[0:15] Good morning, everyone.

[0:19] This is the regular board meeting and we will call this meeting to order. Starways, roll call, please.

[0:28] Director Bell Absent, Director Eisenberg Absent, Director of Stamera, Absent, Director Keegan.

[0:36] Here.

[0:38] Vice Chair Santos.

[0:41] Director Verella.

[0:43] Here.

[0:44] Chair Schwell.

[0:44] Here.

[0:47] Okay.

[0:48] That constitutes quorum of the board.

[0:49] Thank you.

[0:51] Item two.

[0:52] Close session.

[0:53] This.

[0:54] The board scheduled.

[0:55] A close session between.

[0:57] Ten.

[0:57] A clock.

[0:59] And.

[0:59] One will come back.

[1:02] Approximately one.

[1:04] PM.

[1:04] For.

[1:05] It's.

[1:06] procession. So at this point, we will be going into the

[1:10] co-session. Thank

[2:24] you.

[2:34] Okay,

[2:38] good afternoon everyone. The board just completed its

[2:42] co-session and we're coming back to the scheduled

[2:47] open session. We'll start with item 2.3 district council report closed session. So as district council to report item 2.1.

[3:00] Thank you Madam Chair, Carlos, what are you on a district council? The board meant in close session with all directors except for director Eisenberg participating with respect to item 2.2 direction to staff is given.

[3:11] Okay.

[3:15] And I would do the item 2.2.

[3:19] This is about public employee performance evaluation.

[3:25] The board members were present except director Rebecca Eisenberg.

[3:31] And then there's no reportable actions.

[3:34] What's taken?

[3:36] And now we'll move on to either 3.1, pledge of allegiance, Mr. Puffroch, you're here.

[3:46] I don't believe that's for the pledge of allegiance.

[4:05] Thank you.

[4:07] Item 3.2 orders of the day are there in the request to change the orders of the printed agenda.

[4:18] Okay, very none. Item 3.3. Time open for public comment or any item that's not on the agenda.

[4:27] Do we have the request to speak for the board?

[4:30] Thank you, Madam Chair. I have no hands raised in Zoom and I have no request to speak for members of the public.

[4:41] Okay.

[4:44] Is there any request to pull items from the consent calendar or there's, I can entertain a motion to approve consent calendar.

[4:55] So we have a motion.

[4:57] Two motions.

[5:00] All right, Vice Chair, along with the motion and then Director Estomeris, but the Director for Ella, second, the motion.

[5:09] This requires a roll call vote.

[5:13] Student roll call vote.

[5:18] Director Bell,

[5:21] Director Estomeris.

[5:23] Director Keegan, Vice Chair Santos.

[5:28] Director of Aurella.

[5:30] Chair Swayan.

[5:32] Yes.

[5:35] Motion passes.

[5:38] Okay, item 5.1, board committee reports under the attachment of item 5.1.

[5:51] We have reports from the joint research, while the resource committee, the board,

[6:02] community and also the water supply and demand management committees meeting summary. Are there any questions from board members or comments on this meeting summary? Okay, very none.

[6:20] on or move on to item

[6:26] 8.1, receive an update on cost associated with the Pacheco Reservoir

[6:34] Expansion Project, Project Number, 9195402, Santa Clara County, District 1, Mercedes County.

[6:44] And the recommendation is to receive an information on the cost associated with the Pacheco

[6:52] as a voice mentioned project. And I'm just a reminder to all of us that this is again receiving

[7:04] information on the most current information. This is not a decision or taking the action

[7:12] by the board and the board scheduled several main topics that are of our time and paying attention to and so that by the time the board is making decision on particular residential expansion project.

[7:35] We have these technical and then difficult issues already work through.

[7:42] So that's the purpose of today's item as one of those topics, the board compliance

[7:52] to go through on the regular basis.

[7:55] So is that Mr. Mkater?

[7:59] Yes, thank you, Chair.

[8:00] Good afternoon, directors.

[8:01] And thank you for that introduction, Chair.

[8:04] You described it well.

[8:05] This isn't an update on the cost.

[8:07] This is just a project update in the topic.

[8:09] It is the costs and financing.

[8:11] So, appreciate that.

[8:12] I've got about seven slides of content here that I can go through relatively quickly.

[8:17] We brought this presentation to the water supply and demand management committee on May 17th.

[8:22] And I had some follow-ups.

[8:24] We have a handout attached with Q&A from the Sierra Club and some responses to their

[8:30] questions they had during that committee meeting. And so those are also attached to the agenda.

[8:39] Okay, so what we wanted to do here is really differentiate the different cost figures that are

[8:45] being thrown out there for this project. And really that breaks down into the total project

[8:51] costs and the finance costs are kind of the main two figures that we deal with regularly.

[8:56] So, first we start out with a construction cost estimate. That's the purple rectangle you see there.

[9:01] There, currently we have a 30% estimate that has other contingencies applied to it, well,

[9:07] is inflation, but what you see there is about a $2 billion price tag for the construction

[9:12] phase.

[9:14] So one of the follow-up questions we had was the numbers that we provided on the added up to

[9:19] about $1.8 billion, so that other $200 million is for the soft cost or construction like

[9:25] construction management and engineering services during construction, which is one to answer

[9:29] question right out in front. So then we take that cost and then we add in our design costs which I'll

[9:36] go over on the next slide and in the planning environmental phase stuff real estate so that's

[9:40] not about another 200 million. So that gives us our our five year CIP total project cost without inflation.

[9:47] We put all these numbers into the CIP model for each year and then what we intend will spend

[9:51] throughout construction throughout the entire project and those numbers get calculated and

[9:56] formulas for inflation and get spit out basically our final.

[10:00] Total Project costs in the CIP. You see there is about 2.8 billion. And now you can start seeing a discrepancy between the FY2428 and the FY2529 numbers. And that's because there were changes to that formula that they used to calculate the inflation. So that was done with a review of market trends and using an outside consultant to look at projected inflation throughout those years. So that's why you see discrepancy between those two CIP reports.

[10:30] So the next we have the projected finance cost, so this is something we don't typically

[10:35] just talk about in great detail in our total project cost and what the finance cost will

[10:42] be.

[10:43] But because of the size of this project, there has been a lot of questions on what it will

[10:47] take to pay for this project, the full finance cost.

[10:51] So the fourth bubble you see there is a projected finance cost with 35% partnership assumption.

[10:57] And the last one you see there is the projected finance cost without the 35% partnership.

[11:02] So there's a slide later on that we've shared before that I'll go into in more detail about what all that means and what the different financing is.

[11:14] Okay, so this is a breakdown of that total project costs beyond what was shown on the previous slide in these different categories for planning, design, environmental, right away, real estate, and then also the construction.

[11:26] So you can see that it was top four rectangles.

[11:28] Those that up to about 200 million,

[11:31] then you've got your construction base at $2 billion.

[11:33] That's where we come up with the uninflated CIP value

[11:36] of $2.2 billion.

[11:38] And then as I mentioned, we put that into the CIP model

[11:41] with time considered and when all that money will be spent

[11:44] and then inflate a cost comes back to $2.75 billion.

[11:47] So let's just showing how that all goes into the model.

[11:55] So moving on to our expenditures to date.

[11:56] There's been questions about our expenditures

[11:58] and how much money we've spent and what it's being spent on, so there's a, this is a, just a little bit more of a broken down summary here.

[12:06] These different categories as I mentioned on the previous slide at what we spent so far for the planning environmental design.

[12:12] And right away, and you can see the breakdown in those columns includes both labor and services and supply.

[12:18] So labor is value water staff.

[12:20] It's been paid value water staff to develop a project over the years, and the services and supplies are consultants and other contractors that we pay.

[12:28] And there will be further breakdowns on that.

[12:31] In fact, there's another handout along with the agenda that has a much more

[12:36] broken out version that has exactly which consultant we paid and how much

[12:40] over these different years the project development.

[12:45] And then you can see that breakdown in the categories of the services

[12:48] and the files there on the right as well.

[12:51] So putting all that data out there.

[12:55] Okay.

[12:56] So project funding got a few different things in the air here that we're dealing with

[13:00] funding this project. So I'm just going to go over these. This is not a high chart. This is just really just showing four different kind of sources.

[13:07] And I'm going to start with the lower left with the water storage investment program grant. This is the application we submitted in 2017 and we're awarded

[13:15] conditionally $504 million in grant funding in 2018 from the California Water Commission.

[13:23] So we went through our process and remained eligible in 2021 that was part of the requirements

[13:30] for the water storage investment program. And then we also have been reimbursed $24.2 million

[13:36] in early funding. That was initially 5% of our conditional award we were able to use to develop the project.

[13:43] And the remainder of those funds will be available once we get all the approvals to begin construction and start building the project. That's when the rest of that grant money will become available.

[13:54] Next up is the WIFI alone. I'm going to go counterclockwise and you'll see why on the next slide.

[13:59] WIFI alone is federal financing. So it's essentially alone and we do have to pay that back.

[14:05] We were, I'm conditionally awarded a $1.4 billion loan from the Environmental Protection Agency.

[14:12] And we did close a loan for $92 million for planning designed to help finance the cost that we've been incurring so far developing the project.

[14:22] Next up, top right, we have the Water Utility Fund, and this is what the rate pairs are paying through the Water Utility.

[14:27] And that's from water rates, so you can see the breakdown there, 84% from zone W2, 16% from zone W5.

[14:35] That's throughout the years of the project, as well as the financing years.

[14:39] You'll see that on the next slide.

[14:41] And then lastly, on the upper left, we have the value water partners.

[14:44] So we did have a target participation of 35% to maximize the partners.

[14:49] Still make the project beneficial to value water with that maximum amount.

[14:54] And there is no, just want to know that there is no requirement of participation with the California Water Commission.

[14:59] This is a Valley Water.

[15:02] Okay,

[15:08] so we've shared this slide before, but this is kind of just going through the different funding sources and how the project is financed.

[15:16] So, you'll see I'll go in the same order, I went on the previous slide and how the financing gets applied to the project.

[15:22] So, column B, you can see the capital costs, that's what we're spending in these years.

[15:27] And you can see FY 19 through 23 there's the top and you see the breakdown at five years at a time to sum up with those costs would be because we're going way out in the future there at the bottom out to FY 67.

[15:39] So we can see in Column B those are the actual costs that we're going to be paying out to contractors and consultants to build the project.

[15:45] Column C that has our our prop one grant or the wiss it with funding that five hundred and four million dollars and you see how we project that will be paid back.

[15:55] the value water to compensate for those costs and column B. Next up you have the withia debt proceeds

[16:01] that are our loans will be taken out and those will be applied back to the column B to the

[16:06] capital cost of responding. And then in column E you see the revenue debt proceeds through the

[16:14] the debt financing through regular bonds we do for most of our other projects that will be

[16:19] contributing back to the project cost will be spending in column B. And then in column F this is where

[16:25] value water gets back into paying for the wifthialones as well as those bonds and calling G.

[16:31] So you can see throughout the years and out years what we will be paying to pay back those

[16:37] funds that were borrowed through Wifthia or through the bond debt service.

[16:43] And lastly, you have calling H. This is with the assumption of 35% partner payments that would

[16:47] compensate throughout those years and offset our financing costs and bring us down to basically

[16:53] cash flow to pay for the project. So we also wanted to show here what the cost would be without

[16:59] the partners. And so basically you just delete column H and you lose that incentive of paying

[17:04] back some part of that money. And so you can see the total there would go from 3.1 or about 3.2

[17:12] billion with finance costs to about 5.3 billion for our total cost with financing without partners.

[17:22] Okay, so I know that was a lot on that slide, but I'll move on and can answer questions at the end.

[17:32] This slide shows those projected rate impacts for what the water utility rate pairs will be paying.

[17:38] And this is a breakdown that shows three different terms from F by 29 to 33, FY 34 to 53.

[17:45] So that's kind of a current children's generation, then the next generation beyond that, out to FY 67.

[17:53] So, this is what we would expect the average monthly impact would be to the average household each month.

[18:01] They'd be paying.

[18:02] So, for example, let's say, without partners between FY 29 to FY33, it's about $11 per month,

[18:11] more that rate per would be paying more that the Jacob project.

[18:15] So, they can see the table below just in another way to break out the same information,

[18:20] but then also including what those dollars for acre foot impacts would be.

[18:29] Okay, this is the last slide for the

[18:30] presentation that has content and this is just a summary of the WIFI program just a lot of notes

[18:35] and really summarizing what all the terms of that program are. There's been a lot of questions about that.

[18:40] So I just want to put that out here. I will not read it to you, but it's all there in the presentation.

[18:45] There's any questions. I can take the note.

[18:49] Okay, thank you Ryan.

[18:52] questions from board member?

[19:01] Okay, so can you press the button?

[19:05] I actually have Director Keegan first.

[19:08] If you press the button, then I can press enough.

[19:12] Yeah, okay.

[19:13] Then we'll go with Director Bell.

[19:17] Is it all?

[19:17] Okay.

[19:19] Okay.

[19:20] What's the cost, the total cost of the imported water with the

[19:28] Pachaco project and without the Pachaco project?

[19:33] Total cost of the imported water would not change with or without the project.

[19:38] That would be a rate paid to either the Bureau of Reclamation through our central

[19:42] product or capital cost.

[19:45] As far as, do you mean what it would cost to store it in Pachaco, like the pumping cost?

[19:50] These are total costs of the imported water, operational

[19:53] capital with the Particle Project and without the Particle Project.

[20:00] I don't think I have that information in front of the readily available, but I think I know what you're asking is if we didn't have a particular project just importing the water that may be, you know, what it's projected to be now, there would be no change, but then there may be, maybe there's no other costs.

[20:15] that's right, there'd be like the system,

[20:17] there'd be like deltamin dota canal, probably just sites

[20:21] reservoir, delta, advance, project, other projects, OK?

[20:30] So I asked this before, that's why I'm raising it now.

[20:34] I haven't gotten an answer yet, though.

[20:35] I'd like to know what the cost is.

[20:38] That's all.

[20:39] I would like to have that prepared.

[20:41] I mean, it's not available.

[20:42] So it's kind of hard to judge the comparative cost when you're only looking at one aspect.

[20:51] Okay.

[20:52] So that's the kind of thing I think we need to see and it would help us in evaluating this.

[21:07] What would be the total cost of importing water, all the import water cost?

[21:11] So, the cost is to move it's operation, deliver it's capital and then compare that to, you know, like, the rest of the budget and look at the other aspects of our water supply program, figure out whether that's cost effective.

[21:35] So, I, you know, we're sort of having a study session here,

[21:41] so I asked this question before.

[21:44] I think it's important to get.

[21:46] I haven't got it yet.

[21:48] I'd like to know.

[21:49] Thank you.

[21:50] Yeah.

[21:51] Well, thank you for asking the question again.

[21:53] I think that's the purpose of this.

[21:55] All right.

[21:56] The sessions, which is new.

[21:58] We do need to figure out a way that,

[22:01] When questions are asked, doing these sessions,

[22:05] how do the response come back to,

[22:09] so make sure that everybody's on the same pace.

[22:13] I think we do need to figure that out.

[22:16] So Rick, do you have something related to this before

[22:19] call director Kiki?

[22:20] Yes, Madam Chair, we're a calendar CEO.

[22:23] I did want to respond.

[22:24] Through the chair to the right to Bell.

[22:25] I know the right to Bell has asked, actually,

[22:27] a couple times the cost of imported water.

[22:29] We are compiling that, and we will be providing, we have our water supply master plan update on the 25th, so it's your next meeting that you'll be able to look at a comparison of the cost of all the different types of water that's moving forward and immediately following that.

[22:45] You'll have a presentation on the Delta Finance project, and so we will make sure that you have that information prior to that, so then you can look at the cost of imported water versus other kinds of water supply projects recycled water,

[22:57] to take a look, etc. So there will be a lot of detail in next two weeks for now's presentation.

[23:08] Yeah, thank you. I appreciate that. I'd like to maybe get the components of what you

[23:18] consider important water. I would consider the ones I mentioned, but maybe the water bank

[23:28] programs that we have, other kinds of operational costs. So we get the total financial costs

[23:35] to the Sanctuary Valley Water District. So we understand the cumulative cost of importing water.

[23:46] And just have that information broken down so we can understand it. And it should be done

[23:58] cost over time, you know, like as you did on this particular project, you know,

[24:05] Chaco,

[24:09] I had one more question if I could. What is the current status of the sharing

[24:19] discussions regarding the Chaco project with the 35% of the class going coming from

[24:30] some other party.

[24:36] What is that?

[24:37] Status of our discussions on partnerships, is that?

[24:40] Yeah, you put it in your program, your presentation.

[24:43] You said, you kind of like said,

[24:45] OK, it's going to be $2 billion, more than $2 billion coming

[24:49] from this source.

[24:52] And since you put it in your program,

[24:56] maybe

[24:57] to be an important to understand that a little more.

[25:02] And I'd like to find out who we talking about sharing. We had a discussion before. We had a few months ago, but I want to know if there's any current information regarding that or contacts or inquiries regarding that.

[25:22] So what is the status of that? And where would be our potential sources for that?

[25:30] Sure. Yes, so we have had several conversations with different different groups.

[25:36] There's some interest, but we are working to develop more information on how the operations

[25:41] will pan out with our water rights. There's a lot of technical details and how we'll

[25:46] be using the facility and how that ties into our water rights and also with our agreements

[25:50] with both the state water project and central value projects. There's a lot of new

[25:59] water related projects, and so we're kind of work out those details so we can really

[26:04] present a package of what is possible to these interested partners.

[26:09] So it'd be government agencies?

[26:12] Correct, yeah, water agencies.

[26:14] So other government agencies have a process regarding purchasing water from a

[26:19] patriarchal project as well?

[26:21] Yeah, they've expressed interest.

[26:23] We've given them presentations and had conversations.

[26:25] we did a presentation to the Central Coast Water Authority to one of their committees,

[26:32] can't remember, it was earlier this year, representative, they represent several water agencies

[26:37] along the Central Coast, including Santa Barbara and the Pomo and other state water project agencies.

[26:44] I think it's important that since we're talking about $2 million that just become a more

[26:53] transparent process, and I have real questions about whether or not it's transparent enough

[27:01] for the public interest in light of the fact that we're asking them to pay for such

[27:07] a large project. So I don't, I don't deserve this as it stands out adequately transparent.

[27:14] And I think at some point we can address that.

[27:20] Yeah. Yeah, it was a public meeting with the Central Coast Water Authority and the materials are all out there.

[27:25] Be able to the public. We're happy to share that presentation with you.

[27:31] Okay.

[27:32] Director Kigan.

[27:35] Thank you, Director Shua.

[27:39] You preface this presentation director's show up by saying today is not the day when we're going to be making decisions on whether to support this project or not, and I think that begs the question, when will we make the decision number one and number two, how much money will we have extended by that time.

[28:06] And I just want to, and before getting an answer to that, I want to refer to a communication

[28:15] we receive from Ms. Rita Norton, who is a very well-regarded environmentalist, as well as having

[28:25] worked for another public agency. And she asked a couple of questions, and she's asking us

[28:33] directors to indicate at what point would this project no longer be feasible to us if some

[28:43] of our expectations don't hold out. So at what point if there aren't additional funding partners

[28:50] would we continue to support the project? And at what cost forecast would we no longer support

[28:57] the project. You know, the worst case exposure right now is 5.5 billion, but if we look at the

[29:05] historical increases in our project costs, it's not at all unusual for projects to double

[29:11] in cost. So getting back to my original point is when are we currently expecting that this board

[29:22] will make a formal decision as to continue to pursue the project and how much money will we have

[29:28] expended by that point.

[29:37] So I think you're asking me that question and actually I was referring

[29:42] to staff but if you want to take a stab at it. I don't want to, I'm not sure I can take a stab at it

[29:49] So one thing I do want to stress is that we've always this board, not being personally or me personally too, that as part of the board, that

[30:00] We're making these future investment decisions as part of the Water Supply Master Plan study process.

[30:12] And so we have multiple opportunities that we're all looking at.

[30:18] And right now, there's not a opportunity that we're at the point that we say that's dropped this opportunity or that's keep this opportunity.

[30:26] So, and we, we said that our staff, that that's what the supply of massive planning process is supporting the board to make investment for the future.

[30:38] Investment for future includes water conservation, purified water, and maybe storage, and stone water retention, even though there are lots of things that we're looking at.

[30:51] So, anyway, if staff have anything to add to that with the time gone, they'll be good.

[30:57] Yeah, thank you, Jared. Thanks for the question, Director Keegan.

[31:00] I think that said that WARS Prime Master Plan is really going to give us a lot more information

[31:04] on decision-making, on moving forward with the project. There's a lot of projects out there that

[31:09] you'll be hearing more about in two weeks. The CEO, Caroliner mentioned, and you know,

[31:15] weighing a which project to move forward with will be, you know, ultimately a decision that comes out

[31:19] water supply master plan process just to add the natural decision points for the board directors

[31:26] for any project are typically approving the final EIR which we anticipate in 2026 and then also

[31:34] approving the project to go to advertise for bits for construction bits which we anticipate in 2027.

[31:41] So those are the natural points at which the board would make you know final decisions whether

[31:47] before or not.

[31:51] So I don't feel like my question has been completely responded to. So what I

[31:56] just heard is what we could make a decision at the time of reviewing the water supply master plan.

[32:05] We could make a decision at the point where we finalize the EIR or we could make a decision

[32:15] when we decide to award a project and each and I agree with that. But each of those points,

[32:24] there will be a dollar figure associated with our expenditures. And I think what we're hearing

[32:32] from the public is they do have a concern about the cost and the cost is going to be ever

[32:36] increasing. Obviously, the further we go along that timeline. So I'm not sure that you

[32:45] have an answer right now as to what those costs might be, but I think it's important.

[32:51] From a sense of transparency, as my colleague, Director Bell brought up, is to provide

[32:58] that information.

[33:01] And just parenthetically, I'll say that I feel like we're taking a very sort of narrow engineering

[33:11] approach S and we want to have a definitive analysis, right? Like, how much is something actually going to cost?

[33:23] And I think what we're hearing from the Sierra Club, what we're hearing from is Norton is we don't have to take something, you know, to the, the very, the very end process at some point we could say we don't have any funding partners.

[33:39] should we continue? And that could happen before we have an approved environmental document.

[33:46] It was certainly happened before we were ready to award a project. And also, if, as frequently

[33:53] happens, as almost universally happens with our projects, that we see a big project increase.

[34:01] And, you know, I'm not, I'm not saying that it's unexpected for project budgets to go up,

[34:06] particularly the projects like this where there's many, many moving parts and things can increase,

[34:14] but historically we see cost increases, not cost reductions and not staying the same as before.

[34:22] So my perspective and this I'm saying to my colleagues here is I think that Miss Norton brings up some good points,

[34:30] which is, there may come a point where we say the project isn't feasible, or it is feasible,

[34:38] but we should have criteria that we're going to be applying.

[34:43] So that's just, you know, my input, but I would like to know, what are the expenditures

[34:51] going to be at those three inflection points or decision points that you talked about, and

[34:58] You may not have the answers right now, but I...

[35:00] I would like to see those answers.

[35:02] Surely we can get those answers.

[35:05] Thank you.

[35:06] Okay.

[35:07] I do think Director Keegan raised an important point.

[35:16] I mean, we're being talking about decision making for this project.

[35:20] And one, there's likely it could be more than one decision and then the decision of the point that if we determine that 35% partnership is just not feasible then that should be continuing and that can be a point that on the board have some serious discussion.

[35:49] So, Director Eisenberg,

[35:55] thank you.

[35:56] I'm grateful to Director Keegan and Director Bell for raising some of the questions I've been raising for a year and a half.

[36:04] That still don't have answers.

[36:06] But I do want to take this opportunity to thank you to staff for doing something else I've been asking for for a long time, which is listing the parties.

[36:17] that have been receiving some of this money.

[36:21] I'm really grateful.

[36:22] I do see that you've responded to that

[36:24] and I'm very grateful for that.

[36:26] So thank you so much for spending the time.

[36:28] I'm doing that and now that you've done that,

[36:31] I want to ask you for clarification about it.

[36:35] So here when you look at the budget,

[36:38] you see that the vast largest piece of the budget

[36:43] is consulting services, almost 62 million.

[36:47] Right? And that is really, you know, for means of efficiency and transparency and accountability, that's really the piece that's also, I think is the most important to break down.

[37:02] It's also the piece that is most right for abuse as stated in the outside auditors recommendation when you have a, you know, as is known in the auditing world when you have a category like consulting.

[37:13] often you have situations with the huge money projects, not just here, and I'm not making

[37:20] any accusation as to here. But that's why you have an auditing function. You know, that's

[37:24] where you would theoretically have things like two different consultants paid for the same project,

[37:30] which is just a very kind of like common correction, you know, action for, you know, which is why there's

[37:38] auditing. Just to confirm that there was no problem like that left. So I guess I would want to say

[37:43] that that consulting line to be broken down.

[37:46] And when I look at the, in particular,

[37:48] when I look at the P.E.s that you were very,

[37:51] you know, what you visited, which again,

[37:54] for which I'm so grateful.

[37:56] When you look at the P.E.s,

[37:58] you will see, there's not really any kind of explanation.

[38:03] So, you know, I'm guessing Solurium is a law corporation

[38:06] that that's probably listed under consultants.

[38:09] But that $155,000 that we paid to them

[38:11] was actually a penalty for the varying motions that we filed that I earlier had urged that

[38:19] district council not to file for which I was actually censored for telling him not to file.

[38:24] Those were the motions. That was the penalty we paid for those motions that we lost in court

[38:31] and we lost in court and such a humiliating and large way where we did look like d-bags.

[38:37] You know like I said we probably would that we actually were required to pay the legal fees of

[38:41] the other side. So that 155,000 is how we paid for the legal fees for the party that sued us.

[38:51] So we paid the legal fees for the party that sued us, making them whole, that's how wrong we were

[38:57] according to the court. So I think that doesn't belong in consulting services. That's like a penalty

[39:04] we paid for what the court decided were extremely egregiously bad decisions made by the legal

[39:12] functions. So that needs to be separated out. Additionally, I also saw that we made a payment

[39:18] to one of the parties that actually is suing us. That's only because I'm familiar with what

[39:26] these parties are and because I was opposed to the actions that we took that, of course, I noticed

[39:32] when we were forced to pay the law fee,

[39:34] legal fees, of the other side who sued us.

[39:37] So I think it'd be helpful to have these broken down

[39:40] because I don't know what these different payments are for,

[39:43] and I think the public from a point of view of transparency

[39:45] deserves to know, like when it comes to consultants,

[39:47] what are we considering consultancies?

[39:49] Are we considering salori-misserve?

[39:51] I don't think that belongs there.

[39:54] So most of the breakdown, most of this money

[39:56] is, of course, paid to ACOM, which is helpful.

[40:00] But it might be good to know what exactly we paid them for. Same with mock McDonald's, you know, those of us who are new, we not know exactly what the difference is between McDonald and E. Cup. So it's just kind of a summary. You know, I say this, well, also getting a lot of gratitude to you for doing this, because this is so helpful.

[40:18] It's really what the public deserves and what I've been asking for. So with gratitude, I mean, no criticism, just give us a little more information also.

[40:27] And then finally, I do want to say it, it's been brought up now, okay, I was sworn in December 2022 and now it's June 20, 24, like since that day, many of us have been actually just asking for that deadline that is referred to by Director Keegan, it's really, you know, for a year and a half, we've been saying, what is your deadline when you're finally going to admit, you know, that we're not going to get, you know, people to help pay for this project.

[40:57] And there've been no zero financial commitments.

[41:01] Sure, lots of people are in favor of this project

[41:04] when they get it for free,

[41:06] who wouldn't be in favor of something

[41:07] that they get for free, but, you know,

[41:10] without agreeing committing to spending money on it,

[41:14] that's not any kind of commitment.

[41:16] It's basically like waiting in line

[41:18] at a true, like Steve Jobs House for true trading,

[41:21] where you know, you're gonna get a big bad account.

[41:23] Anybody would put their name on that list.

[41:26] So, Steve Johnson widows house.

[41:29] And his memory would be a blessing.

[41:31] So, I think we, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask

[41:34] what that deadline is.

[41:37] And, you know, I hope the chair will take leadership,

[41:41] because I've heard the chair actually,

[41:43] you know, mentioned this also in the past.

[41:45] Just pick a day, any day.

[41:47] It's now been what like, how many years, seven years,

[41:50] eight years, do you know, Ryan?

[41:52] How many years we've been trying to get partners for this?

[41:55] So partners weren't part of the original project concept that was that came out in 2021.

[42:00] That was one of the earlier slides. The date was on their flea beach April.

[42:04] Okay. So anyone? So we're about three years in. Yeah.

[42:07] Okay. And since that time, the price of the project has gone up.

[42:11] The price of the project was already. That's actually what stimulated the idea to have partners

[42:15] when the project cost went up. Okay. That wasn't the history I was given of it.

[42:20] But okay. I'll still let you and say that's it. The price has gone up because interest rates have

[42:25] considerably. So that means the price has gone up.

[42:31] You can disagree, but it's just a

[42:32] fact-jack, as they say. So interest rates have gone up, which means the price of the

[42:36] project has gone up. We all know the price of the project has gone up because everything

[42:39] is more expensive now than it was three years ago. So do you think it's more or less likely to

[42:44] get financial partners now to hire price than it was at a lower price, assuming that it is a

[42:50] higher price, doesn't make it easier or harder in your experience? That's hard to say. I don't

[42:54] know exactly what their needs are and what their cost thresholds are.

[42:58] Well, universally it's much harder to get interest

[43:01] at a higher price than it is at a lower price.

[43:04] That's like one of the fundamental rules of economics.

[43:06] When you have a higher price, you have less demand.

[43:09] We have a much higher price.

[43:11] So the likelihood of getting a partner now is lower than it was three years ago.

[43:16] So I think it's reasonable now to have a deadline.

[43:21] And I hope the chair will pick a deadline, maybe December 31, 2024. Why not? Because as we delay with this deadline, we're spending money. That doesn't belong to us.

[43:35] And we owe it to the right pairs. And just as into the taxpayers, not to spend their money, when we could stop spending their money, let's just have a deadline.

[43:46] everybody wants it. It was not some of my colleagues. It makes us

[43:50] sweet. And so I hope if nothing else happens, the chair will decide to do that. Thank you.

[43:57] Director Estromera. Thank you, Madam Chair. We're looking at other storage

[44:03] opportunities, aren't we? That's correct. We're looking to be partners with

[44:07] other in other projects. And how long have we been doing that? How long have we been

[44:13] negotiating and looking at other projects to participate as partners?

[44:18] It's been a while. I don't know off top my head, but there's actually some upcoming presentations at the water supply demand management committee on Monday, where you'll hear a little bit more detail and maybe be able to ask those questions for

[44:30] Let's prepare us sites.

[44:31] That's what we didn't commit and signed up first week for the first year.

[44:38] Any of these projects as partners.

[44:43] I don't have an answer to why we committed.

[44:45] Why didn't we sign?

[44:47] Why didn't we?

[44:48] We come partners.

[44:49] Completely commit.

[44:51] Because we didn't know the cost because the projects weren't there yet.

[44:55] No difference in this project.

[44:59] So when we talk about it.

[45:00] We've got wanting and hoping to get more partners and engage in negotiations just like we're doing with these other projects.

[45:08] It takes time because you got to get to a point where the project is designed in the chores so that people know what the project is going to be like.

[45:17] What the project is going to cost. What the water is going to cost and so on.

[45:23] And it's no different than what we are engaging with other prospective partners in other projects, like Sykes, all of the carols.

[45:36] It's not different.

[45:38] They did come up with a cost the first week, the first year.

[45:50] Thank you, Director Keegan.

[45:52] Thank you very much.

[45:53] You know, I just looked up the central coast water authority and looked at their overall budget, and it looks to me like their annual budget.

[46:07] They say they're total that they're recommending or were recommending for the fiscal year 23, 24 budget was about 56 and a half million dollars.

[46:21] And so I think it would be helpful as we come forward with potential partners to actually identify, you know, how much money they have available because

[46:35] 56 and a half million dollars total budget

[46:40] doesn't seem to indicate that they would be able to contribute a lot

[46:48] I think just having that information available will help us put it in context because we could have a large number of people interested or agencies interested in participating but if they don't have the financial wherewithal to make up that 35% you know that's something we have to consider so it would be helpful I think if we had that information provided to us so thank you.

[47:10] Yeah, through the chair, maybe unclear what they're financing terms could be with borrowing or other types of money to invest in something it's it's hard to say it's hard to speak for them. I can't really do that.

[47:22] Yeah, we can't speak for them, but we can certainly identify what they're.

[47:26] Yeah, we can do this right now because thank you.

[47:29] Okay, for the questions on board, okay,

[47:38] director of Iran.

[47:40] Thank you, Chair.

[47:41] This isn't a question.

[47:42] It's just some observations recently.

[47:45] Conversations that I've been engaged in.

[47:49] Many of you are aware that in addition to value water.

[47:53] I have privileged to sit on several other.

[47:55] boards and directors of other agencies, one being Aqua, which is the Association of California.

[48:02] Water agencies, there are 477 members, small meeting in large water managers and water agencies.

[48:08] It's very similar to Valley Water.

[48:12] And then the San Luis Delta Mendoza Water Authority,

[48:15] where myself, director Santos and director Val, sit on that board.

[48:19] And that's pretty much agriculture from the Bakersfield to Sacramento in that valley.

[48:29] Some of the largest water managers in the state, perhaps in the country, are in that region.

[48:35] And that's primarily sort of agriculture. And valley waters in a unique situation.

[48:41] We are one of the only water agencies in the state of California that serves both urban and agriculture.

[48:48] Agriculture still survives and thrives in Santa Clara County.

[48:53] Many of you that were here many years ago remember that this region was once called value

[48:57] of heart still light.

[48:59] Before in the mid-70s it became Silicon Valley where we went from processing apricot chips

[49:05] to Silicon chips.

[49:07] So the demand for water from the urban area is enormous and we continue to grow and develop

[49:13] in our regions in our area in Silicon Valley, Santa Clara County is no different.

[49:16] We are growing. Yes, people are leaving, but people are also coming in and the unique

[49:22] this about agriculture is the fact that that's our food source. And I attended a board meeting

[49:30] this week with the aqua board of directors and there was a presentation by agriculture.

[49:37] But one of our members would in Bardo, who sits on the advice president of Harris Wetch, and

[49:43] The purpose slash shows that they also manage cattle, and you may be familiar with who they are.

[49:49] And he's also a educator at the CS2 program in Fresno, California State University on agriculture, and food supply in water management.

[49:58] So when we look at this, and I look at this.

[50:00] Those two ways that were providing water for our constituents for you and I, but we also have to provide water for our agriculture to keep it thriving.

[50:08] And that's a large percentage of water that we use here in the state, and the region goes to agriculture.

[50:14] So, when we look at water storage, up and down the state, people are looking for additional partnerships where they can, and to develop and build water storage in those regions as well.

[50:26] We're no different. We're planning for our future. It's not going to happen tomorrow.

[50:30] It's going to happen way beyond the fact that I'm no longer part of this board and the rest of us will be replaced.

[50:37] So we're looking at the future of what our water needs are. And cutting us costs are escalating on everything.

[50:43] You know, I remember when I back in my day, I paid 12 cents a gallon for gas for fuel for my car.

[50:48] on being $5.50, $5.50 a loaf of bread with what? $39, $3.00 and $2.50 and so on and so on.

[50:58] When we look at these things, we really have to look at it with an open mind. As far as what

[51:04] we're looking at costs, the reality is we don't know what those costs are today. That's why we're

[51:09] having these discussions and looking at the future and planning them. We're not making any decisions

[51:13] today. We're getting information that you were providing to us and we are responding to that.

[51:20] And when we're ready to make that decision, believe me, you'll be engaged in that conversation.

[51:24] But remember, again, food supply is very much a important part of what we're engaged in,

[51:29] and that's agriculture, and we support agriculture as well as our urban needs, which are you and I.

[51:35] Thank you. Thank you. Director Eisenberg.

[51:40] Just putting out here that the agricultural community is opposed to the particular dam.

[51:45] They do listen at the agricultural committee meetings.

[51:49] They're opposed to this.

[51:50] So we're really going to help agriculture.

[51:52] The first thing we could do is listen to the farmers.

[51:56] And actually respond to their needs.

[51:59] And they are opposed to this.

[52:01] As are the water retailers are opposed to this.

[52:05] So it's just always I think it's I think it's a bit arrogance.

[52:10] to say we know better than the farmers about what's best for the farmers, and the farmers say

[52:15] this is a bad idea. So, we got to listen to them. Sorry. And not sorry. And so, you know, one

[52:24] of the problem, many problems with this project is that the community is opposed to us. As a reminder

[52:31] to my colleagues and to the public, we are being used with regard to this. We are being sued to

[52:38] stop this by our own constituents, and by the people we are supposed to be serving, the people

[52:46] who are suing us include the Alma-Mutsen Tribal Band. The indigenous population here is suing

[52:54] us to stop it. It's not just guessing what they feel. They are suing us to stop it. We know they

[53:01] proposed to it. The Sierra Club, which represents environmental interest in our environmental

[53:08] constituency, is suing us to stop it and private land owners, including ranchers and farmers

[53:17] in the private side are also suing us to stop it. So I think it's at this point, it is

[53:24] and earlier, it is simply goes against the facts and logic and reason for us to claim that this

[53:31] good for farmers. When farmers have stated their opinion, have stood us and have made

[53:39] it clear, they don't want this. So I just needed to add some facts to this. Thank you.

[53:55] District Council, do you have something related to this or have another director involved?

[54:01] Yes, Madam Chair, just briefly for the charity for the public. There's no currently pending lawsuit

[54:06] against Valley Water, but they had to this project.

[54:08] Okay, thank you.

[54:10] Director Bill.

[54:11] I'm sorry.

[54:12] I need to say, we lost the lawsuit.

[54:14] They sued us and they won, and we lost.

[54:19] Director Bill?

[54:25] When we develop a partner, do we look at our climate change policy, and our energy use policy,

[54:37] And in terms of evaluating those kinds of projects,

[54:47] I think the obvious thing is that

[54:53] So, Coastal Range, Mount Hamilton Range, and...

[55:00] We'll light the agriculture on the other side, and then there's other agricultural interest that are on the same side as the particular reservoir down to power river, for example.

[55:21] is the use of electric power or power to pump water part of the idea of having a partner,

[55:33] to pump the water somewhere where you mentioned Santa Barbara. That's quite a long way to

[55:38] That would engage significant amount of energy use.

[55:46] Is that correct?

[55:49] That would be correct.

[55:51] However, that type of partnership would have to be

[55:54] done through an exchange of water.

[55:57] That they would otherwise have delivered.

[56:01] And so, in a wet year, they would they would bank water

[56:04] in Bacheco.

[56:05] And then in a rire or time when they wanted it,

[56:08] they would basically do what we do in exchange.

[56:10] And then they have to use power to pump the water.

[56:13] We would send our water, it wouldn't come to Pachaco.

[56:15] It wouldn't physically come from Pachaco.

[56:16] It would come through the system.

[56:18] It would come through a system.

[56:20] The perid state water project system.

[56:21] Yeah.

[56:21] So we have to engage other partners to transport the water, correct?

[56:26] Yeah, there's a lot of nuances on how these things will have to work through the water projects.

[56:33] Okay, I'm one of our policies is to increase regional self-reliance through water conservation and reuse and incentivize water conservation and promote stone water capture and so forth.

[56:57] that's one of our existing, existing policies.

[57:03] In terms of planning for water supply,

[57:07] one of our policies is to reduce impact on climate change

[57:12] and a certainly energy use is an impact on climate change.

[57:20] And I believe I'm asking that in light of the letter

[57:25] from Rita Norton.

[57:28] Of course, Rita was our energy director for the City of San Jose

[57:32] when I was on the San Jose City Council.

[57:35] So she is quite experienced in that particular issue.

[57:43] If we have discussions with partners

[57:47] and their public agencies shouldn't that be a public discussion

[57:52] and is there a process to report those discussions

[57:55] to the board of directors and get direction?

[57:59] Yeah, I think eventually we would be at a stage where those would be more or less public

[58:04] discussions through some sort of, you know, open public meeting with those water agency,

[58:09] but we're right now just presenting what we're working on, what are the details are and

[58:15] just looking for perspective partners.

[58:18] So you're having a list of perspectives, partners are going to other elected officials, essentially

[58:25] and presenting this idea,

[58:31] in that case, I think it's very important that we have report

[58:34] that goes to the board directors exactly who you are presenting these discussions too,

[58:42] so the board can be informed that you're talking to other elected officials.

[58:48] I think that's necessary. It's a transparency issue and I think it's

[58:53] And then what is the discussion, the prim, do we have primers for those discussions?

[58:59] What are the primers?

[59:02] So those kinds of issues have to be addressed still.

[59:07] I'm not, it's not in a way of criticize.

[59:09] I'm just saying we have to recognize if you're talking to other agencies, public agencies.

[59:16] There are obviously getting directions from their board.

[59:22] And the boarder of being informed that Valley Waters doing this project and they're,

[59:31] they would like to know whether or not we want to participate, et cetera.

[59:38] The Valley Water Board would like to know who you're talking to.

[59:43] I think that's fair.

[59:46] I understand.

[59:47] I think that's a public process and we should have more transparency.

[59:51] that's one of the reasons I think we should have more transparency. And we should know what the parameters are.

[1:00:00] So those are some questions. Madam Chair, we're not really making decisions today, but I'm raising some issues. I think is important.

[1:00:10] There's no transparency. It presents a problematic situation to me as an elected official that direction is not being given by the board about the parameters and who we talk to, what kind of impacts they have.

[1:00:28] So, I would like to see answers to these questions in the future.

[1:00:36] Thank you.

[1:00:37] Thank you.

[1:00:39] And you all right, there are two about that.

[1:00:41] And as I said earlier that we do need to figure out from the process point of view that how the questions that's raised by the board and then need to answer on certain specific thing that will come back to the board.

[1:00:55] And then those response may generate that additional discussion, and that's what the whole purpose of this process that we're putting place on to start from.

[1:01:06] And I will take the responsibility to work with staff on those things.

[1:01:14] Any other thing from board member?

[1:01:18] Okay.

[1:01:19] Go ahead.

[1:01:22] Yeah, thank you, men, I'm sharing, everybody's got an opinion and you will hear people say,

[1:01:26] well, the public saying this and that they don't really know, they're just saying what

[1:01:30] they feel is right, just like they're able to joe out through the common person, South

[1:01:36] Labor represents them. That's the working class and they're all for it. Well, here we go.

[1:01:44] We have someone who always wants to be rude and erupt, but of course I didn't say a thing

[1:01:48] when you talked, did I with respect?

[1:01:51] Something you should learn.

[1:01:53] So anyway, as I represent the regular labor person,

[1:01:57] you know, the same public invests in football stadiums

[1:02:01] and $45 billion, nobody says a word.

[1:02:04] They're not around today, but water will always have to be here.

[1:02:08] That's my obligation.

[1:02:10] We're spending a couple million dollars or $5 billion,

[1:02:13] whatever it may be.

[1:02:15] It'll be here. We hope forever.

[1:02:17] we're working for the next generation. All these decisions were passed to us when

[1:02:22] other boards before us should have took action they didn't. So we are today we're

[1:02:26] doing it. So when you have an issue 10 or 15 years so they have me not be here.

[1:02:32] You can call the people who are debating against it because you don't have any water.

[1:02:37] So we want to make sure we have water and that's what our obligation is. I hope the

[1:02:40] majority of this board continues what we're doing. I don't know if we want to reveal all

[1:02:44] different potential partnerships until we get that. Because that's negotiations. We shouldn't put our

[1:02:51] staff in a bad situation. We should be here opening and this is actually the question best

[1:02:56] we can't for a cause. But you know, you'll pay more damage to control if you listen to the wrong

[1:03:00] people. I like to say this. My obligation is to make sure that I sit at many times to the next generation.

[1:03:07] We owe it to them. And it'll be less cost 20 years from today. And if you take care of it now,

[1:03:13] We had the same issues when that was a young person with the in-house, which we call on us.

[1:03:19] That was all debated back in 1976 and 77 and everybody just sat under butts and didn't do a damn thing and the governor closed the hospitals down

[1:03:27] So here we are today panzyliens

[1:03:31] So I'm saying it's the same such a ratio for water. Think about the next generation. It'll be less cost

[1:03:37] let's proceed solely with the majority of us are doing.

[1:03:42] And when you make those phone calls, remember who we call. Thank you.

[1:03:47] Okay.

[1:03:48] I don't have for the questions or comments from Paul Members.

[1:03:52] We'll go to public comment.

[1:03:55] Before I call on individuals, I want to recognize that

[1:04:01] we did receive a written comment before this board meeting.

[1:04:08] that's posted as handout, A, all the way through I, so thank you for your time to submit written comments on this item.

[1:04:24] And for we have, we don't have anyone in Borgung who wants to speak to us, do we?

[1:04:33] Thank you Madam Chair, no we do not have anyone in the book.

[1:04:36] we have people on the zoom race their hands. Okay, so I will start with you call the game.

[1:04:45] The first person we have is Osham Azirov.

[1:04:49] Okay, Osham, please go ahead.

[1:05:14] Okay,

[1:05:20] a mutual self, and is start?

[1:05:27] Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you now.

[1:05:30] Sorry, I was, yeah, no problem.

[1:05:33] No problem, yeah, yeah, please go ahead.

[1:05:36] Anyway,

[1:05:38] thanks for taking public comment.

[1:05:42] My name is Ocean Reserve. I represent the stops of the particular dam,

[1:05:48] I'm glad the board is getting these updates,

[1:05:54] perhaps it will be in another update, but

[1:05:56] as was mentioned earlier, the ability to care about other water supply options and the relative

[1:06:02] cost of those options and the risks of those options is really important.

[1:06:10] in particular storage in San Luis and the caros, which are two expansion projects that

[1:06:18] true expansion projects, not new dams, basically, as this one is, that would end up in

[1:06:24] a day, 1500 new acres.

[1:06:28] I want to point out in case folks just to remind that Chaco Creek is a pretty small

[1:06:34] crakes in North fork of the Chico Creek, it's ranch land, it's wild land, it's habitat,

[1:06:42] it's in private ownership, and it's not really expected to be much of a new source of water.

[1:06:49] The report that you'll submit it to the water commission says that in dry years it might be as

[1:06:54] little as 50 acre feet. In addition, valley water doesn't currently hold water rights to

[1:07:01] Kuchiko Creek, the main source of info would be the rights you already have or the contracts

[1:07:08] you have with the CBPN, SWP, so it's not like it's not on stream storage and it would

[1:07:18] be a huge water rights process and basically end up attempting to take the water and land

[1:07:23] away from somebody else in order to build this project and it really might not be much water

[1:07:29] all in a lot of years.

[1:07:33] Also, I think that there's going to be a lot more resources available

[1:07:40] for better water supply projects that are doing recycling, reuse, conservation, ground water

[1:07:50] storage. There's going to be a lot more public funds and interest for those types of projects.

[1:07:55] I think, you know, you kind of people have voted with their feet in terms of not signing

[1:08:01] that for this project because it's such high cost and high risk and it's, you know,

[1:08:06] that was, you know, some three years ago since your staff started looking.

[1:08:12] I totally agree with the comments from the board about they need to be a prize of what's

[1:08:17] being told to these other districts in terms of what, you know, they could buy into and it's

[1:08:22] that they understand the high risks from from this project and the unlikely good that it

[1:08:26] would ever yield very much water. So yeah, those are my comments for now before I really think

[1:08:34] the board should make a decision about you should have a timeline and so that you can start spending

[1:08:40] your time and your rate hares money on better projects. Okay, thank you, Miss.

[1:08:48] And we now have the Coach, this Coach Irvin.

[1:08:54] Okay.

[1:08:55] Yes, Madam Drurkin.

[1:08:57] Go ahead.

[1:09:00] Good afternoon.

[1:09:01] Good afternoon, Chair Shua.

[1:09:03] And Valley Water Directors.

[1:09:05] This is Coach Irvin with the C.R.

[1:09:06] C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.C.R.

[1:09:10] I want to start by saying thank you to Chair Shua.

[1:09:12] and for asking staff to respond to our comments

[1:09:17] from the water supply and demand management committee

[1:09:20] and to Ryan McCartor's team for putting the response together.

[1:09:25] I'm hoping we can also get answers to our follow-up questions

[1:09:29] attached to this item as handout 8.1A.

[1:09:34] In addition, I want to thank the chair for putting out a notice

[1:09:37] about the meeting to your list of Pateco interested parties.

[1:09:41] And it would be helpful to send out a notification that list when Pacheco items come up to the committee as well as to the board.

[1:09:51] Otherwise, I want to emphasize some of the issues related to the cost for the Pacheco Dam project.

[1:09:57] First, the 2.2 billion.

[1:10:00] And cost estimate is clearly low. That is about the same as Anderson Dam Retrofit project. If you've been out to

[1:10:09] Doudie Ranch at Henry Coe, you get an idea of the distance and the type of roads and the additional

[1:10:15] costs to work in such a remote location. Second, the water supply benefits that would result from this

[1:10:22] project are not worth the cost. A small amount of emergency supply and some supposed water quality

[1:10:29] benefits are not worth 2.5 billion. Third, the impact of this project on rate payers will

[1:10:36] be significant. We should not be burdened to that extent for so little benefit.

[1:10:43] Lastly, I want to emphasize the extreme environmental impact this project would cause

[1:10:48] the environmental cost is immense and should be reason enough to cancel this project.

[1:10:54] Thank you for your consideration.

[1:11:01] Thank you.

[1:11:03] And I'll always have

[1:11:09] this, Mr. Forest, Peterson.

[1:11:15] Thank you, Chair.

[1:11:16] Lord, the name is Dr. Peterson.

[1:11:20] I'm an engineer here at Stanford University.

[1:11:24] I specialize in workforce technology.

[1:11:28] And the reason why I'm speaking is

[1:11:30] I saw on your expenditures that there's tribal consultation of $50,000 and engineering of $50 million.

[1:11:42] Now I understand people want to be efficient and but I want to be the voice that says, I think we should probably share in the community benefits in the discussion of the project a little bit more with the tribal.

[1:11:59] the impact of tribes, and I know they be, you know, even finding those tribes because it hits your California could be a challenge.

[1:12:07] But, and to put this within the research that I do at Stanford and workforce technology and education, as a suggestion of Palo to try to make sure that before we get into the environmental impacts that, you know, and mitigations were probably, you know, some tribal benefits might be part of that.

[1:12:26] during the project, but in the discussion for the project is maybe

[1:12:31] filled in internships or even some kind of funding for tribal members in the Santa Clara County region

[1:12:40] as part of the engineering team as part of the water district or give scholarships to students in the workforce

[1:12:51] building trays and things like that. So that is not such disparity. I'm actually here at Stanford and my colleagues are standing here watching this with me and to a global audience of engineers who who see this that number was a little bit shocking when it stood out. So I'll stop there. And I thank you for all the discussion. And then just to mention, I am essentially a lifetime concrete labor myself. So I'm actually pretty much on the fence on this project. But all that aside, seeing that number, please.

[1:13:20] I'll try and put a little bit more in the tribal, the tribal wine that you are self-preciate. Thank you.

[1:13:28] Thank you for that comment. Miss Molly Koten?

[1:13:36] Good afternoon, board members. This is Molly Koten, and I'm commenting on behalf of Sierra Club California.

[1:13:42] I want to thank the board members for this great discussion on this item today, and for the excellent questions raised by board directors,

[1:13:49] Bell, Keegan, and Eisenberg, especially relating to cost and transparency of the Pachico project.

[1:13:55] We also thank staff for taking time to answer our questions about the information given in the

[1:14:00] staff presentation that we've outlined in our comment letter. This is an expensive project, especially

[1:14:05] when the lack of project partners is taken into account. We look forward to continuing to engage in this

[1:14:11] process and look forward to the water supply master plan update at the June 25th meeting. Thank you.

[1:14:17] Okay, thank you.

[1:14:20] Do we have any other requests to speak to this one?

[1:14:25] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[1:14:26] We have no more requests to speak at this time.

[1:14:28] Okay.

[1:14:30] Thank you, everybody.

[1:14:31] And as I said, twice already that I will take that responsibility and work with staff.

[1:14:39] and then the purpose of these sessions is to answer a bold question, so we will figure out a way to do that.

[1:14:50] Okay, how moving on to Tim, I think it's 10.01, CEO and Chief's report, I'll turn the meeting to CEO.

[1:14:59] Yes, Madam Chair.

[1:15:01] We'll have a short report. We'll start with Acting Chief of Installal Affairs Lugo.

[1:15:11] Good afternoon, chair and board members. I'll start with our highlights for the Office of Government Relations.

[1:15:19] In terms of the state budget process, it continues on May 10, the governor presented his May revise budget to address a 27.6 billion shortfall,

[1:15:27] retaining cuts to dam safety, sea level rise, and recycle water and proposing to shift

[1:15:32] excess e-wrap funding from counties and special districts to charter schools. However,

[1:15:37] on May 29, the Senate and Assembly released their mutual budget proposal rejecting the e-wrap

[1:15:43] funding ship and the cut to dam safety while partially restoring modest funding for recycled water

[1:15:49] and sea level rise. The legislator has until June 15 to pass the fiscal year 2024 25 state budget

[1:15:57] stop continues to advocate for protecting existing

[1:16:00] value water project funding and is now focusing on increasing

[1:16:04] funding through a proposed climate resiliency bond for the November

[1:16:08] 2024 election.

[1:16:11] And then in terms of our highlights for the office of civic

[1:16:14] engagement, we did have our National River Cleanup Day,

[1:16:18] Valley Water and Purnership with the Creek Connections

[1:16:20] Action Group coordinated another successful cleanup event

[1:16:22] instead of our county on Saturday, May 18th.

[1:16:26] There were 42 clean-up sites all together throughout all seven valley water districts and around

[1:16:32] 700 volunteers cleaned 66 miles of creeks, shorelines, and natural areas were moving up

[1:16:37] approximately 17,255 pounds of litter.

[1:16:42] The Q-commission also hosted a site at Valley Water Headquarters where director Bell tended

[1:16:47] and provided opening remarks.

[1:16:49] Stop also participated in the DPR workshop, which is a direct political reuse workshop here

[1:16:55] our headquarters last month, a staff coordinated a presentation with Dr. Stephen Jackson, who's the chair

[1:17:00] of the Environmental Health Committee with the Center for Accounting Medical Association. Dr.

[1:17:05] Jackson shared with the committee, his support for adding purified water to Center for Accounting

[1:17:10] is drinking water supply, and the importance of medical professionals supporting portable reuse.

[1:17:16] A staff also presented an overview of value waters public outreach efforts. And then to wrap up

[1:17:21] But under our grants program, we had a save by nature's grant funded event on May 11.

[1:17:28] Stop attended, save by nature's headwaters to the Bay event, which was at Lake Almedin

[1:17:35] in Valley Water Headquarters.

[1:17:37] It included in a hike and a partition, partitionally funded up to $84,000 from the

[1:17:47] clean water, F-9 standard grant.

[1:17:49] There were 13 participants that began the day at Valley Water Headquarters and

[1:17:54] hiked around our Las Alameda's Proculation Pond and

[1:17:57] Alameda Lake Park.

[1:17:59] They've included open-air remarks from Director Bell and

[1:18:03] an educational environment that involves escape demonstration hosted by

[1:18:07] Valley Water's Education Outreach Team.

[1:18:10] And that concludes my report.

[1:18:12] Thank you.

[1:18:13] And let me share that.

[1:18:14] We'll conclude the CEO and cheese reports.

[1:18:16] Okay. Thank you. Okay. I will move on to the item 13.1 review the fiscal year 2023-24

[1:18:27] board policy planning calendar. And the planning calendar is listed as the attachment of this

[1:18:36] item for this specific board meeting. There was no proposed modifications to the plan schedule.

[1:18:45] It's everything that's listed there right now is as planned to end then to happen in those months.

[1:18:58] Okay, now item 14 board member reports and announcements.

[1:19:05] Well, start with Director Keegan.

[1:19:12] Okay. Whoops. Madam chair.

[1:19:19] In terms of, sorry,

[1:19:25] I've multiple calendars up at the same time.

[1:19:29] So I was present at the Sanitla Ra County Special District Association. I sat in on the, or actually

[1:19:43] attended the water 101 graduation and it was wonderful to talk to you all those folks who had

[1:19:53] gone through our program and they were all very complimentary of the program. I think they just felt like they're

[1:20:00] It would be even more information, but they really enjoyed that. I met with the CEO and that's it.

[1:20:22] Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair. So, 40th anniversary of the Mushroom Festival in Morgan

[1:20:28] Hill, for I'm going to call the Mushroom Artigrant, attended two weeks, two days, over the last

[1:20:34] weekend of May and Valley Waters' sponsor of that event. Board meetings here, also another

[1:20:43] Morgan Hill, elevate the economic mobility symposium and Morgan Hill, which all the major

[1:20:50] movers and checkers of the region were in attendance about 200 people participated in

[1:20:55] that event.

[1:20:57] Let's see, we have the South County wastewater facility meeting.

[1:21:04] Sound of the East Delta Mendoza meeting.

[1:21:06] Santa Clara, can't be far and be all meeting, it's just close on it. Okay, let's see, and I think that's about it for now.

[1:21:18] Okay, do I have to, uh, Hester Marra?

[1:21:22] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[1:21:24] We had a joint, recycled, uh, committee meeting with the City of San Jose.

[1:21:29] So, very good meeting, we had some great discussion and we all agreed to meet more often

[1:21:38] and to try our best to assimilate the project as fast as we can.

[1:21:47] Also had oversight, redevelopment oversight, board meeting where we approved the sale of last project in Santa Clara large office building for $25 million, so we expect as an independent district to receive some of that.

[1:22:17] some of that income. Also, rather around table, meeting I attended and at the special districts,

[1:22:28] meeting was also during the week. And also, I have a meeting with the CEO from the Delta

[1:22:39] of Spain's disparity. And lastly, I just wanted to mention shout out to Mexico for electing

[1:22:47] their first woman president and also for electing their first Jewish president. I thought it

[1:22:54] was very significant and I know many people both in this country and around the world feel very

[1:23:01] positive about that. I think that there are going to be some really great changes. Both from Mexico

[1:23:06] but also for the United States, because of that in the next.

[1:23:11] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:23:13] Thank you.

[1:23:14] My report, I was on vacation for two weeks,

[1:23:18] so no report on meetings,

[1:23:21] but I do want to take this opportunity to share

[1:23:23] a thought on how I was my colleague that.

[1:23:26] So right before I went on vacation,

[1:23:28] I did participate on the National River

[1:23:30] calling up day and at the Colabassist Creek.

[1:23:35] And I've been doing this for many years.

[1:23:39] And when I first started, the most garbage I picked up

[1:23:45] was cigarette butts.

[1:23:47] So it's a lot of cigarette butts.

[1:23:51] And it's gradually decreasing in this time.

[1:23:54] I was there for almost three hours.

[1:23:56] I did not find a single single above us, so I just feel like many things that education and

[1:24:07] communication is hard. It takes time. It takes decades, but we should not give up on anything that

[1:24:16] we're trying to communicate and educate our constituents and just keep working at the results.

[1:24:25] We will see even though it's going to be next week. So just like this year that was there everybody

[1:24:32] Director Santos. Yes, thank you. I want to all those meetings plus more when you're in the case

[1:24:39] Thank you. I forgot the thank you

[1:24:45] No problem a lot of trepid what a bit. But I will mention all of them

[1:24:48] But I was a very impressed with our procurement meeting with the small Lord's business here

[1:24:54] It was a packed house, Tina, you're staffed by you guys, it was a great job, really nice and...

[1:25:00] A chance to engage with some of the owners and small business people and they were all very happy and got the direction they needed and so on. And then, of course, the ambassador, one in one, the graduation was top of the mark. Thank you.

[1:25:15] Director Eisenberg.

[1:25:18] Thank you.

[1:25:18] Thank you so much. First, thanks to the chair for mentioning that about the cigarette, but that was a really important comment.

[1:25:24] And also thank you to Director Estimera for mentioning that news, Jewish, female elected

[1:25:32] president of our sister country and neighbor, Mexico, a democracy, you know, which, and

[1:25:38] Mexico, actually, as I'm sure you're aware, has done really amazing things.

[1:25:43] It's a pretty progressive and enlightened country, every country has issues and problems,

[1:25:48] but Mexico has really done a great job, my sister lived in Mexico for a long time, so,

[1:25:53] And it's great.

[1:25:54] In fact, I do want to say real quickly before I say what I'm talking about, that there

[1:25:58] is actually a very, very active and exciting, flourishing Jewish population throughout the

[1:26:06] Latin American world.

[1:26:07] As most Latinos know, I've read this in Chile, and there's a big Jewish population in Argentina.

[1:26:14] Argentina was one of the countries that did best at taking in survivors from the Holocaust.

[1:26:20] So cheers to Latin America, always a friend of the Jews.

[1:26:26] So speaking of Jews, and I want to talk about tonight's holiday,

[1:26:29] which is Shabuot.

[1:26:31] Shabuot is a holiday, like many years' holidays,

[1:26:34] because Judaism is one of our oldest world religions,

[1:26:37] and it's very, very integrated with nature.

[1:26:40] Of course, Christianity has a lot of the Jewish stuff too,

[1:26:44] as this is lived.

[1:26:47] So Judaism is a lot of the natural holidays work

[1:26:50] and tonight's holiday is particularly special for those of us who are friends of the trees, all of us,

[1:26:55] and the environment. Chavuot means weeks, but it's Chavuot is a week. But it's really about,

[1:27:04] it's a night where we stay up all night and study. It is real that they didn't have much

[1:27:08] luck in the last step on night holiday, but that's not going to happen this time. The commandment is

[1:27:13] to stay up all night and study together with Jews and with the larger community and study ways

[1:27:19] of how to make the world a better place.

[1:27:23] And one thing, and specifically, it commemorates the day

[1:27:27] that supposedly Hashem, God gave the commandments to Moses

[1:27:33] or the leader at that time.

[1:27:36] And the commandments, many people don't know

[1:27:38] that there's actually 613 commandments,

[1:27:40] and not just that 10, which is one reason why so many

[1:27:43] Jews are lawyers and so rural or into 613 commandments.

[1:27:46] And a really big number of them are devoted

[1:27:49] to how we take care of agriculture, how we take care of agriculture, and 49 and 7 are both

[1:27:56] very important numbers in Jewish commandments, because just like human beings are commanded

[1:28:01] to rest every seven days, Jews are commanded to give the land a rest every seven years.

[1:28:08] And after 49 years, there's this thing called the Jubilee, where all the lands, so every seven

[1:28:14] years of plot of land, wrote on a rotating basis,

[1:28:17] rest, and then in year 50, all the land at the same time

[1:28:21] rest.

[1:28:21] And that's a celebration called the Jubilee,

[1:28:24] and how do we feed people with the food we've

[1:28:27] stored up responsibly over those 49 years?

[1:28:30] And what's so cool about how it is based on the number 7?

[1:28:34] Is that it really teaches us that it's so important

[1:28:37] to take time and reflect?

[1:28:38] I know we're all so busy, but taking that break once every seven

[1:28:42] years and once every seven days to join together and study and work out ideas and

[1:28:47] disagreement is something that's really actively valued and treasured in my

[1:28:52] religion.

[1:28:54] So, when you talk about people who have different points of view and different

[1:28:56] perspectives, if you talk with them directly, that's how you come to the truth.

[1:29:00] Which is why I really welcome and I cherish and I'm grateful times that we as a

[1:29:04] board disagree about things.

[1:29:06] In my culture and ethnicity and religion, we're commanded to disagree with each other.

[1:29:11] Only by disagreeing with each other, listening to each other, you know, and really in compromising and exploring things deeply.

[1:29:19] Well, we get to the right answer, and the right answer is the most righteous thing, and the most righteous thing is the thing that serves others the most.

[1:29:27] So tonight, whether you're Jewish or not, I hope you all will join me in just taking some time to talk to someone with whom you disagree.

[1:29:34] And to talk about it, it's a topic that's difficult.

[1:29:38] And with that person with whom you disagree, share your ideas and listen to theirs

[1:29:43] and try to find a common ground and try to get to the truth because only by talking with those with whom we disagree will we get to the best answer.

[1:29:52] So thank you for listening to this long talk and I wish you all a happy show about it.

[1:29:56] Thank you, Director Bell.

[1:29:59] Yeah, thank you.

[1:30:00] Thank you. This isn't directly related to Valley Water in a sense, but this last couple weeks,

[1:30:15] we

[1:30:27] as my father's situation, his history,

[1:30:38] I also attended the Ericsson Homeowner Association meeting,

[1:30:43] concerning mainly concerning homeless, but also maintenance on the creek, staff with

[1:30:49] there did a good job presenting some of the issues.

[1:30:54] water 101 graduation was very interesting. I attended that with my colleagues and I attended

[1:31:02] Lafco, the Lafco meeting. I was excited to attend East Ridge, light rail Saturday, the groundbreaking

[1:31:16] for the light rail project, especially since seeing some of my legislation come to fruition

[1:31:25] in terms of getting the funding for that project. It was very exciting.

[1:31:32] I met with some veterans

[1:31:36] It's kind of informally, and we were talking about the VA Center and having the idea of having

[1:31:50] some kind of like area along Coyote Creek, which is right next to the VA Center, where

[1:31:56] we can put some benches or some outdoor kind of contemplative ideas.

[1:32:03] probably maybe do a referral when I have that firm duck. I want the board to know I'm working

[1:32:08] on that with the staff. I talked to Mr. calendar about it and others, but there's some interest

[1:32:17] in that as part of the veterans organizations.

[1:32:25] We have a group called the Minority Mental Health

[1:32:29] a social group and they are having a minority mental health fair at the African-American Community Center in Lake

[1:32:36] Jantelai and I'm helping them organize that. They used to be a hellier park, but they kind of got

[1:32:45] kicked out of hellier park. The county, I don't know what the rules are, but they're sort of like maybe

[1:32:55] come on county. You're the county government. You should be going out of your way to help that kind of organization, right?

[1:33:04] Because the county provides the mental health services for starting a little bit. Okay. Well, I'll help them out.

[1:33:09] I also talked to the share, the communicate with the sheriff and the day about encampment issues to get their perspectives on incarceration, prosecution, so forth.

[1:33:22] And that was very interesting here where they had to say.

[1:33:27] So lastly, Madam Chair, at some point a lot of us have known, I've known Victor Garza for

[1:33:38] 40 years, okay?

[1:33:40] Lots of known, at least that long.

[1:33:43] And I think it's very important to do something special for Victor at some point.

[1:33:48] And I'd like to hear the opinions of my colleagues,

[1:33:53] maybe we can adjourn a future meeting in this name,

[1:33:56] but also do some special for Victor.

[1:33:59] I think Victor just had so much influence on so many people

[1:34:05] in terms of social justice, in terms of civil rights,

[1:34:13] just over a long decades and decades,

[1:34:18] and had influence on many of us in terms of what we did.

[1:34:26] So, to me, it was very sad to see him pass

[1:34:31] and at some point we can honor him in some way more and just adjuring the debate.

[1:34:36] Okay, well we'll come on that. Okay.

[1:34:40] Okay, there's so now we're under 16

[1:34:44] a journey. As we end today's meeting, I invite you all to join valley water and community

[1:34:54] nationwide in celebrating June as LGBTQI.

[1:35:00] By a to ask plus, right months, celebrating LGBT plus people's contribution to the field of medicine and healthcare.

[1:35:12] Also, Caribbean, American heritage months honoring the dreams and achievements of Caribbean Americans.

[1:35:21] and immigrants heritage months, which allow us to explore our immigration heritage and celebrate our shared diversity annually.

[1:35:33] So in alignment with the value of diversity, equity, and inclusion, we honor the history and achievement of LGBTQIA to us to ask plus Caribbean American

[1:35:50] and immigrant communities nationwide.

[1:35:54] So with that, we'll adjourn this meeting

[1:35:56] to a special closed session board meeting

[1:36:01] that scheduled at 23 today.

[1:36:08] And so this meeting is adjourned

[1:36:11] and as full member to stay,

[1:36:13] because we need to restart the meeting

[1:36:15] again for this special closed session meeting.

[1:36:18] So thank you, thank you everybody.

Closed Session and Regular Meeting - Jun 11th, 2024

Agenda

Transcript