[15:56] And the green line represents the flat wall as I mentioned earlier.

[15:58] And

[16:03] a little bit more information on the CDF San Jose properties needed for this project.

[16:09] So we are valuable to be planning to construct like passive barriers, flood walls and berms.

[16:15] And all of these are in the city park line.

[16:18] And the project will maintain the existing access to the park.

[16:21] And will minimize the impacts to the existing and planned recreational facilities.

[16:27] After the project is constructed, the areas will be returned to each existing use.

[16:33] And the last finding to make this hearing is that an offer required by the government court section 7267.2A was made to the owner of the record.

[16:44] government court offer was made to the property owner on record on July 16th of this year.

[16:50] And it was not as an it was at a framework at value.

[16:54] City of San Jose has confirmed that they have received this package

[17:00] and this concludes the staff's presentation and after the board receives the comments from the property owner or public

[17:08] We'll be we'll stand by to answer any questions. Thank you, Madhu. We have any requests to address this. We do not have any requests to speak. Okay. Any discussion questions?

[17:22] Yes. Yes. Yeah, Mr. Chair, one question question. When we acquire all this and get this thing going,

[17:29] does the city of Sase provided maintenance on their property or they required?

[17:34] Yeah, there is an increment like whatever we are acquiring as a permanent easement.

[17:38] We will be maintaining that part because our flood protection features will be there.

[17:42] And the remaining areas will be maintained by the city of Sase.

[17:47] Thank you.

[17:49] Any other questions?

[17:50] a 10 motion. Second,

[17:56] sorry, let's close the public hearing. Other than a 10 motion, the

[18:02] closed public hearing. Those full motions say aye. Aye. Opposite no. Okay, we'll bring back

[18:10] the motion for approval of the resolution.

[18:16] Director Ballard. Director Bell. Absent. Director

[18:20] Vice President, Director Shua, Vice Chair Santas, Director of Aurella, Chair Esther Merad, motion passes.

[18:30] Thank you.

[18:33] Thank you.

[18:33] Move right along to our consent calendar for 0.12.

[18:39] There's a motion in the second.

[18:42] Those of motion say aye.

[18:44] who say no? Move right along to 5.1. Receive the semi-annual lobbyist report.

[18:53] That's for information only. Any questions?

[19:02] Well, there is no presentation. It's just the list

[19:06] of the lobbyists. I mean, and the lobbyists are here, so I've already, you know, in our report.

[19:14] Next is a 5.2 board committee reports. We have handouts. Any questions on any of these?

[19:24] Okay.

[19:28] Okay, then move right along to 8.1. We should even update on the Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project.

[19:36] Project number 9195402 and Brian.

[19:45] Yes. We have right a panel. I'm good. I'm going to give a chance for staff to come out here.

[19:51] But good afternoon, members of the board, Charis Dernera and members of the public.

[19:56] Thanks.

[19:56] I'm Melanie Richardson, the interim CEO, and I'm going to kick.

[20:00] Off today's staff presentation for the Pecheco Reservoir Expansion Project. Currently valley water is facing unprecedented financial pressure and economic uncertainty. Like many public agencies, we have been and continue to navigate years of high inflation, rapidly rising construction costs, and ongoing economic uncertainty at the federal state and local levels.

[20:25] Therefore, we need to continue to find ways to reduce the burden on our ratepayers and

[20:31] keep water affordable for the community.

[20:34] This means prioritizing only the most critical projects that secure and advance our

[20:40] core missions and deferring or delaying projects that are not via the left-list time.

[20:46] After the board approved the FY26 budget, the CIP and the groundwater charges this past spring,

[20:52] staff began taking a deeper look at key budgeted projects to determine if they are the best

[21:00] option for value water given the financial constraints were currently under and this analysis

[21:05] included the Pachagal project. Next slide please.

[21:28] Thank you. In May, staff presented before

[21:32] the California Water Commission, a status update of the Pachagal project and the commission

[21:38] had many of the same concerns that staff was already considering. Namely, the time lines that

[21:45] it was taking to complete environmental review and design, the project affordability, securing

[21:51] approvals that are required from the Bureau of Reclamation, and what those might mean to the

[21:57] overall benefits of the project, and then just the priority of the Pichigo Reservoir project

[22:02] in our overall water supply master plan.

[22:06] So today, staff has collected most of the information

[22:10] that we feel we need to present to allow you

[22:13] to make an informed decision about this project.

[22:16] And we're going to give you a pretty comprehensive update

[22:18] today.

[22:19] It's going to be distributed among several staff.

[22:22] We're going to start with Rita Chan,

[22:24] who's going to give us an overview of the environmental review

[22:27] timeline, followed by Ryan McCurder and staff.

[22:30] we're going to talk about the design status.

[22:33] And then Darren Taylor is going to talk about affordability

[22:36] of the project, including a recent cost estimate update

[22:40] that staff is completed just late last week.

[22:43] So two light to get into the packet that Darren will talk

[22:46] about that cost estimate and what that means to rate impacts.

[22:50] And then lastly, Aaron Baker will talk about two subjects.

[22:54] He'll first talk about the meeting

[22:55] that executive staff had with the interim regional director

[22:58] of the Bureau of Reclamation in early July where we talked about securing key approvals for the

[23:04] Bureau and what those meant to be overall benefits of the project.

[23:09] And then Aaron will finalize this by talking about the water supply master plan, what

[23:15] differing or suspending to take on might mean to the master plan and what we could do is

[23:21] alternative projects to make up for a replace that benefit.

[23:26] So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Rita Cham.

[23:31] Thank you, sir.

[23:32] Chair, I see Mariah.

[23:33] Members of board.

[23:34] I'm going to talk about briefly.

[23:37] Where we are in environmental review and permitting process.

[23:40] It's like, see.

[23:42] So as you know, the draft environmental impact report was released back in November 2021.

[23:47] In compliance with the proposition one deadline,

[23:51] which was codified in the water code.

[23:53] Since then, the project has undergone significant design changes.

[23:57] And along the way, staff has identified some areas that we could be finding some of the

[24:02] analysis.

[24:04] And pursuant to the seafood guidelines, our staff has determined that the circulation

[24:08] of the revised draft year will be necessary.

[24:11] So staff has been working very diligently, making progress on the preparation of this

[24:16] revised year.

[24:17] The revised draft year is scheduled for release in December, 2026, and staff anticipates

[24:24] spring in the final year or to the board for certification in December 2027. Next slide, please.

[24:32] In terms of permitting, as you know, due to the extended schedule, we are still in the process

[24:38] of preparing permit applications. This is not unusual because most of the all-the-state agencies

[24:44] will have to rely on our secret document to make approval of the project. And because of what I just mentioned

[24:51] earlier that the need for us to revise the ER before we finalized it. Naturally, we have

[24:57] not submit any permit after-

[25:00] That set, staff has been working to us, making the future permit review in approval process as streamlined as possible.

[25:09] And we are accomplishing that by holding a lot of individual and group meetings with the applicable regulatory agencies.

[25:17] And the idea is that once we are ready to submit the permit application, these early engagements, going to lay the groundwork for more streamlined permit approvals.

[25:26] Once we finalize, so yeah, or with that, I think I'm going to turn it over to Ryan Carter, Deputy Operating Officer.

[25:36] Thanks Rita, good afternoon, board.

[25:39] I'm Ryan McCarter, Deputy Operating Officer, Dam Safety and Capital Delivery Division.

[25:43] So I'm going to talk a little bit about the design completion timeline for the Pacheco Reservoir Expansion Project.

[25:48] But first, I want to just take a step back and just explain what a 30% design means compared to a 60% design.

[25:54] It's really the level of detail that we have for that design.

[25:58] It's not like it's a partial design and we have 70% of a blank page.

[26:02] So a 30% design means we have a design for the entire project.

[26:05] And going into a 60% design is added detail, like really getting into everything fits together

[26:11] and how deep we have to excavate for the foundations and kind of taking in more detailed information.

[26:16] So just want to kind of make that clarification because sometimes it gets a little bit confusing.

[26:20] So we did complete the 30% design back in August of 2022, so 3 years ago, and since then

[26:28] we've been working on the 60% design, however, in order to complete that 60% design and get the

[26:34] geological data that we need to refine it. We've been trying to complete the geotechnical

[26:40] investigations associated with that. So when we began those investigations back in 2023,

[26:45] three, we were stopped with a SQL challenge that we've heard about many times and we're asked

[26:51] to do additional SQL analysis for those geotechnical investigations.

[26:55] And so we've been working on that and have prepared a final EIR for that work, which is scheduled

[27:01] to go to the board on September 9th, but we will talk about that a little bit later, but

[27:07] just going through the rest of the design process here, we've been kind of waiting for that

[27:12] certification to resume those investigations, and we're hoping to complete the 60%

[27:18] design by late 2026 next year if those investigations are able to go forward this year.

[27:27] And then for our full design completion or the 100% design that's anticipated for late 2028,

[27:33] and that would be a full set to get the contractor, the information they need to build the project.

[27:39] But in between there, we'd also have a 90% design that would be done in 2027, that's not listed here,

[27:44] that's another step. And we go through those steps with the percentages and there's kind

[27:49] of a process that we use where the engineer of record, the design team puts together this package

[27:55] at the each design level and value water staff and the subject matter experts review that and then

[28:00] we send it to DSOD to review that and do their technical analysis and then we gather all those

[28:05] comments from the subject matter experts and DSOD and compile those and incorporate those into

[28:10] next design level. So that's kind of a step-by-step process we use for all of our projects, including the

[28:16] the damn safety projects that we're currently working on. And so this is just a table to just kind

[28:22] of summarizes those milestones, some of which read it, covered in her slides, and then the design

[28:27] milestones here, and then just this really is just to kind of lay out for our best-case scenario

[28:32] of completing these major milestones, and then estimating the construction start date in mid-2029.

[28:37] And like I said, that's the best case scenario, but we have been making progress on all of these efforts throughout time.

[28:44] But there have been challenges like the geotechnical investigations,

[28:48] Sequoanalysis that have slowed us down by about two years on the design process.

[29:00] Okay.

[29:03] Good afternoon.

[29:04] Chair, Mr. Mary, members of the board.

[29:05] They're in Taylor, Chief Financial Officer.

[29:08] I'm going to talk about the next slide, which provides information on cost and affordability

[29:13] of the Pachika Reservoir Expansion Project. The total estimated cost with inflation as shown in the adopted

[29:21] CIP is 2.732 billion and that's based on the 30% design that Ryan just spoke about that was

[29:28] completed in 2022. It is an expensive project and value water has undertaken a multi-pronged approach

[29:36] to reduce financial impact on the community. Starts with securing a $1.4 billion water infrastructure

[29:43] and finance innovation act loan or wifio loan that covers up to 49% of planning and design costs.

[29:51] The key benefit of that particular loan is that it has a customizable loan repayment schedule.

[29:59] And so the currently...

[30:00] We assumed with you a loan debt service schedule reflects backloaded principal payments that start in FY55 with the payoff in FY67.

[30:09] Pushing principal repayments toward the end of the amirization period helps relieve near-term water rate pressure and, as the board knows, that's a front and center issue for valley water today.

[30:20] A note for you is that interest expense over the long-term can be mitigated by the ability

[30:26] to pay off the loan sooner with no prepayment penalty if financial conditions weren't.

[30:31] So we can push forward those principal payments if we need to and if the board desires.

[30:37] Another thing that has been done is that staff was able to secure a $504 million conditional grant

[30:45] from the California Water Commission's Water Storage investment program back in 2018.

[30:50] That includes 24.2 million of early funding for planning and permitting, which valley water has already received.

[30:59] And in addition, staff has been exploring cost sharing opportunities with external partners.

[31:05] When it comes to the water rate projection that the board has seen, that projection has assumed 35% partnership participation.

[31:13] And that particular assumption was discussed by the board back in 2021 and directed by the board to be the assumption.

[31:25] The grant with that 35% partnership participation means from a water rate modeling perspective is that what we've loaded into the model is the full cost of the project.

[31:37] the 2.732 billion plus the cost of financing, including the WIFI alone.

[31:43] And then we calculate the 35% partnership payments, which comes into the financial model

[31:50] as a revenue source.

[31:51] So it offsets the costs.

[31:53] And that's what is included.

[31:54] That's the assumption that's baked into the pause report projection that the board

[31:59] has seen.

[32:01] So with that, the groundwater production charges would cover the remaining cost of the

[32:07] of the project after the wizard grant and after any partnership participation revenues come in.

[32:16] So now, CEO Richardson mentioned a new revised cost update. And so we don't have a slide on that.

[32:23] So I'm going to give that information to you verbally. The latest rough estimate of costs for the

[32:37] million-dollar cost increase, almost 500 million dollars. That is still based on the 30% design,

[32:44] but incorporates current market conditions. For example, OCI, which was the firm that did this

[32:51] revised rough cost estimate, added tariff-based premiums on the applicable line item costs,

[32:58] so reflecting the tariff increases at this point in time for those particular line items.

[33:05] At this point in time, the estimate does not include cost increases based on the 60% design,

[33:11] which is in progress, as you know.

[33:14] Right now, staff anticipates that there would be a change in the 60% design in an increase

[33:22] related to a PG&E transmission line, and that is estimated to cost $65 million, so that

[33:28] 2.22 billion dollar number does not include the impact of that PG&E transmission line.

[33:35] In addition, further investigations could reveal unexpected geological conditions

[33:39] that may require design changes that are not possible to estimate at this time.

[33:44] So as I mentioned, that estimate is rough, but it's the latest and greatest that we have at this

[33:50] point in time. So with that, the next question that the board may ask is, well, how does that

[33:56] impact the water rate projection, particularly for the North County zone W2. And so again,

[34:01] I don't have a slide to show you, but I do have the information that I'm going to share

[34:05] with you verbally. So the board may recall when you've looked at the pause report that was

[34:11] submitted back in February and with the with the public hearings on the water rate setting

[34:15] process that we had in April, you may recall that for the North County zone W2 groundwater chart

[34:21] projection, that staff was projecting 9.9% increases from FY27 through FY34. So for the next

[34:29] eight years, tapering down to 7% after that. With this constant increase to the Pacheco

[34:35] project, moving from 2.7 billion to 3.2 billion, now we would project 10%, so we're in the

[34:42] double digits now, 10% increases in that North County's own W2 groundwater charge projection

[34:47] for the next eight years, and then not tapering to 7% but continuing at 9% for the next two years after, so FY35 and FY36.

[34:57] And that includes the assumption of...

[35:00] A 35% partnership participation. Now, if, for a scenario without partnership participation, 0% partnership participation, that scenario, then, would reflect 10.3% annual water rate increases from FY27 to FY34 and then again 9% from FY35 to FY36. So that would be the cost impact of this updated.

[35:30] Rough cost estimate and just another term to kind of put that estimate in for for the board is that when when the project is done

[35:39] And an operational based on this new cost estimate the impact to the average household in terms of the monthly

[35:46] Monthly bill would range from $11 to $16 per month in terms of incremental costs to the average household for the project with 35% partnership participation

[35:58] And would range from $20 to $27 per month in terms of an incremental monthly impact to the average household for the project without partnership participation.

[36:08] And that's all I have to share on that and I'll pass it along to Erin at this point.

[36:16] Good afternoon, Chair.

[36:18] Good afternoon, Chair.

[36:19] Mr. Mayor and Honourable Members of the Board.

[36:21] I'm Aaron Baker, Chief Operating Officer of the Water Utility, and today I will provide a status update on the approvals required from the Bureau of Reclamation in order to construct the Pachaco Reservoir expansion project as envisioned.

[36:32] I will also provide some information on where the project fits into the Water Supply Master Plan 2015.

[36:38] Currently, Valley Water receives water from San Luis Reservoir via Bureau of Reclamation pump stations and pipelines.

[36:43] The proposed Bichaco Reservoir expansion project would rely on the Bureau's Bichaco condo of pipeline to deliver water from St. Louis Reservoir into the new reservoir and convey water from the new reservoir back into valley water system.

[36:56] To accomplish this, we will need several approvals from the Bureau.

[37:00] With four critical approvals bolted here. Approval for a turnout connection, we will need permission to construct a new turnout structure on the Bureau's Bichaco condo pipeline to move water in and out of the new reservoir.

[37:13] Long-term worn-out contract, we'll need authorization to use Bureau Facilities to move non-central

[37:19] valley project waters such as state water project supplies into and out of the new reservoir.

[37:25] Approval to store central valley project water in the new reservoir. We need permission to store

[37:31] central valley project water often abbreviated as CBP water into the new reservoir. This is a

[37:42] and fourth, we need permission for the new pumping plant and electrical facilities.

[37:47] We need approval to construct a pumping plant and associated electrical transmission facilities

[37:52] on bureau land near the new turnout location. Next slide, please.

[37:58] After consultation with senior

[38:00] reclamation officials, the outlook is challenging. Storing CVP water in the new reservoir.

[38:07] At this time, the bureau does not support allowing CVP water to be stored in the new reservoir.

[38:11] This is a significant setback as it greatly limits the project's viability and reduces opportunities for partnerships with other CVP contractors.

[38:21] Permission for a new turnout and elect facilities.

[38:24] While possible, approvals for a new turnout connection in a related infrastructure or require extensive engineering analysis and environmental review,

[38:32] this will be a lengthy process compounded by the Bureau's current staffing shortages and competing priorities.

[38:39] or an at contract. It will be possible to obtain it. It could be possible to obtain a

[38:44] worn at contract to move the non-CVP water into the reservoir, but securing a long-term

[38:49] contract will take years and may come with restrictive or unfavorable terms. In short, the

[38:56] Bureau doesn't support using CVP water in the new reservoir, and with their resource constraints,

[39:01] the timing for seeking other project-specific approvals is not favorable. Next slide, please.

[39:09] So where does this project fit into our draft water supply of Master Plan 2050?

[39:14] The draft plan identifies future water shortages and underscores the need for new storage projects,

[39:19] particularly given the uncertainties surrounding groundwater banking.

[39:22] The Pacheco Reservoirs Ganshin project is not included in this staff recommended lower cost portfolio,

[39:28] due to which relatively high cost compared to some other options.

[39:31] Currently included in the lower cost portfolio is the San Luis Reservoir and Large Ruit project,

[39:36] also known as the Siskraes, groundwater banking, the Delta convenience project, pure water

[39:40] silicon valley, and South County recharge. However, cost is not the only factor in determining

[39:47] a project's value. The project remains the particular project remains an important alternative

[39:52] that can provide reliable benefits if other lower cost alternatives are delayed, downsize, or

[40:00] The water supply master plan actually recommends continuing to participate in the planning of alternative projects such as Pichaco.

[40:07] As new projects materialize, or current projects change in costs and benefits, the water supply master plan is continuously adapting the its adaptive management process.

[40:16] So, if the Pichaco Reservoirs Fange and Project is not able to be implemented as envisioned, such as not being able to store CVP water, what alternatives could provide similar benefits.

[40:26] The team is further analyzing alternatives, such as expanding a local reservoir like

[40:32] Clareau, increasing participation in sites or DCP, and developing new groundwater

[40:37] banking opportunities.

[40:39] While this is going on and in the meantime, staff will continue to focus on the lower

[40:43] cost portfolio, including CISC, Pure Water Silicon Valley, and groundwater banking next

[40:49] line.

[40:54] So that wraps up our summary today, Board.

[40:56] and I hope that you've got the information that you needed to be able to make an informed decision on whether

[41:02] Valley Waters should be referred with this project. And as Aaron said, we will be coming back with additional information.

[41:08] Should you make that decision that will tell you what we will be doing to explore alternative options in the future?

[41:15] And with that, staff stands open for questions.

[41:19] Thank you, Melanie. Thank you, staff, big panel of staff. So I have a formal written motion

[41:31] that I've been thinking about. So I ask you all to allow me to do that after discussion

[41:37] and after we've all had our opportunities to discuss, we'll listen to public comment.

[41:44] So I have a direct umbrella.

[41:49] Thank you.

[41:49] So my question is.

[41:52] So what would that impact the remaining

[41:54] with you dollars that we have?

[41:57] Do we have to give those up?

[41:58] How do we resource?

[42:00] We've already committed some of those dollars.

[42:02] What is the impact going to have on those dollars?

[42:05] Sure.

[42:05] Thank you for the question.

[42:07] So it was for guard to the wiffie alone.

[42:08] So we we've secured a 1.4 billion dollar loan.

[42:12] It's there's a there's a master agreement for about 10 loans. We've executed on one loan. We have not drawn on that loan.

[42:21] So when you say what is the impact if if if the board were to choose to delay the project or not move forward with the project.

[42:31] What we would do is begin discussions with EPA to cancel that particular loan. Obviously if the board chooses to continue on with the project.

[42:39] we would continue on with the loan, and we haven't drawn on it on the first loan yet, but we would

[42:44] draw when the time comes. So just to be clear on the question and ask, those dollars are

[42:49] specifically used for to pay a particular, no other use for those dollars would be,

[42:55] that's right, under the loan of just particular. Please, that's correct. Is that correct? Thank you.

[43:00] That answers my question.

[43:04] Any other questions?

[43:09] Okay, all right, that would be nice and rude.

[43:13] These are just questions, saving my comments to afterwards.

[43:17] So the $3.2 billion new total, why wasn't that reflected in the PowerPoint?

[43:28] Yes, thank you for the question, so that cost estimate is very fresh.

[43:34] It came in.

[43:35] I think it was on Friday.

[43:36] So just a couple of days ago.

[43:37] So that's not in that time to amend the amend the PowerPoint side presentation for sure, Friday.

[43:44] I would like to see that more transparent for the public, so I hope that next time that kind of information can be shared.

[43:52] I also want to note that 3.2 billion is next of the 35% participation at the board.

[44:03] years ago said was required for us to move forward with this project.

[44:08] Isn't net of that theoretical 35%.

[44:12] The 3.222 billion would be the full cost.

[44:16] Okay, so and does it include how much of that 3.2 billion is mitigations?

[44:27] Yeah, that's still the 50 million dollar placeholder that we put in to the cost.

[44:32] Do you think $50 million is an accurate,

[44:35] I do.

[44:36] I do.

[44:38] I do for now.

[44:39] Based on what we know.

[44:40] How much medications cost and continue to cost with Anderson?

[44:45] Anderson is much further along in the negotiations with the regulatory agencies.

[44:48] Approximately.

[44:49] I don't have the number off top of my head.

[44:51] Hundreds of millions?

[44:52] No.

[44:54] Okay.

[44:55] I think it's best to put in a more realistic.

[45:02] assessment of mitigation costs. I'm also wondering, does that include finance charges?

[45:12] The 3.2 billion, that's the total project costs that we put in our CIP. There's not included finance charges.

[45:17] Finance charges in project.

[45:20] In project cost.

[45:21] We never put our finance charges in our total project costs in the CIP for any project.

[45:28] Okay, then do you provide it separately?

[45:31] We have provided separately for this project and Darren Taylor's presented that a few times.

[45:37] So, that's here again, I'm Darren Taylor.

[45:40] So, if the if the with the alone that I thought was ninety three million dollars.

[45:48] That's the number in December.

[45:52] In December 2022 there's a ninety three million dollar with the alone that closed, right?

[45:58] I don't have the exact number, but it's about that.

[46:00] Approximately.

[46:01] And I remember you saying that the payback application for that was about 294 million.

[46:09] Something about, I don't have the exact number, but it was long in those lines.

[46:13] Okay. So if a, you know, less than $100 million loan had a just under $300 million payback

[46:23] obligation, then a 1.4 billion dollar loan would have approximately a 3.3 billion dollar payback

[46:35] obligation.

[46:39] It's going to be in that neighborhood, again, I don't have the correct number.

[46:42] Given that the finance chart is in the payback obligation, actually our larger than the

[46:48] project costs, and therefore more than jubbles the cost of the project, perhaps that could be

[46:57] considered an aspect of that. So that actually would then arguably double the cost to

[47:04] 6.4 billion or so. So in that, so that is a good. Okay, that those were really my questions here.

[47:14] Here,

[47:18] oh yeah, have you included the legal costs that have spent so far?

[47:22] I know that that OSHA challenge that was referred to was a challenge that we lost and the

[47:31] challenge are one and as a result we had to pay all of the legal fees and costs of the

[47:40] as the court documents clearly show and perhaps, you know, given that this was a pretty

[47:50] expensive lawsuit in itself, are we also including legal related fees, and we know also

[47:58] that if we continue this project, the same parties that suit us before, including the

[48:03] I'm a mutton indigenous tribal band, the Sierra Club, and private landowners,

[48:12] but well, likely to see us again. Are we including those in the budget?

[48:20] As far as the projected costs, is that what you're asking?

[48:24] Yeah. Yeah, there are placeholders for fees that associated with that.

[48:29] And how much money do you have set aside for legal costs?

[48:32] I don't know off top of my head.

[48:35] So, okay, it'd be important to have that called out too, especially given all of the opposition by very diverse stakeholders to this project.

[48:48] So, okay, those are my questions.

[48:50] I really appreciate your updated number.

[48:53] Numbers so far in the amount of time and the spirit in which you're provided this is very helpful.

[48:58] And I know that together, we'll reach an appropriate resolution.

[49:03] So thank you.

[49:07] Director Ben.

[49:11] Thank you.

[49:12] Erin, I know you went over this a bit.

[49:15] But I was hoping maybe you could restate or say again, especially for,

[49:20] I'm looking at how many people we have online.

[49:23] I think my eyes aren't that great, but I think we've got like 150 people listening in.

[49:29] which is absolutely wonderful and fantastic that we have all these folks interested in this project.

[49:37] I was in on this board when we moved, we decided to move forward. So I was wondering if you could or someone could do a little, a little more of a history lesson of how did we get here.

[49:47] I was going to do that. Oh, you were. Okay. Awesome.

[49:50] I am deep story. Okay.

[49:52] our guy. Meaning that the old is one. All right. All the service.

[49:58] We have so many people here interested.

[50:00] But I think it would be useful for them to understand how do we get here and then airing you do it now, it's about, you talked about the context of the water supply master plan and how this fits. And so I, I, I, I just want to be able to understand, you know, the, as I'm learning, the importance of storage. If we don't move forward with this, we still have this water supply master plan where we're planning to 2050.

[51:25] Thank you very much for allowing me to speak.

[51:30] I am definitely liking the direction that I'm hearing that this meeting is going so far.

[51:35] Of course, you know, we have to wait for the final payoff to make sure that it actually happens.

[51:41] Something from the diehard meeting our movie came to mind.

[51:45] It's like, welcome to the party, pal.

[51:49] We have been telling you all for years now that this is not a good project.

[51:55] There have been lots of my own constituents, our neighbors, but I've talked to my representative from District 6.

[52:06] There have been organizations, professional organizations.

[52:09] there have been state organizations, federal organizations, lots of people have been telling

[52:17] you that this is not a good idea. There is something rampant that is happening with our politicians

[52:24] and they're not listening to the people.

[52:28] We are telling you this was a terrible idea.

[52:36] I'm standing

[52:37] The terabyte deals, so I hope you eventually get to the end and say, no, we do not want to do

[52:44] this, we do not want to follow up on this, we do not want to keep this on the books and

[52:49] keep drawing more millions of dollars.

[52:52] I don't know, it seems like 17 millions of already been spent on this.

[52:55] Maybe that's right, maybe that's wrong.

[52:58] Thank you, Ms. Eisenberg, for that comment.

[52:59] I had a little note for myself.

[53:00] It says, anytime you're talking about money, quote, have a slide for that.

[53:06] every single time so that we can understand what's going on.

[53:13] I don't understand you're talking about all this money and 30% of the project, 60% of the project.

[53:19] Right, all these little things are manipulating just basically say to yourself,

[53:24] what are my constituents saying, do they want this? No.

[53:29] Let's look at a different direction. Let's cover our water. Let's put some solar panels on top of those covers.

[53:35] You know, let's really do those very basic things and then we may have a new outlook and we may be able to say, look, we don't need to have these giant storage units anymore because we've done such a good job.

[53:51] Listen to us.

[53:53] Your constituents.

[53:56] District six.

[53:59] Listen to us.

[54:00] Thank you.

[54:01] Thank you, sir.

[54:08] Yes.

[54:12] Yes.

[54:13] on Wednesday. Okay, we have Peter Van Dyke. Good afternoon, Mr. Van Dyke. Good afternoon,

[54:22] Arnold Board members, chair attorney. Yeah, I think director, I should actually ask a lot of

[54:30] questions. I'm going to ask regarding finances. This is a very aggressive and huge project.

[54:35] And I'm just wondering about the cost benefit analysis on this one. And I'm because I'm the chair

[54:42] the Agwater Committee. I think it's important that we know the impact on agricultural water rates

[54:51] because, you know, as you all well knows, Ag is struggling pretty hard on this in this county,

[54:56] because it's an urban county now in the longer and rural.

[55:00] And I'm wondering if perhaps Darren and events can put this on the agenda for the next

[55:05] ag, water advisory committee meeting.

[55:10] So I might all contact your staff and the clerk to get

[55:14] this on the agenda if we can, because I think it's very, very important that they hear about

[55:18] the costs and the benefits for this project. So I'd appreciate that if we could do that.

[55:23] And thank you for letting me speak.

[55:25] Okay. We'll do that by the way.

[55:27] Thank you.

[55:28] Mr. Gava.

[55:37] Good afternoon. My name is Juan Pablo Galvan Martinez, senior

[55:40] ladies manager for. How far can you hear me? Yes sir. Okay great. Good

[55:49] afternoon. My name is Juan Pablo Galvan Martinez, senior land use manager for

[55:53] save on Diablo. I'd just like to thank staff for the work on this for the

[55:59] valley water leadership, their deliberations, and they're thinking about this

[56:04] As a project, obviously we have come to a point where it seems like some realities have

[56:10] become quite stark and I'm here commenting for you today to urge you to not pursue this

[56:18] project further. We care about drinking water, we care about natural resources, we care about

[56:25] protecting land that is already officially designated as protected and this project does not

[56:34] team to yield the public benefits that its proponents originally envisioned when this

[56:41] work started so long ago.

[56:44] We would really appreciate if you the Valley Board decision makers decided to suspend

[56:50] this project, terminate further work on it, and we are with our conservation allies, absolutely

[56:58] open to working with all stakeholders to pursue liable, long-term strategies to solve our

[57:06] crucial water issues in the face of a hotter, more extreme climate now and in the future.

[57:13] Thank you so much. Have a good day. Thank you sir. Katia Rubin.

[57:28] Good afternoon, Mr.

[57:34] Rubin.

[57:34] She knew this.

[57:35] Oh, through there.

[57:36] Through there.

[57:37] There.

[57:38] Can you hear me?

[57:44] Yes.

[57:47] We can do.

[57:48] Yes, we can hear you.

[57:49] Can you hear me?

[57:50] Yes.

[57:51] Good afternoon.

[57:55] OK.

[57:57] Absolutely.

[57:58] Good afternoon, Chair.

[58:00] If the board is thrilled to continue to talk

[58:12] for a little bit.

[58:16] a more project, immediately the board decides to plan, will be out of date the moment it is approved.

[58:24] Luckily, Pacheco, on a central for future water supply, since it is not included in the low costs scenario, the district is currently prioritizing.

[58:33] Also, the situation with Pacheco needs to be discussed with the California water commission.

[58:39] If it has been discussed, I'm wondering if you could share their response.

[58:45] If not, this should happen as soon as possible.

[58:55] I'm sure.

[59:00] I'm sorry.

[59:04] I'm sorry.

[59:08] I'm sorry.

[59:09] I'm sorry.

[59:10] I'm sorry.

[59:11] I'm sorry.

[59:12] storage enhancement projects. These items should be overseen by the water supply and demand management

[59:17] committee. Thank you for your consideration.

[59:24] Thank you, Mr. Irvin. And I believe we're, we're due to

[59:29] go back to the commission in October. That's correct. And when the end of October.

[59:40] Do you

[59:41] to respond to you, I think it's not told where that was. Towards the end of our

[59:46] tour with that we're appearing before the commissioner, right? Okay,

[59:54] do we have?

[59:58] That's, that's, so you have, I mean, doesn't discuss.

[1:00:17] We're meeting with them at the end of October.

[1:00:40] Yeah, through the board, it looks like

[1:00:54] the board. She is unmuted. She's just not speaking into her make at the moment.

[1:00:58] Hello Ms. Kleinhaus. Who is listening?

[1:01:03] Can you hear me? Yes. Yes.

[1:01:07] My name is Shani Kleinhaus, I'm the informant.

[1:01:10] I get through the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance.

[1:01:13] We support the CRCOT.airvan provided. And repeatedly, we are organization

[1:01:22] as the opposition to the Pacheco Resort or Expansion Project, we need to believe that it will

[1:01:30] have devastating ecological impacts on the regional scale with benefits if any latest news.

[1:01:39] We see the Bureau of Reclamation refuses to provide an even more importantly water to the

[1:01:46] And they state not precinct a lot of money to be needed for this project to us, that should be the product.

[1:01:59] So again, we ask you to about particular reservoir expansion project.

[1:02:09] Thank you Ms. Kindhouse.

[1:02:11] Anyone else?

[1:02:13] I have no further requests to speak.

[1:02:15] Okay.

[1:02:15] the request, this question, I start providing the history after we have the discussion.

[1:02:23] Yes, Director de Ruella.

[1:02:24] Yes, thank you, Chair.

[1:02:27] So we talked about suggested partners on this project.

[1:02:31] Recently, the loss for Keto's project in Keto Costa was disbanded as far as their expansion

[1:02:39] of the project and taken on partnerships, Valley Water was very engaged in that and director

[1:02:44] That's what I participated in those discussions, and there was many partners on that project.

[1:02:50] Have any of those partners committed to this project and do we know who they are?

[1:02:56] And what amount of dollars if so have been committed to this project?

[1:03:00] In partners?

[1:03:03] Yeah, I can answer that.

[1:03:04] So yeah, we do know who the partners were on the list of the care of suspension through the JPA of course.

[1:03:08] We haven't had any any in-depth discussions about partnership opportunities for those those agencies.

[1:03:15] Do we pursue that or I mean are we pursuing that?

[1:03:20] We have considered pursuing that but we haven't had any outreach recently.

[1:03:24] Okay,

[1:03:28] I'm not further so let me just let me just go back to historically a little bit to where we got here.

[1:03:36] four CEOs ago and three and three interim CEOs ago. So that's about almost 25 years.

[1:03:46] Director, I see all the stand Williams ran into a group of people who were the mayors of small towns in the valley.

[1:03:57] who were suffering after the last drought during that time and were sustaining over 45% of unemployment in their areas.

[1:04:13] They went to the governor and asked the governor if he could lead some kind of process to deal with water issues.

[1:04:22] They created the Latino water coalition and the reason they did that was because

[1:04:28] the majority of the legislature was now Latino.

[1:04:34] And so Schwarzenegger said, well, why don't you go talk to Latino public officials and have them support

[1:04:40] get the legislature to do something about this.

[1:04:43] Maybe put a bond on the ballot.

[1:04:48] So they came, they ran into CEO Williams at the time in conference in Los Angeles, who talked about it.

[1:04:58] And he said, oh, well, I have some Latino.

[1:05:00] Directors that might be interested in, so what happened was that we joined this Latino water coalition to advocate for a water barn.

[1:05:13] And so I became the Northern Vice President of that coalition and it went all over the state to advocate for a water barn.

[1:05:27] since we had none in the past, and so out of that came this water bond which was part of financing

[1:05:38] this project,

[1:05:41] the governor himself came to sign the bill right here at Valley Water,

[1:05:47] there in Anderson, personally signed the bill, and in a few years that that that law

[1:05:54] allowed the bonding bill and the bonding load will be put on the ballot.

[1:06:04] Within a few years when that bond was approved, many of the agencies that needed and were interested in building storage,

[1:06:19] There was tremendous competition in the state for the commission to award grants under that

[1:06:27] bonding of about $10 billion or altogether, a bonding.

[1:06:33] We were the proudest in the world to have been designated the number one priority on that

[1:06:40] bond.

[1:06:40] tremendous competition, including met, most of the carols, sites, everybody, few were number

[1:06:46] one.

[1:06:47] That's what Particle was.

[1:06:48] That's why we pursued it so much because it has so much to offer.

[1:06:56] So we pursued it since then.

[1:06:58] It's been almost 20 years.

[1:07:00] The staff has learned, has learned many, many things behind this,

[1:07:09] tremendous engineering of course, but also knowing how to raise funding,

[1:07:17] loan and so on, we pursued, as you know, a bill that allowed us binding capacities so that we could work on how to finance these kinds of projects.

[1:07:29] These projects, as I mentioned before, are complex, the humongous, the very expensive, no one has been able to build these projects.

[1:07:41] And all of the other agencies, there's only a couple left, there's three that also had not been able to finish, they were, they were, they received funding from the barn.

[1:07:55] There are, as you know, a lot of the carers is out, sites just went up from six billion to almost eight billion, and that's without talking about the interest that they're going to have to pay on that, okay.

[1:08:06] So it's not just 10, it's probably 20, if you look at it that way.

[1:08:10] These are very difficult projects and no one has been able to get there.

[1:08:15] We are trying to support these projects and we hope that sites will make it.

[1:08:20] We want to participate more in sites.

[1:08:22] We're talking to a lot of our carols to see if we could still be partners with them.

[1:08:29] So there's a lot that we're all trying to do with storage.

[1:08:33] But the very difficult projects, this is not something that everybody does every week.

[1:08:41] There isn't a project that is created every week because it's very difficult to do.

[1:08:48] Now we can do the engineering.

[1:08:50] I have no doubts and I don't think any of our staff has any doubt that we can engineer a project.

[1:08:57] But there has to be political willingness, there has to be funding available because we can put this kind of pressure on our water rates.

[1:09:07] We decided long ago that if it came to a point where we had to put the kind of pressure that looks like we need to do today on our constituents that we wouldn't do it.

[1:09:21] And I think that's where we are. So I have a formal motion because I always anticipated that

[1:09:27] long after I was gone on from the board my 30th year next year that it would be time for the board

[1:09:34] at that time to make a decision whether there's a go or not. And it looks to me like today

[1:09:41] might be the day when we make that decision. So I have a motion it's kind of formal because I think

[1:09:48] it's necessary for it to be formal. So I'll read it and of course repeat it if you request.

[1:09:57] I would move the number one.

[1:10:00] Quality Water Suspending. All of us current efforts in the development of the political, reservoir, and expansion project.

[1:10:08] As some later date, maybe perhaps, you know, we've tried this before and we're trying it again.

[1:10:15] Maybe climate change, something else.

[1:10:21] Be who's us to once again look at this, but I think we suspend this project now today.

[1:10:27] Number two, direct the interim CEO to take the necessary steps, including coordination with the California Water Commission, as needed to withdraw.

[1:10:39] The value of water's proposition one, water storage investment program application for this project.

[1:10:46] Number three, direct the interim CEO to develop a project closure plan, and return to the board and a later date to provide an update,

[1:10:55] and seek the Boyd's input as needed on the key project closure elements, including but not limited to

[1:11:03] fulfilment of contractual and other obligations, collection of project deliverables and communications,

[1:11:10] and notification to applicable regulatory agencies and funding partners of project suspension.

[1:11:19] In short, to close out the project.

[1:11:23] Number four, direct the interim CEO to take the necessary steps to document and preserve all project records and work product to facilitate development of future projects.

[1:11:36] And finally, direct staff to report back to the board at the next few months with a report on what in County storage opportunities we should consider, including our current reservoirs and the permanent inquiry.

[1:11:51] That's my motion is extensive, it's essentially like I said, I'm happy to repeat it if any of you would like.

[1:12:03] I think that, I think that, you know, as with, so my motion, of course, is based on staff's report up to date,

[1:12:12] that, you know, without being able to put CBP water in our own reservoir, come on, and, and of course, you know, that's sure it changes the amount of partners that we would have had because they also would have CBP water and couldn't put in there.

[1:12:32] So, that worked as a bird?

[1:12:36] Sorry, let me in.

[1:12:37] Yeah, thank you.

[1:12:38] So, I first of all, I want to thank the chair.

[1:12:42] Very much.

[1:12:43] You asked me to wait.

[1:12:44] And I did.

[1:12:44] Okay.

[1:12:45] And you were right.

[1:12:47] And I fully support this.

[1:12:49] And I really want to thank staff for all of the hard work you've done on this.

[1:12:55] You know, I know that there has been disagreement among staff.

[1:12:59] But I think it's really nice that there are so many team players, you know, to really prioritize the direction, you know, of the agency, which I'm now, please is changing.

[1:13:15] I think that is a long time coming, but we don't need to look backwards. We, we can look forward and I'm thrilled for the future.

[1:13:24] I mean, I'm sure we're all aware that our storage needs will go down as we ramp up alternative water sources, such as renewable sources such as water recycling and possibly non, non-potable diesel, which is very much a thing.

[1:13:48] bringing, using decalination to bring up to putability has been proven really difficult, but

[1:13:54] decal to make water possible for agricultural use depending on the crops and the trees and the,

[1:14:01] you know, that is, is working. And well, continue to work, same with water recycling.

[1:14:07] It'd be great that we now can really push out a full-fledged non-potable recycling program,

[1:14:15] like the one that was in my favorite slide ever that I've seen, you know, so far which was a slide

[1:14:22] from a presentation given by Ms. Kirsten Strue, who's back there about the potential for

[1:14:28] purple tight networks and what we could do to enable, you know, this type of forward thinking

[1:14:35] work. You know, it's not a criticism to any of you personally to move on to this new direction.

[1:14:41] And I think it's, I think it's, you know, a, you know, I'm pretty deep this way.

[1:14:47] I came from the internet industry and tech where changing direction is a weekly occurrence.

[1:14:53] You know, this is government and moves to put it, you know, much lesser.

[1:15:00] Much lower, you know, so it's, you know, climate change has had greater impact than, you know, anyone really predict

[1:15:11] of most people predicted 30 years ago, you know, evaporation rates are really high, 30% in getting

[1:15:18] higher. We can't put water in these reservoirs fast enough to make up for the rate it evaporates out.

[1:15:24] But fortunately, there's so many smart people here, smart and hard-working, and creative,

[1:15:32] and open-minded, and I've been so impressed with the staff that I've delighted to work with.

[1:15:39] And I know that, well, move forward so much stronger and creative, and we'll really be indicative

[1:15:46] of the Silicon Valley innovative forward thinking water district that we've always had the capacity to be.

[1:15:54] I think that, you know, my colleagues who have been on this word a long time will leave with a really great legacy.

[1:16:02] And I think that's really important too.

[1:16:05] So I just wanted to make sure that all of you have worked so hard in this view.

[1:16:09] I said, we still respect you and like you.

[1:16:12] And all of that, it's...

[1:16:16] When changes need, need it, change should happen.

[1:16:19] That's the thing I want to make is that I do think it'd be important to add to the list given by if you're

[1:16:26] amenable to this chair. I think it might be also helpful if it's not the outing included to like to do an

[1:16:33] investigation into whether any mitigations are necessary for work that was already done, you know, they're having read the court decision

[1:16:43] that I discussed earlier, there's some pretty big holes in the earth that I think maybe need to be

[1:16:51] filled and you know the areas really close and involves a lot of ancient indigenous sacred relics

[1:17:01] that I think we just want to make sure we're working with the tribes or the representatives to

[1:17:06] make sure that if they are implicated with their being handled in the right way and really do all

[1:17:11] can't leave no trace. If that's, if that's okay with you chair to make sure

[1:17:15] they do that. That's why I was trying to be thorough. Yeah, very thorough because the

[1:17:24] close out is very important. Yeah. So it mentions all the parties and it's very clear

[1:17:31] about going through each, you know, key project closure elements. Great. And the last

[1:17:39] Because I have to, is that I think that it's still important to have a financial audit of this, just to, for transparency sake, and it's good democracy, I know that this audit has been pushed back a few times, and I think that, even though the project is no longer going for, you know, for public transparency and accountability, it'd be useful to, you know, to keep our plans going with, with the not it.

[1:18:09] Yeah, the audit committee will be coming to us.

[1:18:12] I think in October, November to go through the plan.

[1:18:15] And we can talk about it then and schedule it,

[1:18:18] put it on the plan.

[1:18:19] That we coming back towards the either,

[1:18:22] either October or November that will look at their,

[1:18:26] you know, setting out the plan of what audits

[1:18:29] wouldn't conduct for the next year, next calendar year.

[1:18:32] Wonderful. Thank you.

[1:18:33] Talk about those then.

[1:18:34] And again, I think I thank you so much, Chair.

[1:18:37] I think it's, it takes courage and integrity to, um, you know, to change force. And I've applied

[1:18:45] and respect you for that. Thank you. Vice Chair. Yeah. Thank you, Chair. I really appreciate the

[1:18:53] thorough thoughts that you put together here. And I wrote down all five in the other excellent thoughts.

[1:19:00] Well, I think staff of course all the hard work. And um, you know, there's a lot of

[1:19:07] state must have been made there, of course, are not true and so on. But you know, we get to me is that the director,

[1:19:15] nice to you, has said this a couple of years ago, said we're going to get to a certain design.

[1:19:20] And she's a former engineer here with over 30 years of experience. So there's nothing new that we're addressing. She said that then.

[1:19:27] And the chair at that time supported, which is Tony and myself and we go on and on.

[1:19:31] You know, director of a relevant myself, just went through all this.

[1:19:34] We're lost in a chaos.

[1:19:35] So there's nothing new, and at that time, all the environmental groups, legislators,

[1:19:40] assembly people, you know, the commission all gave money, said it was a shoe and now

[1:19:47] of a sudden, we sat there and go, what?

[1:19:50] And our CEO at the time said eight months ago, it's not going to go through.

[1:19:55] Because of cost, regulatory, we go on and on and people just want.

[1:20:00] On a suit, but there is not enough dams in California. So don't keep on saying they are, because there's not.

[1:20:07] And don't forget the climate change. You spoke, you had your time. And we got firefighting.

[1:20:15] Goes on all the time. There's not enough dams, waters, freshness. This prevents floods in the Sahara.

[1:20:21] Don't forget your neighbors who drowned a little bit.

[1:20:25] And in 2017, if this would have been intact,

[1:20:28] We probably didn't have the 2017 flood, but it was built 1939 for something, and future development, economics, we're going to be addressing this, some of us won't be here.

[1:20:41] It'll come up again because you're going to have droughts, doubts, economy, and you can't go on without water.

[1:20:50] You can make what electricity, but you can't make without water.

[1:20:53] So I'll go over this whole thing all over again.

[1:20:56] We did a fantastic job. Our staff was fantastic.

[1:20:59] Trying to make sure we have water for the future.

[1:21:03] Because we have ours.

[1:21:05] So I commend everybody and these are always hard decisions.

[1:21:09] But guess what? When I'm gone, you're going to come back and you're going to dress it because you have to.

[1:21:15] And you can't go build more new dams.

[1:21:18] that's the one you're going to have to take care of. It'll come back and it'll benefit everybody.

[1:21:23] Flooding climate change. And so on firefighting whatever have you, you know, look at the,

[1:21:29] one down on LA when the Dan was dry. And same. That's what they're built for drinking water and the environment.

[1:21:37] All the good things. So I can go on and on Tony fantastic job or a staff. Thank you all.

[1:21:43] We'll be here again, but I'll be a civilian, but I'll be looking at you in helping you.

[1:21:49] Derek, the gorilla.

[1:21:52] Thank you, Chair.

[1:21:54] So just to read or read with Director Satsau says the way it's speaking, doesn't he?

[1:22:01] He just does.

[1:22:02] So he talked about fires.

[1:22:04] And I recall during the fires in Southern California.

[1:22:08] I guess it was a February where the president came to California.

[1:22:12] and was looking for that magic spigot that he could turn and release all the water from the

[1:22:19] central valley to hit it down to Southern California because there's no water in the reservoirs

[1:22:23] there to fight the fires. There's no water in the dams in Southern California to fight the fires.

[1:22:28] Now what do we have going on right now in the state of California up and down the state fires?

[1:22:34] And no matter how you look at it, water storage is above and beyond the most important element

[1:22:40] for firefighting number one and for our water supply for the state of California.

[1:22:48] There are close to 500 water agencies, very similar public water agencies, very similar to valley water.

[1:22:54] Up and down the state, small meeting in large.

[1:22:56] And I'm very fortunate being part of an organization called Aquasosis and California Water Agency.

[1:23:02] To meet with these groups on a monthly basis to discuss their needs.

[1:23:06] Now, what are their main needs? Water supply, water storage. Each and every single one of these folks

[1:23:12] up and down the state are looking to store more water. So, it's a debate. We're going to

[1:23:18] end it tonight with the motion on the table for Pacheco, but we're going to continue to find and

[1:23:24] store water in Santa Clara County to continue the fight, the fire mission. That's my message.

[1:23:40] Okay, so I'll call for the motion now and I've got a second already from like

[1:23:51] Derek Eisenberg. Yeah, from Derek Eisenberg. So those were the motions say aye.

[1:23:57] Aye. Posting no abstentions passes unanimously.

[1:24:04] I want to take a few minutes to thank staff and remind them that there's plenty of work

[1:24:12] to be done.

[1:24:14] You know, Vice Chair and I had the opportunity to go to New Orleans with the Chamber

[1:24:20] on their city visits years ago after Katrina.

[1:24:24] And, you know, we found that what happened with Katrina was that the walls that the Army

[1:24:32] Corps of Engineers had built, so that the water wouldn't go over, and the water didn't

[1:24:37] go over.

[1:24:38] They just simply melted, and so the California Department of Events required every dam owner

[1:24:47] and California to examine all of their dams.

[1:24:51] And we did that. That's why we're working on Anderson as quickly and as hard as we are. And that's why we have a few more.

[1:25:01] Times that we have to repair. We've been waiting, working on this slowly, along with some of the other stuff, and project once so on.

[1:25:10] So there's plenty of work to be done. And I look forward to having this tremendous staff who have learned so much more.

[1:25:18] I have so much more experience that are going to do even better job on our storage facilities, fixing them, upgrading them, maybe expanding them.

[1:25:29] And of course, I'd like to see a stick a look at the permanent inquiry as I mentioned because we did look at it before and gently just to see what we could do with the hole in the ground that we wouldn't have did.

[1:25:43] And so I'm hoping that staff would take a look at that along with the other storage requirements that we have.

[1:25:49] We talked about sites, but you know, let me be clear about sites because a lot of people don't don't understand this.

[1:25:55] Sikes is not a traditional storage facility project we are not going to store our water in that facility nor is anybody else

[1:26:07] What we are investing in is any new water that might be captured by that facility

[1:26:15] But we're not putting any of our water in there. So that's not going to mean our storage requirements

[1:26:21] either

[1:26:22] That's why it's important

[1:26:24] to have our staff move over and get back to looking at the rest of our facility that you

[1:26:31] already were doing but quicker and then be more invested in it. So you have plenty of work

[1:26:38] to do don't worry and I'm so proud

[1:26:46] of

[1:26:50] all of the tours that we have.

[1:26:55] We take people out

[1:26:57] from Sacramento, some of my friends have met and everywhere in the state

[1:27:06] to see the kind

[1:27:07] work

[1:27:20] that you do on a daily basis.

[1:27:29] I'm so proud.

[1:27:32] Thank you all.

[1:27:40] One more right along to item 10, the CEO and Chief reports.

[1:27:49] Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. That's a hard act to follow. I must say.

[1:27:54] We have only one report today, and it's from Chief Gibson.

[1:28:01] That is a hard act to follow indeed, and I'll do my best.

[1:28:05] Good afternoon, Charis.

[1:28:06] Madam, I'm just the board.

[1:28:07] You have, before you, the monthly one,

[1:28:08] Peter from the Office of Communications.

[1:28:09] Just a couple of highlights to note.

[1:28:12] The summer water conservation campaign launched at the beginning of June to bring awareness to the community

[1:28:15] about our rebate programs.

[1:28:17] This multilingual effort serves to remind partner agencies to use our materials

[1:28:21] to amplify the ongoing message of water conservation

[1:28:23] In coordination with HR, staff also launched the 2025 Summer Intern and Social Media Campaign to allow our summer interns to share their internship experience through our social media platforms.

[1:28:34] Secondly, the National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agency is recognized our 2024-25.

[1:28:40] Flood awareness campaign with its second place of word of excellence in communications.

[1:28:44] This latest campaign helped increase residents positive rating of value water flood awareness work by a whopping total of 39% since 2017.

[1:28:51] and that's based on 57% of residents rating our efforts as excellent or good compared to just 18%

[1:28:57] eight years ago. And that concludes my report. Thank you.

[1:29:03] That concludes the CEO report, Mr. Chair.

[1:29:08] Great. Sure. I mean. Well, right along to

[1:29:17] a board policy planning calendar.

[1:29:19] Thank you, Chair. I just have a few quick updates to the board policy and planning calendar. The first

[1:29:24] As the stream maintenance program and environmental impact report that had a target date for the November board meeting will now be moved to the January board meeting.

[1:29:34] And the timing of this item is dependent on many external factors and may change.

[1:29:39] The climate change action plan that was adopted in 2021 with final updates will now be provided via non agenda rather than going to a committee.

[1:29:49] The draft greenhouse gas reduction plan that was presented to the board policy and monitoring committee in June 2025 will go to the full board in late 2025.

[1:30:00] Our early 2026 for plan adoption and seek approval. And finally, an update on legislative proposals and guiding

[1:30:07] principles will be going to the full board in November 2025. That's it.

[1:30:13] Thank you. So,

[1:30:18] Board Member reports and announcements. Let's see, we'll start on this side this time.

[1:30:25] to the advertising bird.

[1:30:28] Thank you. As usual, I said it in a lot of interesting meetings that I really appreciated.

[1:30:33] And also, I listened to pretty much all of the water commission, California Water Commission meeting,

[1:30:38] which was very interesting, you know, thanks for the end.

[1:30:43] So, and met with a couple constituents about various matters. Oh, and attended a meeting in Palo Alto about the upcoming project,

[1:30:51] which was exciting too.

[1:30:54] Then I spent a weekend in Wisconsin where I experienced rain.

[1:31:01] And I know it's pretty awesome water does come from the sky still in many places.

[1:31:08] And that's how agriculture and other plant life is watered there.

[1:31:15] So go figure.

[1:31:16] But yeah, I really appreciate the work of my colleagues today.

[1:31:20] and I'm excited about the future of this organization and board. So thank you.

[1:31:27] Thank you. Vice Chair. Thank you,

[1:31:38] Chair. We had to deal with the

[1:31:40] purification tour with the New Council member Pamela campus. There was excellent

[1:31:45] our staff as a great job. We just had a joint meeting with the City of San Jose.

[1:31:50] I have to tell you, that's always a really good meeting to the chance to

[1:31:53] long dialogue and just chat was really good. Just met with Mark Belsky again about

[1:31:59] the agenda for the coming environmental creek cleanup and we can't say enough about

[1:32:06] Jennifer and Mark and the job they're doing to minimize all the and how's an increase

[1:32:12] trying to make him safe. It's a difficult job and you're busy with the best they can

[1:32:16] and we just had the water and the man meeting just a couple days ago. Thank you.

[1:32:25] Yeah, so in terms of briefings, I had a briefing from staff on window outreach programs in terms of community stuff.

[1:32:38] I give a presentation to the Dean Democratic Club was at the Chamber of Barbecue and we had a really fantastic.

[1:32:45] we invited a speaker on the Delta Command's project and the Bay Delta to a rotary, the downtown

[1:32:51] center of the rotary, and that was really wonderful.

[1:32:56] Met with representative from the Sierra

[1:32:58] Club, met with a representative of Microsoft and just to I'll pause on that because I had reached

[1:33:03] out to, I was trying to get more information about data centers and the water usage of data centers

[1:33:10] in this conversation with Microsoft was so incredibly informative and I really appreciate

[1:33:19] that.

[1:33:20] And then all of this is in addition to normal committee meetings, the EWRC, the Audit

[1:33:27] Committee, the Youth Commission and the Water Supply and the Management Committee.

[1:33:36] Thank you, Chair.

[1:33:38] Since my last report, I had a briefing meeting on some of your east and west channel project.

[1:33:48] They see a P-committee meeting, the special board meeting with the City of San Jose,

[1:33:53] Use Commission meeting, Palo Alto full base and tight gauge seismic retrofit project, public meeting

[1:33:59] and while the supply demand management committee meeting.

[1:34:03] Great.

[1:34:04] The right to move on.

[1:34:06] Thank you, Chair.

[1:34:08] Yeah.

[1:34:08] I've had a series of meetings of special board meeting, whether we have the Youth Commission

[1:34:13] Meeting, awkward board meeting, monthly meeting with the Executive Director of

[1:34:19] Valet of Aqua.

[1:34:21] I also attended a very interesting meeting with Well.

[1:34:25] Well is water education for Latino leaders expressing a lack of people of color that

[1:34:33] serving on major water boards up and down the state of California. And two state legislators,

[1:34:39] both female, both Latina were there advocating for more people of color up and down the state

[1:34:46] and all our ages. And they gave examples of all the primary agencies in California that are not

[1:34:52] being served at all by people of color. It was quite eye-opening. So I was happy to participate in that meeting.

[1:34:57] So those are my reports.

[1:35:00] Thank you. And I had a number of meetings as usual with the CEO, a general council, CEO, the DCA. Also, our environmental stakeholder, our environmental stakeholder meeting we had. We, as the right times of work have raised at the meeting, the day before actually.

[1:35:25] We opened the meeting to everyone and not been done mostly because it was a stakeholder meeting that we only met with invited folks from the environmental community since we already have an environmental advisory committee.

[1:35:42] We were handling it that way but of course it will remain open for everyone from now on.

[1:35:49] We asked all of the participants as usual to, you know, give us any, any list of any people that we should invite from the environmental community.

[1:36:01] And we had a great presentation from Dr. Lyman who, in fact, I will ask to provide that to the board.

[1:36:10] Yeah, a great presentation about carbon cleanup that is naturally done by redwoods.

[1:36:17] And I thought it's very interesting topic for us to look at and perhaps participate in some way in program that he has in planning redwoods.

[1:36:31] And we could do it with a lot of the land that we have.

[1:36:33] It's a big contribution to Carbon Cleanup with not very much money.

[1:36:45] Also,

[1:36:50] a number of the audit committee, the recycle committee,

[1:36:59] and that's it.

[1:37:00] We have our strategic planning coming up on the 29th, so I'm looking forward to that.

[1:37:08] And the meeting with the City of San Jose was a very constructive meeting, very, very, very good constructive meeting, so I think we will continue to work very closely with them on a lot of the issues on housing and some of the other issues that we've been working on.

[1:37:26] Of course, with recycling, we hope by the end of this calendar year that we'll have be able to put out RFP for the for the clear water facility. So, so we're moving on right along very quickly with them and they've been very helpful to be able to get get a recycle project moving getting it on a fast track so so we're doing very well with that.

[1:37:52] Um, so ask clerk review and clarification the board request.

[1:37:58] Oh, just have the request to provide that presentation from Mr. Landman to the entire board.

[1:38:03] I will do that.

[1:38:04] And I wanted to let you know that we have a public comment.

[1:38:06] Gotcha.

[1:38:07] Urban has her case, would you like to?

[1:38:11] Gotcha.

[1:38:12] Good afternoon.

[1:38:13] Hello, again, board.

[1:38:14] Can you hear me better this time?

[1:38:16] Yes, thank you.

[1:38:18] I had my, I just want to repeat one thing for my comment.

[1:38:22] I had my hand raised for the board planning and policy calendar, and what I had said previously

[1:38:30] is I wanted to request that Pateco be added to the board planning and policy calendar so that

[1:38:36] the public can anticipate future discussions regarding the termination of the project,

[1:38:42] and another topic should be added to the calendar about the exploration for new storage enhancement projects.

[1:38:52] and also suggesting that these items should be overseen

[1:38:56] by the water supply and demand management committee.

[1:39:01] So those are my comments for the board planning

[1:39:03] and policy calendar.

[1:39:04] And I did email my full comments to the board

[1:39:08] since apparently we're not able to hear much of what I said

[1:39:12] previously.

[1:39:14] We heard you most important suggestions though.

[1:39:19] And I will, when we, in the next couple of meetings when we raise, when we look at our schedule,

[1:39:29] if by then we have a more sure date when we're going to come back with a report from staff,

[1:39:36] we'll add it to the calendar, so people know when it's coming back.

[1:39:40] So thanks for your suggestions. We'll do that.

[1:39:42] Okay, thank you. Yeah, my suggestions are forward looking so.

[1:39:46] Yes, yes. Thank you. Thanks.

[1:39:52] Okay, so the board will convene for the next special meeting at 9.30 a.m. on Friday, August 29th right here at our headquarters.

[1:40:00] Thank you all for a great meeting and we're adjourned.

Closed Session and Regular Meeting - Aug 26th, 2025

Agenda

Transcript