[15:18] Done, this time, and what can be done in the future to improve.

[15:24] Later this evening, in our discussion of the district's capital improvement project program,

[15:30] I would like to propose that we support obtaining federal assistance for a flood protection project along coyote Creek,

[15:37] that will ensure public safety to these impacted regions.

[15:42] I hope that our board colleagues will join me in this.

[15:48] We are committed during the post evaluation of what resulted in these unfortunate events to finding an effective path for all agencies to come together, better prepare and respond to any future events.

[16:02] As public agencies who are responsible for our residents and ratepayers, we must all find a better path for the future.

[16:11] As we keep in mind, those who are suffering and trying to recover from these floods,

[16:16] I would like to encourage you to give financial help to the victims of this tragic incident.

[16:22] I encourage you to go to Mayor the Cardo's website at www.SanhozeCal.ca.gov-mair

[16:33] and make a donation for those who are less fortunate and could use the help right now.

[16:40] Thank you.

[16:44] So, going to the orders of the day, there will be an adjustment of our agenda.

[16:52] Following item 2.5, which is opening a public comment, I'm moving item 7.3 to follow,

[17:00] and that's the chief executive report.

[17:04] In addition to that, under your agenda, on item 6.1, we'll be moved, and that's the

[17:15] 6.1 will follow 8.1 on the agenda.

[17:21] So in order of the day, I'd like to call my attention to Director

[17:26] Estramera for a comment.

[17:32] Mr. Chairman, we received the letter from Mayor

[17:39] the Cardo on behalf of the city making a specific request.

[17:43] This we just received, so it wasn't on the agenda and understand that since it isn't

[17:52] on the agenda we can't take action, so it is a, it raises a health and safety issue.

[17:59] I think it falls within the exception if I'd ask Council if it's appropriate to put it on

[18:06] agenda at this time with a super-numerary approval vote of the board.

[18:15] Mr. Chair, under 54956.5A1, when you have an emergency,

[18:25] that severely impairs public health

[18:27] with respect to what Mr. Director has talked about, then by five members of this board,

[18:36] You can place the item on the agenda.

[18:40] Thank you, Mr. Council.

[18:41] Then I would move that we put this matter on the agenda.

[18:45] We, of course, can then discuss it.

[18:48] So that's my motion at this point to try and get it on the agenda.

[18:51] Then we can discuss it whenever the chair raises it.

[18:54] I have a motion and a second to approve placing it on the agenda for discussion

[18:58] by the Board of Directors.

[19:01] Do we need a roll call vote on this?

[19:07] Directors Estimara?

[19:08] Aye.

[19:08] Shwea, Keegan, Cremin, Desott, Santis, Chevrolet.

[19:15] Yes. So, that being voted on, I suggest that we're interested in the discussion at this point now.

[19:26] Pardon me?

[19:30] The letter?

[19:31] That was sent out last couple of days.

[19:36] Well, we got it in email this afternoon.

[19:38] This precisely why we just put out the agenda on an emergency basis.

[19:44] But the print can,

[19:49] okay, yeah, okay, so when they get it, okay, so then what we'll do then at this point is move on to public comment on items that are not on the agenda and we'll come back to

[20:02] Okay, notice of the public, this item is reserved for persons desiring to address the board on any item not on this evening's agenda. Members of the public who wish to address the board on any item not listed on the agenda should complete a speaker card and present it to the clerk of the board. The board chair will call individuals to the podium in turn. Speakers comments should be limited to three minutes, hour as set by the chair. The law does not permit board action or any extent to the bill.

[20:29] the discussion of any item not on the agenda, except under special circumstances.

[20:36] If Board action is requested, the matter may be placed on a future agenda. All comments

[20:40] that require response will be referred to staff for a reply in writing. The Board may take

[20:46] action on any item of business appearing on the poster agenda. I have a speaker from Ms.

[20:56] Good

[21:02] evening.

[21:04] I do have a Arlene Getsake, no toxins for children.

[21:09] I do have a suggestion.

[21:10] We're being asked in the public to donate money to help the families in San Jose.

[21:18] I figured in the last 15 years, I've donated $750 to $1,000 to your flood plan

[21:24] which you are spending $49 million on the Permanent-E flood plan, which has a 1% potential

[21:34] of ever flooding.

[21:35] So I'd like to suggest that you stop that flood that will damage state of heaven for

[21:40] the next two years and use that $49 million to give to the families in East San Jose, for

[21:47] those who are not notified who lost everything, cars, possessions, or whatnot.

[21:52] So, that is my suggestion. I don't want to donate again for that purpose since I've already

[21:56] given you so much for flood plans that you have not used in an area that should have

[22:02] been used. But mainly I come and bring you another handout regarding the fluoride that comes

[22:11] from China. Last month, two weeks ago, you did not answer my question. Are you buying fluoride

[22:18] originates in China. So this handout today also talks about how China views its own

[22:26] fluoride. It is actually a toxic cocktail of over 100 deadly industrial chemicals

[22:34] and heavy metals. Many now come from China. So I ask you again today since no one

[22:41] has answered my question from two weeks ago. Do you buy the fluoride you're now

[22:46] in San Jose water, does it originate in China?

[22:56] How can it have any certification that it is safe for humans?

[23:01] FDA has never tested it and calls it an unsafe drug.

[23:05] Since you had no way to notify the 14,000 about the flood,

[23:10] I wonder how you plan to tell the 800 customers to get fluoride

[23:14] that children under 16 should not drink water

[23:17] with more than 0.6 milligrams of fluoride in it.

[23:22] Dr. Sarah Cody says that on her letter to the dental

[23:26] pros and the county, you are putting 0.7 milligrams

[23:29] in the water, which means that no child under 16 in San Jose

[23:34] or in the county should be drinking that fluoride in water.

[23:39] Does your fluoride come from China?

[23:43] When will you tell the public the truth?

[23:55] I understand last time you said you would respond

[23:57] May I not have any answer yet?

[23:59] Neither has the public.

[24:06] For a Christmas.

[24:07] Yeah, Mr. Chairman.

[24:08] I just wanted to make a quick comment.

[24:11] Let me get to you know that we did refer your questions to staff.

[24:15] I think they're fair questions.

[24:17] People should know and you should have those answers.

[24:20] So as soon as we get a response from staff,

[24:24] you'll get some responses.

[24:26] We all will.

[24:28] And of course we'll share with the public.

[24:30] Thank you, director Smyro.

[24:32] So, another comment sheet from Kenzie Musing.

[24:44] Good evening.

[24:45] My name is Mackenzie Musing.

[24:46] I live in San Jose and I work for the Santa Clara Valley Autobahn Society.

[24:51] The recent flooding emergency in San Jose has not only opened our eyes

[24:54] to the true power of Mother Nature,

[24:57] but it has also given us the opportunity to learn an important lesson.

[25:00] In the years to come, we can expect climate change to continue to exacerbate periods of drought, followed by periods of extreme rain and flooding in California.

[25:10] To avoid future catastrophes and maximize public safety, we should be investing our time and resources into finding solutions that work with nature, instead of trying to defy it.

[25:20] Building more dams and levees will continue to destroy river ecosystems and leave future generations with the inevitable burden of maintenance and repair.

[25:30] Our efforts should be focused on flood control the way nature intended and look to the yellow bypass as an example.

[25:38] By identifying potential floodplains and discouraging development in these areas, we can improve public safety and water security and create much needed habitat for fish and wildlife.

[25:48] Coyote Valley should be looked at as a viable floodplain.

[25:52] The recent storms have transformed Coyote Valley into a vast expanse of small wetlands,

[25:57] demonstrating valley's potential to contribute to flood control.

[26:01] Let's immerse Coyote Valley with wetlands instead of the thousands of homes along Coyote

[26:05] Creek.

[26:06] This winter has only been a small taste of what climate change has in store for California.

[26:12] For the sake of the thousands of residents whose homes are threatened by future floods, I urge

[26:16] you to investigate and invest in solutions that replicate natural flood control.

[26:21] Thank you for your time and consideration.

[26:22] Thank you, Ms. Mossing.

[26:25] I have a sheet here from Kacha Irvin.

[26:36] Good evening, Chair Burilla, and I'm the leader of the board.

[26:40] I'm a resident of Rekwit Harris, one of the neighborhoods

[26:44] along Coyote Creek in San Jose that was flooded, evacuated,

[26:50] and I want to make sure you know that our neighborhood is not satisfied with the district's

[26:54] response to this emergency.

[26:57] The coverage in the Mercury News has identified a lot of shortcomings of the district's

[27:01] response.

[27:02] No acceptance of responsibility and no strong statement promising to evaluate and improve

[27:08] flood response or planning for flood control projects in the future.

[27:16] The city of San Jose, on the other hand, has responded in a responsible manner.

[27:22] mayoralicardo posted daily messages and updates to next doors, saying mistakes were made and the process will start soon to evaluate and fix the problems.

[27:35] The only post from the water district was the one that was read earlier, which made no sense acknowledgements or promises.

[27:41] So I'm asking the district to step up, take responsibility for what went wrong with district planning and operations and promise to improve and fix issues.

[27:54] This is a great opportunity for district marketing staff to work with the city and learn how to include citizens' voters and their input to shape solutions.

[28:10] I, I'm sorry, I was kind of last minute, right?

[28:14] So I wanted to add that the district also needs to reevaluate CIP priorities and infrastructure

[28:21] spending in relation to recent disasters, so rate pairs aren't swamped, paying for maintenance

[28:27] and new projects.

[28:31] Maintenance allocation should increase for flood control, local dam and pipeline retrofits,

[28:37] delayed flood control maintenance and fixing or build down.

[28:41] I mean, we're seeing that our infrastructure is crumbling.

[28:45] We need to focus on our legacy infrastructure and not building new things that they need to be maintained.

[28:53] So investment in new projects such as sites reservoir and the Delta tunnels should be postponed.

[28:59] Due to this infrastructure maintenance emergency.

[29:02] I hope this makes sense that if it doesn't, I'm available to talk with staff or directors

[29:07] to explain a more detail when I'm suggesting.

[29:11] San Jose's low income neighborhoods along Coyote Creek deserve to finally get some attention

[29:16] from the water district.

[29:18] Not just places like Los Altes, Mountain View, Beryesa, and other more affluent communities.

[29:23] Thank you for your consideration.

[29:25] Director Keegan is a comment.

[29:28] Yes, I thank you, Kacha, for sharing your perspective.

[29:34] It is a perspective, I think, potentially, there's other ones and as we move forward, hopefully

[29:40] we'll be able to get some good information.

[29:43] One thing I just did want to speak about was the issue of posting to next door.

[29:48] I know that I personally had wanted to post to next door, but I was requested not to at

[29:54] the city's request because as they were the lead in the emergency response, it was felt

[30:00] Well, that there was a concern that mixed messages could come out. So it wasn't from a lack of interest or effort on my part or the other board members.

[30:07] And I just did want to clarify that.

[30:09] Thank you.

[30:10] Okay. Well, could I also just say that then now is the time to do it?

[30:15] Work with Ricardo work with the city and get your message out saying that you're taking responsibility, that you're going to follow up, that you're going to do things that mistakes were made.

[30:24] Thank you. We're going to revisit now. That was the last public comment we had anybody else.

[30:29] I don't have any other forms. So we're going to go back to words of the day and Director Estimara and his emergency request.

[30:39] And you all now have a copy of the letter that we received by the Mayor of San Jose, Mayor LaCarta.

[30:55] Director Estimara.

[30:55] Mr. Chairman, I noticed, as I mentioned, we received this this afternoon, I noticed that

[31:05] email just before I came over to our afternoon meetings, and I thought this is something

[31:14] that I think we ought to do. We ought to support specifically the mayor's request was

[31:19] that the Assembly Conservation Corps having an existing contract with us that we have funded

[31:25] it, would be able to continue to work and support in the city with cleanup and addressing

[31:35] the health and safety issues of the post flooding situation in our neighborhood there.

[31:44] And so I wanted to make sure it was on the agenda that we discussed it, I would like to

[31:50] that we pledge our support, and that we specifically approve his request.

[32:02] I think we can ask to see what the details are, the contract.

[32:06] I think the President contract would allow us to do what he's asking us to do,

[32:11] which is to redirect some of the efforts.

[32:15] presently towards this assistance of the city with respect to the flooding situation there.

[32:25] Okay.

[32:26] Ms. Cmucho?

[32:28] Yeah. To give some additional information to the board that the, we had originally in

[32:33] $1,550,000 as part of this contract for San Jose

[32:37] Conservation Corps assistance.

[32:39] Currently, we've spent about $100,000, so there is $450,000

[32:44] left on this contract.

[32:45] We could set up a special project number in relation

[32:48] to this effort and use fund 12 funds in order to fund this effort.

[32:54] And so within the scope of the existing contract

[32:57] and is perfectly doable at this point in time.

[33:00] So it's at the discretion of the board.

[33:01] How much of this contract do you want to move towards this effort?

[33:07] Thank you.

[33:08] Director Crimin?

[33:10] Yeah, thank you, Chair.

[33:11] Yes, I'd like to speak in support of this.

[33:14] We have the money reserved already.

[33:17] I know our employees have tirelessly helped people in the community with flood challenges.

[33:23] Some definitely in support of this.

[33:25] we might want to mention to Merrill of Cardinals,

[33:28] Spell your name, right, John, but very in support of this.

[33:34] Thank you for that.

[33:36] All right, okay, I have a motion in a second.

[33:38] I'm your discussion, Barbara.

[33:39] I'm going to try to keep it.

[33:41] Yes, I just wanted to add that I was out participating in one of the cleanups

[33:47] that took place this Saturday and I did observe the conservation core out there

[33:52] and they were just doing terrific work.

[33:54] So I'm very happy and proud that we're going to be supporting this request.

[33:59] Thank you.

[34:00] The request actually is $400,000 or more.

[34:04] Do we have now that we've learned that there's additional funding here?

[34:07] Do we want to?

[34:08] I just clarify the motion that we respond by allowing the repurposing

[34:15] with respect to his request, the mayor's request,

[34:20] and we'll leave it up to the CEO to work on what the amounts are.

[34:22] because we don't really know how much it's going to be needed, and the next few weeks it could be what the request is that he may have to make another request.

[34:33] I think if it's appropriate, we have the flexibility we should do that.

[34:38] So, my motion is that the CEO will work out what the amounts are.

[34:41] Okay. Norma, did you have a comment on that?

[34:50] That would be perfectly acceptable and then we could ensure that the work that needs to be done is prioritizing it's done.

[35:00] Okay, great. And also on Saturday, I received a text message from Dorsey Moore in Andrea McKenzie, who were

[35:10] at the site and invited me to come and participate, which I did. And it was quite humbling to say

[35:18] the least. And so, they all same by their grace of God, go aye. It was pretty humbling. It's

[35:27] I have another, I have a speaker on this before we take action on this. Mr. Mirohead.

[35:33] Welcome, I haven't seen you for a while.

[35:35] Thank you, Chair, and good evening, Board members and staff for the record.

[35:39] My name is Doug Mirohead. I live in Morgan Hill.

[35:43] My only concern about this particular item is I don't know whether $100,000 is a big deal, a small deal.

[35:50] You know, there is no plan that I'm aware of that we can relate this to, and so I'm a little uncomfortable with just

[35:58] We want to help

[36:00] I'm not opposed to that, I'm glad you're doing it, but it feels impulsive

[36:06] And I really would like to know how this fits into the larger picture or

[36:11] Perhaps you could request Mayor LeCardo to give you a report that you could then present to us later

[36:18] as to how this fit into the overall recovery efforts.

[36:21] So I'm just a little uncomfortable with,

[36:26] we want $100,000, okay.

[36:27] Here's $100,000, thank you very much.

[36:30] It just doesn't work for me.

[36:31] Thank you.

[36:34] I have a direct rest of my.

[36:35] Yeah.

[36:36] Let me just read the letter to the paragraph just so

[36:40] that the records clear, I believe that's the reason

[36:42] why I felt that the CEO of the work with the city manager.

[36:47] It's a contract that we have,

[36:48] It requires them to report and requires accountability.

[36:53] So we do have an ongoing contract coordinating with the city.

[36:59] The Senate's Dear Chair of the RLN CEO,

[37:02] Kamacho, the Senate's day conservation core

[37:04] has an existing $350,000 contract with the water district

[37:08] for homeless encampment, cleanup, and community

[37:11] outreach, and education.

[37:14] Due to the extreme flooding and the ongoing response

[37:16] requests that the district use these funds for the Corps, the Corps's flood response efforts.

[37:23] The Conservation Corps has done an amazing job and gone above and beyond to fill sandbags

[37:28] and help residents remove damage items from the homes.

[37:32] They have already deployed 30 Corps members working with city staff.

[37:36] I asked that the district repurpose of $200,000 or more to aid their efforts with the help

[37:42] We can continue to all work together to help our community recover as quickly as possible

[37:47] to sincerely, Sam McCartow Mayor.

[37:50] So that's the specific request.

[37:53] I think we could trust our CEO to work with the City Manager to appropriate what it was necessary.

[38:01] Okay, so I have a motion and a second, do I have any other discussion on this?

[38:05] Is this a roll call vote or is this just a board act?

[38:09] Yes, let's take a roll call.

[38:12] Directors, Esmerra, Schlä, Kiegen, Kremin, Desott, Santas, Chair Verilla.

[38:20] Yes, the unanimous.

[38:23] Thank you.

[38:24] I'll be well done, Director.

[38:26] So we're moving to item 7.3, Chief Executive Report.

[38:34] Yes, thank you.

[38:36] And so I'll turn to first Melanie Richardson

[38:38] and they'll drop to discuss the storm report.

[38:42] Good evening, Chair of Rail at Members of the Board.

[38:45] My name is Dale Jock, I'm the emergency and security manager here for the water district.

[38:49] And I'll be presenting the storm report.

[38:51] Go through the usual order for it.

[38:54] Percipitation in the last couple of weeks range from a high in the western hills of 9.49 inches to the lowest area that's

[39:06] Participation was in central San Jose at 3.03 inches during that period that brings

[39:12] this seasonal average to date to over 200 percent in a couple parts of our county and

[39:20] well over 100 percent in the valley floor.

[39:24] So we received a lot of rain total over the season and we received a lot of rain just in

[39:29] the last two weeks.

[39:31] statewide reservoirs are well above normal for this time of year, like or a bill, or

[39:36] Shasta rather as at 120% like or a bill as at 109% of historical averages, for this

[39:42] date, and excuse me, estimated inflow into our own local reservoirs was over 100,000

[39:50] acre feet just in the last two weeks. That's a lot of water, actually it's greater amount

[39:57] water than the entire capacity of Anderson.

[40:00] Reservoir by itself. That brought our total reservoir storage to 95% of total capacity, which is

[40:08] 155% of normal when compared to the 20-year average for this date. During the last couple

[40:15] weeks, as quite a few of our reservoirs began to spill, including Elmet and Yubis Lexington,

[40:20] the Sona Stevens Creek Anderson and Coyote. Anderson and Yubis both continue to spill,

[40:29] and the

[40:29] try to bring the level of the reservoir down. It has been open since January 9 that was closed

[40:36] for a short period during the peak, precipitation of the storm so as to not exacerbate levels

[40:40] in coyote creek, but it's open again.

[40:46] We had several infrastructure issues over the to our own

[40:52] infrastructure. As a result of the storm, there was a failure of the coyote canal

[40:57] where flows from Coyote Creek actually rose high enough to flow into Coyote Canal near Anderson Reservoir,

[41:06] that then flowed through Coyote Canal, breached, and then caused a closure of Highway 101, south of San Jose.

[41:15] Several other reservoirs are above their DSOD restrictions,

[41:23] and local and important water supply

[41:25] treatment plants continue.

[41:27] Preplation ponds were offline due to the removal of

[41:29] extreme divergence and wanting to avoid poor water quality

[41:33] from the creeks.

[41:34] So pre-storm preparations in the field, crews were out

[41:39] clearing trash racks, pure noses, hot spots, and other

[41:41] locations, both during and after and before the storm.

[41:47] And a starting February 17th, a district crew was placed

[41:50] on call in preparation for effects due to the Anderson Dam beginning to spill.

[41:57] Communications personnel was very active both before and after the storm.

[42:03] Some county-wide messaging went out from Chair Varella, talking about flood safety measures that could be taken, as well as storm communications regarding assistance for flood victims.

[42:16] some targeted mixed-door messaging went out from Director's Richard Santos, Director Lizot, Director

[42:24] Estra Merra, and those were sent to residents in several neighborhoods.

[42:31] Once the ELC was activated, PIO staff was heavily involved and engaged both in terms of going

[42:38] to interrupt your presentation.

[42:43] Thank you, just a question here.

[42:45] You may not be able to answer it right now, but I did request prior to the storm that

[42:50] in next storm message be sent out on my behalf, and I was informed that we were deferring

[42:55] to the city of San Jose, so I'm a little puzzled to see that my fellow directors did

[42:59] have messages that were sent out and I did not, and I represent one of the areas of fairly

[43:04] significant flooding, so I'd like a response from staff at some point on that.

[43:08] Thank you for that question.

[43:13] Can you answer that?

[43:14] So, I don't think I can specifically answer your question, but I do think that this

[43:19] is an area where we need to pay some attention to.

[43:23] We're needing to work out with our municipal partners in general, the kinds of messaging that

[43:28] is appropriate for the water district to send out.

[43:31] We've been specifically requested by the municipalities not to send out any messaging that sounds

[43:36] like a call to action, because that can end up conflicting with their public safety messages

[43:43] that they need to go out.

[43:44] And so we've been trying to construct or, I know our communication staff has been trying

[43:49] to work hard to construct appropriate messaging that won't end up conflicting or sounding

[43:54] like public safety messaging from the cities.

[43:58] And so we have to work on what kinds of messaging we can't send out before the storm

[44:03] from the directors.

[44:04] Well, I guess specifically my concern is that the other directors had messages sent out to their community and it seems to me that a message could have been crafted to come out from me that would have met those objectives.

[44:19] So this is a concern and if it can't be answered right now, I'd appreciate getting a response from staff at some further time. Thank you.

[44:29] I'm sorry. I'm not able to answer that question myself right now.

[44:37] So, going on to flood management operations, so yes, there was obviously some severe flooding

[44:44] that have impacted some of the neighborhoods,

[44:48] and as the directors of Express, the district,

[44:53] greatly empathizes with the hardships that the community had to go through, and some of it,

[44:58] And we'll see you in the next video.

[45:00] For ways to improve. Our coordinated response with the city so that we can minimize that kind

[45:07] of hardship in the future.

[45:11] Just to report out on some of the facts and statistics of our response,

[45:16] the District did activate its EOC at 8 AM on Monday, the 21st, for five consecutive 12-hour operational

[45:25] periods, REOC was in a monitoring mode the weekend prior on Saturday and Sunday as well.

[45:34] So we were officially activated for almost a 60-hour period.

[45:38] We did have numerous pre-storm conference calls, many of which were hosted by the Santa

[45:47] Claire County Office of Emergency Services, according to the Santa Clara County Flood Plan.

[45:54] And those on those calls was Santa Clara Valley Water District National Weather Service, City of San Jose,

[46:01] a number of departments from the City of San Jose, and many other municipalities,

[46:05] and other departments and agencies responsible for various parts of response.

[46:16] In those conference calls, it typically led off with a National Weather Service Meteorological Report,

[46:22] followed by a Santa Clara Valley Water District report that focused on hydrological projections,

[46:28] leading up to the storm and then during the storm, you know, real-time, real-time information

[46:34] as best as we could do it, as well as a look forward to projections as to what would come

[46:37] next throughout the storm.

[46:39] So in that we were attempting to provide very valuable information that our partners could

[46:43] use to lean forward and work on some of their responsibilities.

[46:49] We did also invite a city of San Jose, their EOC, I invited their emergency services director

[46:57] to send a liaison to actually be seated in our EOC during the duration of our activation.

[47:03] Can I interrupt you again?

[47:05] Pardon me?

[47:05] Let's comment.

[47:08] Yeah.

[47:09] I was just going to state that Rick calendar is here to respond to the questions that you had regarding

[47:15] the next door transmittals.

[47:17] If you'd like to have a response today.

[47:22] Stand by Rick.

[47:26] So in some of these various ways we were, I feel like we were engaged in very frequent contact with the city of San Jose for the entire week leading up to the storm and then during the activation they were continuously engaged as part of our EOC.

[47:41] We are obviously looking and finding shortcomings in the way that we communicated with the city of San Jose.

[47:47] The way the information was provided, the analysis that accompanied it, and, as well as trying to find out what they needed from us, more than what they received in order to have actionable information that they could make decisions from.

[48:07] But there was a lot of engagement that I feel like the district did provide some very good information

[48:13] with respect to identifying vulnerable locations along Coyote Creek where we looked and tried to pick out spots.

[48:22] Regardless of jurisdiction or ownership, try to pick out 17 spots that we wanted to identify for the City of San Jose that they needed to be aware of could flood.

[48:33] And then what the flow projections, timing and peaks, in comparison to that, could identify

[48:40] sort of a sequence of locations that might flood during the storm.

[48:45] It wasn't intended to be guarantee of flow capacities, that's not the way we intended

[48:50] it.

[48:51] We made statements to that effect, but I'm not quite sure that that fully resonated.

[48:56] And so they very well have taken them as some sort of an assurance that flood and flooding

[49:00] wouldn't occur prior to those, some of those levels.

[49:04] And we're going to be looking at the way that we

[49:05] can communicate that information.

[49:07] During the storm, our field crews were definitely out.

[49:10] We had the coyote canal to repair that I mentioned earlier.

[49:13] It was a blockage of the overpass on Metcalf,

[49:17] that the City of San Jose, we worked with them

[49:21] and the county to do a official resource request

[49:23] so that we could send out crews and equipment

[49:25] to remove that blockage.

[49:26] We also had field crews that were out doing sand-based placements near the South Bay mobile

[49:34] home park to try to raise the earthen levy to be equal and height to the concrete flood wall

[49:40] there, to prevent flooding.

[49:43] And so the field crews were definitely very active and in addition to that doing their routine

[49:46] inspections during the storm and after the storm to try to identify and remove blockages

[49:50] and debris.

[49:52] And with that, I think I'll close the storm report.

[49:54] Dr. Santos.

[50:06] Yes, thank you, Dale. I always appreciate all the work y'all do. I was just curious that you had many statistics. The last time we had that much water could have been less, more 83, been through all that. But I'd like to know you look and look back and for 83 on to see if we ever released any water that was comparable to this amount. And just to have that as far as information when we all take this further and investigate and look at different experiences.

[50:34] Good, it's a good comment a question actually since the dam was built. I believe in 1952. There's been 11 spill events

[50:41] This one

[50:44] reached

[50:45] 712 cubic feet per second over the spillway. I believe the second highest was in the neighborhood of

[50:50] 6,280

[50:51] So this was our highest by a pretty fair margin. Was it was it comparable to 83?

[50:59] I don't know the number for 83, but I definitely know it's higher than 83 because it because there's different

[51:04] the protections that went out just like that.

[51:06] Give us some of that data, so thank you.

[51:08] And again, to all the people that, you know,

[51:10] man, the EOSC and all the work you all do,

[51:13] appreciate it very much.

[51:14] Thank you, thank you.

[51:16] Thank you.

[51:19] The next story distributions that we're done during the storm.

[51:24] Do you want a speech?

[51:25] Director Kigan, did you want to make a comment?

[51:27] No, yeah.

[51:28] Okay.

[51:29] I believe in correcting it if I'm wrong.

[51:30] I believe the question was, next door messages

[51:34] were asked of us not to be sent into certain areas,

[51:38] certain areas in San Jose and am I getting the question of you?

[51:43] Well, in this storm report,

[51:45] it mentions that essentially notifications were sent out

[51:50] to next door on behalf of all the other board members

[51:53] who had flooding in their neighborhood

[51:55] and I have received a message prior to the flood occurring

[52:00] that we were not going to be doing that.

[52:03] So I'm kind of wondering what was unique about my district because frankly it was very frustrating

[52:09] not to be in a position to speak and I do understand that we were not leading the emergency

[52:16] response effort but it makes me as an elected official feel that I wasn't directly meeting

[52:23] the needs of my constituents due to that lack of communication.

[52:28] We did receive a direct request from City of San Jose that they were leading the emergency

[52:33] efforts and they want to be, make sure there was no mixed messages in that they would be primarily

[52:38] correlated, they're messages, and they would be coming from the mayor's office, which

[52:43] if you looked at leading up until the time, the messages were coming out of the mayor's office

[52:47] as well as coordinating with the PIO for their office of communications, which we were doing.

[52:54] So all of the areas that we stopped sending next to our messages and included the toli,

[53:00] the Tolly Barisford area, the Rock Springs area, the Williams Street area, as well as the area that contain the trailer parks or the parks that were ultimately flooded.

[53:16] Maybe if I could read the part in the Storm Report just so you understand where I'm coming from.

[53:21] Targeted next door messages on behalf of Directors Richard Santos,

[53:25] Linda Lizott and Tony Estromerra were sent to residents in the Bebenbrook,

[53:30] Valley View, Reed, Branham, Jarvis, and Rock Spring, the Synodies,

[53:34] regarding the monitoring of Coyote and Ross Creek,

[53:36] storm preparations and flood safety messages.

[53:40] So I just feel like somehow I got treated differently from the other board members.

[53:44] Maybe that's an incorrect assumption on my part.

[53:48] When we were aware of our efforts that needed to be alerted to the community, we did make sure

[53:54] that the messages were sent out, the timeframe, and I'm not sure the storm report that

[53:58] you're reading in, the timeframe for relating from Sunday on is when we receive the information

[54:03] from San Jose.

[54:04] I'm not sure when those exact emails were sent out, they made those next door messages, but

[54:09] they may have been prior to us being able to identify that we needed to send messages into

[54:14] Williams and to the to the Nagli Park area. Okay, that makes sense. I'm sure you understand

[54:21] though the sensitivity from my perspective. I try to be very diligent in serving my constituents.

[54:26] And I apologize for for any misuse of sending that we may have, but we do lead with the

[54:31] directors to next one messages in the neighborhood and that policy has not changed and will not change.

[54:37] Okay, thank you for that explanation. And I do have one additional comment, but I think this might

[54:43] Del Joc, this might be to you or actually it's more a general message and this is, I received a communication from one of my constituents, Mr. Jeffrey Hare who really is interested in learning.

[55:00] We'll talk more about the Anderson Dam Retrofit Project and what kind of flexibility we're going to have in the future in terms of operations.

[55:09] What he's suggesting is that the design, it's, you know, currently our design is a water supply dam and not a flood protection plan.

[55:19] But I think there's interest in the community in terms of exploring whether, if we're moving ahead with this project,

[55:28] we might want to build a little more flexibility into the dam, the operations, and the outflow that could help protect some of these neighborhoods that flooded this time.

[55:38] So this is obviously not the time at which we can discuss it, but I'd like to ask staff to bring that back to us at some point.

[55:48] So, Tim, yeah, Mr. Chair, I can respond that you can certainly do that.

[55:52] There will be additional capacity available with the upgrades that we make at the end,

[55:57] or so we can get that information to the board and to the public.

[55:59] Sure, and there's also going to be a community meeting on the Anderson Dam project.

[56:03] In Morgan Hill, at the Community Center on March 16th at 6 p.m.,

[56:08] so people that are interested in attending that meeting for an update that I urge them to do so.

[56:12] And I have a question either to you or to Rick.

[56:17] There was a former director all over the news last night,

[56:21] suggesting that Anderson Dam was irrelevant in the cause

[56:24] of the flood, and that the district missed an opportunity

[56:27] by not putting out portable dams or inflatable dams,

[56:31] and that would have circumvented any flooding,

[56:33] and would have alleviated the problem entirely

[56:35] according to this director's former director's opinion.

[56:38] Can you make a comment about that?

[56:40] Or are you familiar with that?

[56:41] What I'm talking about?

[56:44] Yes, I am familiar with the former director's report, that was the interview of Damian Trahi,

[56:48] where he did indicate certain information in that bladder dams could have prevented the flooding.

[56:54] We did respond to that report and had provided information that if bladder dams were used,

[57:00] it would have been due to flooding in other areas, and so that would not have been an appropriate methodology.

[57:05] and at least it was presented by the director,

[57:08] by the former director.

[57:10] I'm not sure how that story was generated

[57:13] or how it was started, but we did respond to it.

[57:16] We are in the process of actually scheduling

[57:18] a couple other NBC 11 interviews,

[57:21] both with the investigative team.

[57:23] Two with the investigative team,

[57:24] and one with the reporter,

[57:26] and we will be clarifying and fixing up some messages

[57:29] which have been put into the community,

[57:31] which are incorrect, that probably being one,

[57:34] if there's any further questions that need to be asked.

[57:36] So would this be classified as fake news?

[57:41] Well, this is alternative, I'll tell you a little bit for me.

[57:45] Thank you.

[57:45] Thank you for the clarification, not that.

[57:53] If I could continue with this, please.

[57:55] Yes, please.

[57:55] So I do want to please.

[57:57] You also provide the board some information for both myself, Jim Piedler and Melanie Richardson,

[58:03] and did meet with No. 2 and Dave Sikes yesterday afternoon to discuss how we could work together

[58:11] moving forward. And we talked about the organization of community meetings and understood

[58:18] that Mayor LeCardos office is going to be developing some study sessions to look at the flood

[58:24] response and to look at opportunities moving forward. And I believe right now that that's

[58:31] to be scheduled for March the 9th and so there is the hope that we as staff can participate

[58:38] in providing and enlightening and giving our perspectives on what happened during the flood event.

[58:47] And also we had talked about doing a post-devent review of all the actions that had occurred

[58:54] and to really identify some areas or opportunities for improvement and so we are going to be working

[59:00] And collectively, a joint emergency action plan, I think that that's going to be something

[59:04] that is going to be beneficial for the future.

[59:07] And with the new information that we have received during this storm is to develop few

[59:13] thresholds for coyote-creaking, Anderson-Dam moving forward so that we all could respond much

[59:20] more quickly to the community needs during the flood event.

[59:24] And we will be getting the expertise of a consultant, Mark Clementsek, who is very knowledgeable

[59:30] of the coyote watershed in order to expedite this process.

[59:34] And also, when we looked at ways moving forward in terms of solving chronic flooding

[59:40] along coyote creek, because we could respond as quickly as we can, but we still have to

[59:48] keep in mind that that area is in the flood zone, and it will always continue to flood.

[59:54] And so if we're trying to develop more resiliency in our community, we're going to have

[59:58] to look at the solution.

[1:00:00] That will actually prevent the flood and also do it in such a way that they make sense in balancing preservation

[1:00:08] and habitat for coyote Creek.

[1:00:10] Thank you.

[1:00:11] Director Estimer?

[1:00:15] I had a couple of questions, but I think that the CEO answered some of them, and that was

[1:00:19] with respect to what the process is, of notists and so on, and what the threshold is, and

[1:00:25] that kind of stuff would be working on, and that's good enough for me.

[1:00:31] Yeah, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's good enough.

[1:00:34] What is that?

[1:00:35] Thank you Director Creman.

[1:00:37] Yeah, thank you chair.

[1:00:39] My understanding when we looked at kind of the mid-coyote region that we,

[1:00:45] we deemed a flood control project wouldn't be formidable.

[1:00:51] That's one of the analysis we did, I guess this would be a question to see.

[1:00:56] Yeah.

[1:00:57] We could further address those questions under the CIP discussion that we're going to be having coming up fairly soon.

[1:01:05] Okay, that's good because I'm really curious on the role of the regulators here because it seems that maybe regulators got in the way of us being able to serve the community here.

[1:01:16] And I know we're before the Little Hoover Commission and others. I don't think members of the public understand that there's projects we'd like to do in flood control but regulators like the state.

[1:01:27] Board getting the way, so I'd like to be sure we discussed that later tonight because people don't understand that. Thanks.

[1:01:37] Director Santos?

[1:01:39] Yes, thank you, Chair. You know, I know we're going to be discussing this in depth.

[1:01:43] A lot more as time goes by, but I do want to take the time when the public's here to just say a few things.

[1:01:50] All our staff and people, you know, it just didn't happen like one day.

[1:01:55] I've been on the phone with chair Verella, Rick calendar, Rachel Gibson, Michelle King.

[1:01:59] I'm going Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, way before the flood.

[1:02:03] Folks, don't be sometimes swayed by what you may read in the media.

[1:02:08] This was an ongoing process with our CEO, numerous conversations,

[1:02:14] right up to when these unfortunate things happen.

[1:02:17] And so I wanted to thank all those folks working on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, Rick

[1:02:23] Calmer had the flu, and the state at home was on the media and everything else.

[1:02:27] It's just continually with phone calls, and if you know me, I'm a real pest, these things

[1:02:31] are very sensitive.

[1:02:32] I'm going to share a verella every day, having a discussion, making sure what we need, reach

[1:02:37] it out.

[1:02:38] I was on the phone with the Alberto Duendez, the city manager, real good guy, and just sat there

[1:02:43] and he's telling me, yeah, I'm talking to normal, I can go back and forth all day, but

[1:02:47] So this would be what's going on every single day keep an update on everything but again to a warm minimum and who do a fantastic job. Thank you

[1:02:55] Thank you director Santas director Astamara

[1:02:59] I did want to repeat a few things that I've had an opportunity to share with the community and that is you know

[1:03:09] We don't hear 20 years and I think we've had at least four or five different

[1:03:14] projects that will propose for the coyote area and for many reasons mostly because of permitting and the core not wanting to support these projects because of this analysis that they do with respect to values.

[1:03:33] You know, this, this truly is a question of environmental justice.

[1:03:40] There's certain areas in the city.

[1:03:43] If I caught you talk about that, there's certain areas in the city

[1:03:46] that get better treatment than others.

[1:03:49] And that's just the way it is.

[1:03:52] We've tried for many years to address that

[1:03:56] and to try to get the court to address it.

[1:03:59] and we haven't been successful. We've got good news. Otherwise, our viso didn't flood.

[1:04:09] Now, viso always flooded before but we did a project and our viso finally.

[1:04:14] And these sidewalks grew up, which always flooded when I was in high school,

[1:04:20] had didn't flood either, because we just finished the project on lower silver, all the way over to the lake.

[1:04:25] And the lake is there because that was the biggest part of the flooded area.

[1:04:32] So we have some successes, and obviously we have still some challenges that we're going

[1:04:38] to continue to work on.

[1:04:40] I, you know, always see some opportunities in these disasters, and I noticed that Governor

[1:04:48] Brown was just announcing that he was going to repurpose some of the bond money.

[1:04:55] that was passed and approved in the past, specifically.

[1:05:00] Over a billion dollars to address some of the flooding in the state.

[1:05:05] And maybe that will allow us to address these areas against specifically.

[1:05:13] And, of course, our delegation is on its way to Washington, D.C. as we always ought twice a year.

[1:05:20] This time, May 1st, will be in D.C.

[1:05:25] Carrying the news of what happened to us so that maybe this time the core will be able to support us on some of these projects and hopefully with the help of the governor's office

[1:05:36] State regulators will be a little bit more supportive than they were in the past and we will continue to try our best to do our work

[1:05:47] I remember over the years, you know, in fact, I worked as Santos and I just a few years ago,

[1:05:53] I attended a community meeting where the community showed up and said they didn't want to need,

[1:05:58] they didn't want any flood control work in their area.

[1:06:02] They wanted us to go away.

[1:06:05] And we tried to explain to them that, you know, we don't look for work.

[1:06:14] We're trying to do what we're supposed to do, and that's to address the dangers in the

[1:06:19] community and trying to make the community safer and trying to address the flooding

[1:06:24] needs of the community.

[1:06:26] And after a while they understood and they became very supportive and we in the middle of

[1:06:30] that project that we'll buy penitentia.

[1:06:33] So we will continue to do our job and we'll continue to try and convince the regulators

[1:06:40] and the federal government and the core that we still have a lot of areas in the city that are

[1:06:48] in danger and needs some support. So with you help we'll continue to do our best to do our

[1:06:56] mission and we'll pursue that all the way to Sacramento and DC as many times as it takes.

[1:07:08] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think we need to move on with the agenda.

[1:07:12] Yeah, we have a few more report out from Jim Featler.

[1:07:16] And the water.

[1:07:16] Okay.

[1:07:17] Do you want to pull that?

[1:07:19] It's a chair.

[1:07:24] Okay. First, I'll have Angela Chun come up.

[1:07:27] In Angela, we'll report on the work at Rinkanad and they just shut down some other issues that occurred

[1:07:32] over the last couple of weeks.

[1:07:34] Okay. Good evening, Chair.

[1:07:36] Rela, members of the board, and Mansello Chang, Deputy Operating Officer for the Water

[1:07:40] Utility Operations and Maintenance Division.

[1:07:42] First item that I want to report on is that one informed the board that next Tuesday,

[1:07:47] March 7th, will be doing the last swing cannot shut down the swing or in support of the

[1:07:53] Reliability Improvement Project and winner maintenance activities.

[1:07:56] The shutdown will be for a week returning to service on March 14th.

[1:08:01] The contractor will be working on the raw water control facility which will require the

[1:08:05] can out of force main to be the water and the contractor will also be doing electrical

[1:08:09] time work. The district main in the staff will be getting five of the plants

[1:08:15] chemical storage tanks clean and inspect it removing precipitation from the

[1:08:19] chlorine fee lines and also completing electrical work that can only be performed

[1:08:24] doing a plant shutdown. Retailers were informed well in advance and already to

[1:08:29] accommodate the shutdown with alternate water sources. Related to the

[1:08:33] can out a shutdown, staff will be taking advantage of this schedule shutdown to inspect the

[1:08:38] Santa Clara Tunnel, which is part of the Sanctuary Basism.

[1:08:42] The Bureau of Reclamation staff and all staff will be inspecting the Tunnel on Sunday,

[1:08:46] March 12th.

[1:08:48] Results of the inspection will be used, we find scope of work for tunnel lining repair, which

[1:08:54] is part of the upcoming particular conduit inspection and rehab project.

[1:08:58] to accommodate a sonoclark tunnel inspection.

[1:09:01] Scentfully they will be shut down and a portion drain.

[1:09:04] So the sanitary water treatment plan will be using

[1:09:06] Clareal Reservoir, a source water,

[1:09:08] which can only supply about 32 mgd by gravity.

[1:09:11] We have asked S of PUC for inattized standby readiness.

[1:09:16] So we're planning to possibly bring in about 10 mgd

[1:09:19] to supplement ESI retailer demands.

[1:09:23] And last but not least, we did experience a few

[1:09:26] power outages affecting the facilities in the last couple of weeks.

[1:09:30] Over the precedents stay weekend, there was an extent of power outage in the little

[1:09:34] scottles area.

[1:09:35] A reen cannot water treatment plan had a 26 hour power outage which was pretty unprecedented.

[1:09:42] However, the plan's backup generator smoothly transitioned in, so the plan never experienced

[1:09:47] any interruptions in operational delivery of treat-a-water.

[1:09:51] Senator trees are water treatment plan had a few power glitches, nothing really long enough

[1:09:55] to kick in the backup generator and staff how to restart a few systems again.

[1:10:00] And there was nothing that actually interrupted the plans operation or delivery of treat-a-water.

[1:10:05] Last weekend, the Silicon Valley events water purification center had a power outage on Saturday.

[1:10:10] It was not storm-related. There was a hidden run from a driver who knocked down three power poles on Sankaro,

[1:10:17] and calls a power outage to the purification center.

[1:10:20] City of San Jose's plant was not affected, and we started the purification center back up on Sunday.

[1:10:25] With that, I'll stand for any questions.

[1:10:27] Director Kremlin? Yeah. You would think, you know, back to these power outages. I mean,

[1:10:34] I understand someone hitting a power pole. Even there, though, you would think we have

[1:10:37] backup power at which facilities do we have that? I mean, maybe I don't want to take the

[1:10:41] meeting now. But I'd like to know when our main power goes out of which is given the

[1:10:46] criticalness of water treatment with uninterruptible power supplies. Okay. So I've been

[1:10:52] waiting for you. We can come back on that. Okay.

[1:10:55] question.

[1:10:56] To look at Assembly please.

[1:10:57] Assembly publication hundreds did not have backup that was by

[1:11:00] designed we're looking in that later.

[1:11:02] All right going to be happy.

[1:11:04] The other item we have Mr. Chair is we have a report from

[1:11:08] Garth Hall, a couple of points, one is gotta report on the

[1:11:11] initial allocation we have got today from the Bureau of

[1:11:13] Reclamation and secondly, crews are in the field in

[1:11:16] specular facilities and he will report in a minor issue we found

[1:11:19] in a one of our spillways.

[1:11:21] Good evening, Chair and Board members. From time to time, we update you on the allocations

[1:11:27] of federal and state water project water previously informed the board that the state

[1:11:31] water project has allocated 60 percent to its customers this year that have been a fairly

[1:11:38] long time ago, many, many weeks ago. Just today, Bureau of Reclamation had an announcement

[1:11:44] where they allocated in part water to their customers, but not including the

[1:11:51] district and civil others. The ones that they allocated were on the American River at 100% and

[1:11:57] on the San Joaquin River, the Friant, the Friant Group, got 100% both of those river systems,

[1:12:02] their San Joaquin and the American River, by the way, are just very flowing, very strongly

[1:12:06] with the results very fall, with no particular fish issues. So that was a very simple and

[1:12:13] not unexpected announcement. So the expectation is there by the middle or third week of March,

[1:12:20] we will get the allocations that we expect.

[1:12:22] Reclamation does observe without making commitments that

[1:12:25] shasters very fall and that within the next week,

[1:12:30] the federal share on Sun Lewis Resver will be fall.

[1:12:33] So they're indicating that there's plenty of water in the system,

[1:12:36] however, until we have the allocations, we don't really know.

[1:12:39] The second item I Mr. Fiddler asked me to report on is

[1:12:42] Saffroner, our crews are out making between

[1:12:44] routine inspections of spillways and so on.

[1:12:46] On coyote reservoir, just above Anderson, the spillway, there was noticed to be a very small concrete

[1:12:55] tear and you could see a little slashing of water on the spillways as the water is a reducing on that spillway.

[1:13:02] Cruz inspected, expect that they can repair this very quickly within the next week.

[1:13:07] So this is a must-stress, a very small piece of damage from the storm.

[1:13:13] I have a question for you.

[1:13:14] Does that spill go?

[1:13:15] That goes into Anderson.

[1:13:16] Is that correct?

[1:13:16] That's correct.

[1:13:21] Thank you.

[1:13:21] Anybody any other comment report?

[1:13:24] That would conclude our report.

[1:13:27] Well, a very thorough report indeed.

[1:13:29] Yes, Director Santos.

[1:13:32] Briefly, thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:13:34] I haven't seen knock in a couple of weeks because we had meetings that he was

[1:13:37] out doing something else.

[1:13:38] But I want to take the time because I wanted to say a couple a month ago.

[1:13:41] But thank you for all your work.

[1:13:43] Because with like Tony said, we had a community that didn't want a certain flood wall,

[1:13:46] not because persistent, and as you know, I would really appreciate it that.

[1:13:50] And they stuck to his guns and he handled himself as a professional.

[1:13:54] And thanks to that, there was no flooding, and they would have been.

[1:13:57] Thank you.

[1:13:59] Well done.

[1:13:59] Thank you.

[1:14:00] So we move on to item 2.6 on the agenda.

[1:14:06] The record happened with what Dick said.

[1:14:07] You know, this issue of flood walls and communities not like in flood walls.

[1:14:11] It seems kind of now is the time maybe we need to get out and explain this in some communities like happening in director Santos's district right now that floodwalls

[1:14:21] appropriate floodwalls can help

[1:14:23] You know, we want everything natural flood control, but sometimes it's just impossible, or there's no upstream storage

[1:14:30] So it seems you know, we never can get our case out there. Why flood let's say just is it quote floodwalls are needed, or why we should raise rates to

[1:14:39] improve dams or why storage is important. And then when it's

[1:14:44] throughout time people shoot at us and why didn't you do anything? Now we

[1:14:48] should kind of take note at this very moment. This is an example of why we have

[1:14:52] flood control storage and other things. Very good point director. Any other

[1:14:57] comments? Okay moving on to item.

[1:15:00] From 2.6 on the agenda, chief executive officer and general manager's search update. Previously listed at item 2.1, the recommendation will be to receive stakeholder and community input and direct the consultant as appropriate.

[1:15:14] The board has retained that corn and ferry a global executive recruitment firm to work with us and managing the chief executive officer and general manager's search process.

[1:15:24] Identifying and onboarding the district's next chief executive officer is a top priority and

[1:15:30] the board is committed to conducting a thoughtful thorough and transparent search process.

[1:15:36] Therefore, we are pleased to have Shaleefost and Dan Pulver from Corn and Carey,

[1:15:41] very excuse me, with us this evening to provide an overview of the experience and leadership

[1:15:46] profile the search process and anticipated timeline.

[1:15:53] All right, thank you very much, Chairman, Bella, members of the Board, district staff, as well as the general public.

[1:16:02] As Chair of Aurella has mentioned, this is a very critical process that the Board has undertaken in terms of the search process, which will be a national search process for your next CEO and general manager of the district.

[1:16:15] So as we talk about, we've been asked to talk about the leadership profile and the experience

[1:16:24] profile that has been developed jointly with members of the board and to talk a little

[1:16:32] bit about the process and timeline for this search.

[1:16:36] Just one of the things we wanted to mention, this was a competitive process, so cornfarer

[1:16:44] was selected as a result of a competitive RFP for the process.

[1:16:49] This will be a national search that we will conduct, and we anticipate that there will

[1:16:55] be both external as well as internal candidates for the search process.

[1:17:02] So one of the first things that as a part of our search that we need to do is to really

[1:17:08] understand who this organization is and the key parameters for the organization.

[1:17:14] So certainly understanding the forced strategic pillars, the board and district have obviously

[1:17:20] done an outstanding job in terms of its strategic planning and being able to look at

[1:17:26] the strategic pillars, you know, tonight certainly even more important with conversations

[1:17:31] as we're having tonight around flood protection.

[1:17:33] So, certainly flood protection, both infrastructure as well as strategies associated with flood protection

[1:17:39] are very critical, as well as looking at adequate and high-quality water supply, environmental

[1:17:46] stewardship, looking at overall watershed management to flood plains and all of the issues

[1:17:52] associated with that that come into the purview of this organization, as well as the overall

[1:17:57] business management of the district, ensuring that there are diverse and inclusive policies,

[1:18:03] in the organization, that there are effective programs and policies for working with the unions

[1:18:09] and engaging with the partners and the communities as well as with staff, all in the mission

[1:18:15] to serve the mission of the district, which is to provide Silicon Valley safe, clean water for

[1:18:21] healthy life, environment, and economy in the region, again, all very appropriate for the issues

[1:18:29] that we're talking about tonight.

[1:18:31] We have posted the position profile on the district's website, so in the interest of time

[1:18:37] this evening, recognizing that you have so many issues to get through, we won't go through

[1:18:40] a lot of the individual detail, but again, the key responsibilities of the chief executive

[1:18:46] officer in general manager are to serve at the direction of the board, it's the board's role

[1:18:53] to certainly set policy and the role of the CEO to follow that policy and to implement that

[1:18:58] policy with its staff and with the communities in which it serves. So we talk about the fact

[1:19:05] that collaborative relationship with key stakeholders is critical and that the CEO's mission

[1:19:12] in all of the key areas, whether it's water supply, ensuring quality, quantity of water

[1:19:19] and an environmentally responsible manner. Again, looking at flood protection, both in terms

[1:19:25] of the operational issues and infrastructure associated with flood protection, environmental

[1:19:32] stewardship, the ability to protect and enhance water sheds and the natural resources

[1:19:39] that surround them, working very much in collaboration, again, with the local communities,

[1:19:46] with the NGOs, with the regulators, at both the federal and state level.

[1:19:51] And then from a business management standpoint, as we've talked about, certainly diversity

[1:19:54] and inclusion is a critical parameter here that we need to ensure that whoever comes in is the

[1:20:00] Next leader of this organization that that's a key pillar for them as well, and also ensuring that the district has the financial stability in order to proceed and to do the things that we've talked about, especially here in the context of flood protection, and also working in a positive and beneficial manner with the district's unions.

[1:20:19] We talk about the professional experiences and qualifications, you know, it's clear that this

[1:20:27] is not a training ground for bringing individuals who do not have experience in this area.

[1:20:32] These are complex roles that require a mix of technical,

[1:20:39] including engineering, hydrology,

[1:20:41] environmental stewardship, financial, political, regulatory, as well as very strong leadership

[1:20:48] qualities. So we talk about the fact that in terms of functional

[1:20:53] and technical qualifications need to include some of who understands the

[1:20:56] administration of a public entity. The ability to have ensure long-term

[1:21:02] viable and continued quality as well as financial performance of water

[1:21:07] supply. Again, that ability to interact with local governments, state

[1:21:12] governments, as well as federal governments on every issue that comes before

[1:21:17] this district is a critical component.

[1:21:21] Certainly, the capital budgets of this organization are significant, and so the ability to have

[1:21:26] strong financial stewardship of the district's resources and being able to be a strong advocate

[1:21:33] for incremental resources as needed in order to meet the district's obligations are important.

[1:21:39] We talk about that this individual need to have at least 15 years of demonstrated experience

[1:21:45] in relevant areas. Again, this is we're looking for experienced executives in highly relevant

[1:21:51] areas. And again, all of the qualifications are in spelled out in significant detail in the position profile that is located on the district's website.

[1:22:06] We're talking about the interpersonal and leadership qualities as well. These are as important in many cases,

[1:22:11] sometimes even more important than some of the technical qualifications.

[1:22:15] The technical qualification sort of set the bar in terms of individuals who can be determined

[1:22:21] to be a qualified, but it's the leadership and interpersonal skills that really differentiate

[1:22:27] your next CEO in terms of fit for this organization.

[1:22:31] We talk about that the board is very focused on ensuring that the next CEO is very much a collaborative

[1:22:39] of leader who will work with them and also work with the staff of the local communities

[1:22:44] in a highly collaborative manner. They will also be able to create and articulate an innovative

[1:22:51] vision for this district. We've talked about the fact that this organization is located

[1:22:56] here in the Silicon Valley where you have some of the, certainly some of the greatest

[1:23:01] minds in the country in terms of the ability to innovate. And so looking for individuals

[1:23:06] who can harness those resources and those ideas to solve some of the very, you know, technically

[1:23:11] combat complex, financially complex issues that face this district.

[1:23:18] We talk about a sensitivity and appreciation for diversity and inclusion, again, that

[1:23:22] that's something that comes across in every conversation that we've had with members of the

[1:23:27] board.

[1:23:28] And again, the ability to work effectively with the represented workforce that represents a significant

[1:23:35] portion of this district, also provide succession planning and leadership for the organization.

[1:23:43] Those are also very critical components that the district is looking for, the board is looking

[1:23:48] for in its next and its next leader.

[1:23:51] And again, the ability to thrive in a regulatory complex regulatory and political, when I

[1:23:58] would also say, you know, not only just in the state of California, but also at the federal

[1:24:03] level as well, it's just becoming more complex every day, certainly.

[1:24:10] We, in the position profile, there's a listing of year one success factors.

[1:24:14] This is a dynamic document, and I would imagine that given some of the events that have

[1:24:19] occurred in the last few weeks that some of these success factors may change as we go through

[1:24:24] this process.

[1:24:25] But clearly we're talking about a seamless leadership transition for the new leader, the ability

[1:24:31] to build confidence between the board and the staff of the organization to ensure that the capital

[1:24:37] improvement programs, and I'm sure that there's potential to reallocate funds to maybe

[1:24:43] rethink some of the flood protection, plans and strategies and capital allocations associated

[1:24:49] with that. Again, to continue to build many of the collaborative relationships that your

[1:24:55] current CEO has already begun to build in the community.

[1:25:00] And I think has been well respected for her work in that area. And again, to develop a culture of accountability and achievement within the organization itself.

[1:25:13] We talk about employee engagement, but it's not just employee engagement, but also the ability to empower employees in addition to engage them in their work.

[1:25:25] So, a little bit of our search process overview, again, the board is committed as Chair

[1:25:31] of Aurella mentioned that this is part of a report from the director's away, as we

[1:25:36] comment.

[1:25:38] Thank you, Chair.

[1:25:40] Can we go back to the previous slides?

[1:25:49] So, this third bullet, it's just kind of odd to me that it seems that it's other place

[1:25:57] with the other bullets as a success factor.

[1:26:01] One, the first, the first thing, second thing is that it just, it just, it just

[1:26:06] ought to me that there's a lot of districts,

[1:26:11] very broad projects, programs, just seeing

[1:26:16] as single out as the success factor, there are many, many other things, I think, probably could

[1:26:25] be more critical, or at least equally critical.

[1:26:30] So I was suggest that you mentioned that this is a moving document.

[1:26:37] So that last four meeting or two four meetings ago,

[1:26:41] the board actually adopted a budget message for next fiscal year.

[1:26:47] If we're looking at next fiscal year, maybe that's a good starting point.

[1:26:51] the board's budget message and instead of just out of many hundred things that one thing

[1:27:00] gets picked up as a success factor, just things all the place to me.

[1:27:08] Thank you.

[1:27:09] Thank you, Dr. Drycher.

[1:27:12] Continue.

[1:27:14] So again, the little bit more about the search process.

[1:27:17] This is more about, it's about finding the right leader.

[1:27:21] It's not necessarily about a very specific time frame, but the estimate is that we're looking to complete a process in an average time frame of four to six months.

[1:27:32] It could be shorter than that. It could be a little bit longer. It really depends on finding the right leader for the process or for the organization.

[1:27:41] We talked about that this is going to be a very confidential process.

[1:27:46] So in order to really ensure that we're able to bring the most qualified candidates to the table

[1:27:53] for evaluation, that the consensus was that we would agree to a confidential process,

[1:27:59] so the names of candidates will not be shared in any kind of a public domain until such

[1:28:06] time as the board makes its final decision for a new CEO.

[1:28:12] We've talked about the fact that this will certainly be a diverse slate of candidates.

[1:28:16] Our objective is always to create a diverse slate of candidates for consideration by the board.

[1:28:25] And again, as I mentioned earlier, it is also anticipated that there would be both internal and external candidates

[1:28:31] that would be assessed as a part of this process.

[1:28:35] And there is no differentiation in terms of our evaluation, whether an individual is an internal or an external candidate.

[1:28:43] They go through the same evaluation process and a similar timeframe and would be evaluated against the same set of criteria.

[1:28:51] There will be regular updates from Chair Morella posted on the district's website to keep the public informed in terms of where we are about the search process at any point in time.

[1:29:06] a little bit about the process itself.

[1:29:12] So, again, our intent is that this is a comprehensive and proactive sourcing process.

[1:29:19] While we do post the position on some of the, you know,

[1:29:24] it's certainly posted on the district's website.

[1:29:26] We would also post it on other industry websites.

[1:29:29] This is very much a proactive sourcing process.

[1:29:31] So, in many cases, we are going out and identifying individuals that are currently employed.

[1:29:37] in a wide range of organizations, so you can see here that we talk about, you know, it's

[1:29:43] everything from similarly situated organizations to, to this organization, expanding into

[1:29:51] other areas of both water and energy, but certainly all areas that would have similar

[1:29:59] context.

[1:30:00] Next in terms of experience and qualifications of individuals in order to fill this roll.

[1:30:07] Another part of our process, that's actually unique to corn fairy, corn fairy, has its own proprietary

[1:30:13] intellectual property around leadership assessment. So every candidate that we evaluate and determine

[1:30:20] meets our qualifications in terms of the experience and skill sets. We also take them through a

[1:30:26] comprehensive leadership assessment, we have our own on-staff PhD industrial and clinical

[1:30:31] psychologists to work with us.

[1:30:33] We've taken over 2 million executives through this process, and this provides us additional

[1:30:40] insights into the leadership competencies as well as motivators and culture fit for this organization.

[1:30:48] And the statistics show that individuals who go through this process are eight times more likely

[1:30:54] to be promoted. In this case, this is the top role, so maybe that's a little less relevant,

[1:31:00] but certainly to be perceived as being top performers in their position.

[1:31:05] But it does help increase the statistics in terms of ensuring that you find the best fit for your next CEO.

[1:31:14] A little bit about the process and timeline, so we're really at the conclusion of really the first of four phases

[1:31:20] In terms of our kickoff and due diligence, and that was this meeting to design to get additional feedback from the board and also from the stakeholder community.

[1:31:31] We will then commence our candidate identification and evaluation process.

[1:31:36] With the intention of then developing a short list of candidates who will likely go through at least a two step interview process with the board.

[1:31:45] and then looking at a finalist candidate who would then go through extensive

[1:31:50] vetting and background checking through that process.

[1:31:59] Again, posted on the District's website is our contact information.

[1:32:03] There's a link into our website where anyone who is interested in applying

[1:32:08] and believes that they have the criteria and qualifications that we're looking for

[1:32:12] applied directly into the e-corn ferry website and also our contact information is there along

[1:32:20] with the position specification and we will make the changes that were recommended

[1:32:27] this evening into that profile and and repost that on the website.

[1:32:34] So happy to answer any further questions.

[1:32:36] Thank you Mr. Sposite. Questions any comment?

[1:32:41] So this question may be premature, but what's the level of interest that we so far have seen or is it too early to tell?

[1:32:50] It's a little early, but again, we are from initial feedback in the market.

[1:32:56] This is viewed as a very interesting role in an organization that has a very solid reputation in the community and it's a very complex role.

[1:33:08] So, I think, you know, again, it's quite early, but we're already, the phone is ringing,

[1:33:14] let's say, as we're reaching out, we're able to have very robust conversations with individuals

[1:33:19] that we think are potentially qualified for the role.

[1:33:23] Dr. Creman, excuse me.

[1:33:25] For the next time, Dr. Creman,

[1:33:29] have we talked to, is this the meeting where we're supposed

[1:33:34] get some community input, have we done any things,

[1:33:39] reach out to any employees, any of the represented

[1:33:41] and unclassified employees shed or is we're doing it now?

[1:33:45] No, we have not.

[1:33:47] Do you mind to do that?

[1:33:49] This was really the only meeting that we had on the agenda

[1:33:53] in order to solicit that feedback.

[1:33:56] If there's other processes,

[1:34:01] this is Monarchy Ganju from Watershakes.

[1:34:05] I'm working with the consultants in terms of reaching out internally.

[1:34:09] There was a message sent out from Chair Varela on internal and was posted on internet as well.

[1:34:15] Saying that there is this meeting and it's to get input from stakeholders.

[1:34:27] Okay. Any other questions or comments?

[1:34:32] Thank you.

[1:34:33] Thank you.

[1:34:33] I do have a number of our public.

[1:34:36] I would like to speak on this, Mr.

[1:34:38] How do you pronounce your name?

[1:34:40] Your head?

[1:34:41] There you are.

[1:34:43] Well, thank you, Chair Varlas.

[1:34:46] To share.

[1:34:46] It's always good to be back among people who understand that I'm a little bit on the extreme

[1:34:53] edge of things in terms of process.

[1:34:56] So, two questions for you on page 11.

[1:35:00] One of the presentation under the search process due diligence, there's a wonderful collection of words that I don't understand.

[1:35:09] Socialize the strategy and profile with community and stakeholders. My second question is more in line with the Director Cremon in terms of how you're reaching out to the community to get their input.

[1:35:26] the subject line for this agenda item is receive community input except that it pairs

[1:35:32] that if we didn't happen to be here tonight, to speak to you, there's no mechanism for doing

[1:35:38] that. I would hope that there is an intent to continue to solicit input. It doesn't say anything

[1:35:47] about the website except unless I want to apply to be CEO and I'm definitely underqualified

[1:35:52] for that position, you know, how am I supposed to do it,

[1:35:56] how is anyone else supposed to do it?

[1:35:58] It seems inadequate to me that this meeting

[1:36:01] is the only opportunity to receive community input.

[1:36:07] So the language one is just kind of an amusing one.

[1:36:10] The community outreach I don't think is amusing at all

[1:36:13] and doesn't appear to be inadequate to me.

[1:36:16] Thank you.

[1:36:17] Thank you, Mr. Mirat.

[1:36:19] Director Kigan.

[1:36:21] Thank you, perhaps, given that we've had a couple of comments recommending greater community

[1:36:32] input.

[1:36:32] I am wondering whether or not we could perhaps have some sort of survey that might allow

[1:36:39] members of the community to provide some level of input.

[1:36:43] I'm just kind of tossing that idea out right now, but I think whenever you're looking

[1:36:48] for input from either the public or employees, the best way to ensure you get it is to make

[1:36:54] the process as easy as possible for people to engage with.

[1:36:59] So I don't know whether our consultants can speak to whether there might be an opportunity

[1:37:05] to do that.

[1:37:07] I, you know, based on some of their prior experiences.

[1:37:11] Thank you.

[1:37:13] I have two more comments from the director.

[1:37:15] Do you want to hold your comments?

[1:37:16] Just put that as a note.

[1:37:18] Director Swayo.

[1:37:20] Thank you, Chair.

[1:37:22] I related to Director Keegan's comment

[1:37:25] and Mr. Muir here's comment.

[1:37:28] I was also a little confused when I read

[1:37:30] this agenda memo.

[1:37:31] The recommendations that received stakeholder

[1:37:33] and community input in direct

[1:37:36] the consultant as appropriate.

[1:37:38] So I thought this agenda item is

[1:37:41] for the board after listening

[1:37:43] to the presentation, to direct consultant, to do a outreach, and there's a list of the input.

[1:37:54] So it is very confusing, while we're trying to do it.

[1:37:57] If this is the only meeting that's planned, I agree with Director Keguysher, probably have

[1:38:04] a process and then a process that everybody can follow.

[1:38:07] I'm easy to easy to follow to providing input.

[1:38:10] Director Kremlin?

[1:38:13] I'd agree with those, maybe something off on the website to say comments, and a minimum

[1:38:19] GoCPMA, Yes, and EA, and find out what they're thinking.

[1:38:24] I mean, our employee groups, you know, even an informal meeting, you know, maybe, you know,

[1:38:31] this shouldn't be the only meeting possible.

[1:38:35] So I suggest maybe you work with staff to figure out just a meeting with them to see what

[1:38:39] they're thinking plus this other stakeholder stuff.

[1:38:43] Well, though it sounds like a question

[1:38:44] that was posed by Director Kagan, so can you respond to her?

[1:38:46] I would say, because it sounds like there are two issues here.

[1:38:49] One is community input, and the other is staff.

[1:38:53] Input is that correct?

[1:38:55] I would say I think that we have engaged in a process

[1:39:00] according to Ms. Donju that would allow for input by our employees.

[1:39:05] So, I'm not perhaps, as concerned about that, the fact though that this is an important position

[1:39:13] to fill, it might be advisable to try and encourage people, you know, we had one individual

[1:39:21] show up and speak to this tonight. So, to be interested in getting people a little more

[1:39:30] engage. I don't think that it's really going to materially change what we're looking for,

[1:39:37] but it's always nice to be able to say that you've provided an opportunity and that's why

[1:39:41] I wanted to defer to you as the person with the expertise in this area. Is there anything that you

[1:39:47] think we might be relatively easily able to implement that could facilitate us getting that input?

[1:39:54] I realize that was a long sentence or questions, so give it a good shot.

[1:40:00] That's fine. You know, in terms of experience, you know, I've seen it in many different ways. I mean, you know, in some cases there is a longer process of developing the profile with the board and that that is then socialized more in terms of it's out there, you know, for discussion for a longer period of time.

[1:40:21] So we can certainly work with the board and with the staff in terms of identifying other mechanisms.

[1:40:30] So because obviously getting more of that feedback is helpful to us as well in terms of being able to gauge the feedback from the wide range of stakeholders that are either here tonight or those who would like to weigh in on this process.

[1:40:46] I think I'm basing my comments on what I've seen with some executive searches, like for

[1:40:53] example for city managers, and particularly since the process we're following, you know,

[1:41:00] we're not going to bring our top 10 candidates in public and people will get a chance to vote

[1:41:05] on whoever they want to stay on the island, so again I don't think, I think we've come up with

[1:41:15] very solid process here. But it's always nice to validate that. And so, I don't want

[1:41:21] to overly lengthen the process or be terribly burdensome. But again, if there's something

[1:41:27] like having a brief survey on our website or whatever other mechanism you think might be appropriate,

[1:41:37] I'd be interested in hearing about that. And I'd be happy to work with the staff and to come

[1:41:41] with the proposal that we can come back to the board with, that can do that in a timely manner

[1:41:47] that still provides that level of engagement and support.

[1:41:51] I think that would be great if my colleagues can occur with that.

[1:41:57] Any other comments from the board?

[1:41:59] So my comment is, my impression is, and I understand you, does that's why you're into contract?

[1:42:05] Is to bring all these questions to life and bring these differences that you're hearing tonight?

[1:42:13] I was kind of expecting to get a more of a, I guess, an update as to where we're at from the last time you present it to the board.

[1:42:22] And it seems like the process has taken much longer than it needs to, and maybe it's just a perception on my part.

[1:42:29] You're the experts, this is your, this is your ballgame, your playing field.

[1:42:34] And it seems like you're asking more information and input from the board than you're offering to giving us.

[1:42:40] And that's a perception that I'm getting tonight.

[1:42:43] I think at this time.

[1:42:44] Next, would I have the process or we need to move forward on this?

[1:42:46] Well, and we are, so behind the scenes, we are moving forward.

[1:42:50] The information is posted.

[1:42:51] We are in the market beginning to identify and evaluate candidates.

[1:42:58] I think to the point that was made, I think we have a robust profile that's already in place.

[1:43:04] That was very much one that was solicited through significant interaction with the board.

[1:43:10] and each of the directors, and we have taken that as the profile that we are going to market

[1:43:17] with.

[1:43:18] So, again, if there's also, we had also heard that this was a process that the board wanted

[1:43:25] to direct, and we took that at the board's, maybe at the board's direction, that that was

[1:43:31] the profile that we were to go out to the market with and begin our process.

[1:43:37] So, I don't think that we are waiting, you know, for a lot of additional feedback.

[1:43:42] I mean, I think that that will still be helpful to provide color.

[1:43:45] It's as helpful to the board as you go through your evaluation process of candidates that

[1:43:51] are brought to you.

[1:43:52] I don't know that it necessarily changes a lot in terms of the documents and materials that

[1:43:58] are out there in the public domain.

[1:43:59] But again, I think it's still helpful input for you as the board that has to make a critical

[1:44:04] decision and it's helpful for us to be able to get feedback from the local communities

[1:44:10] as we evaluate candidates and convince individuals that this is a position that should be

[1:44:17] interesting to them from a career standpoint.

[1:44:21] Thank you very much.

[1:44:22] All right.

[1:44:23] Thank you.

[1:44:25] Moving on on the agenda to item 2.7, the Safe Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection

[1:44:30] program independent monitoring committees third and a report for fiscal year 2015-2016.

[1:44:40] We have a recommendation A received the Safe Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection

[1:44:45] Program, as I just indicated, and provide direction to staff as appropriate.

[1:44:50] It afternoon or evening to the chair and to the board members.

[1:44:54] I'm Glenn and Bramwell. I'm one of the liaison's for the Safe Clean Water

[1:44:57] Independent Monitoring Committee.

[1:45:00] We have Kathleen Sutherland, who is chair, and she will be giving you an overview with the letter,

[1:45:07] the challenges and the priorities. So, I do want to thank her for her patience as we told her

[1:45:12] it was time since, um, certain ed 6. So, come on up, Kathy, and give them your field.

[1:45:20] Thank you, Gwana. Thank you very much.

[1:45:27] Good evening. My name is Kathy Sutherland and I am the chair of the independent monitoring

[1:45:31] committee for the Safe Clean Water bond measure.

[1:45:34] And this is the third time I've been before the board to present our findings to the board

[1:45:40] and ask the two except our recommendations regarding the report.

[1:45:46] Just to reiterate what we do is we look backwards.

[1:45:52] The staff writes the report presents it to the board, the board, then forwards it to the independent

[1:45:58] Monitoring Committee and then we look at the report and see if there are ways suggest suggestions that we can make that would improve the readability of the report and see if there are any issues that are of concern to us as independent monitoring committee members.

[1:46:15] So, the report we looked at was the 1516 Safe Clean Water Report and our recommendations

[1:46:24] continue to refine and improve the format of the report and we hope improve the transparency

[1:46:32] and clarity of the program, especially for the public.

[1:46:38] We thank the board for their past support of the recommendations that we've made, and staff has also been supportive of our recommendations.

[1:46:48] And so we feel very fortunate that we have the ability to make recommendations for changes and then have you as a board accept them.

[1:47:00] Overall, the IMC would like the board to know that our suggestions this year are minor.

[1:47:06] We've been building upon prior years and I think one of the biggest things that we've asked for as under our challenges area is that given given our new administration and given past concerns with permitting and funding.

[1:47:28] We are asking that the staff provide a table that would list each project and then include

[1:47:39] which, who the partners are for permitting, so that we can easily see how many multiple

[1:47:45] partners there can be for permitting.

[1:47:47] And I think this goes back to a lot of the conversation you are having regarding flood mitigation,

[1:47:53] There are multiple partners there, and it's not always the districts, the district doesn't always have the ability to give the, yes, no.

[1:48:04] And so we would like that information included in a table.

[1:48:08] And then not only the permitting issues, but also the funding issues, so that these projects, many of them are large and they require multiple funding partners,

[1:48:17] So that that that be included in a table with in the permitting one and both the funding one with that

[1:48:26] HM or L for how

[1:48:29] Staff feels about whether or not it's going to move forward. You know, H for high medium certainty low for

[1:48:36] Not real sure so that we can have a better sense of what's going on with the complexity of these projects

[1:48:50] We'd also like to just thanks staff, and I'd like to thank my fellow IMC members for their

[1:48:58] dedication to this.

[1:48:59] We worked very hard for about three months, and it's intense work, but we do feel like

[1:49:05] we've been able to make recommendations that have improved the readability of the report

[1:49:10] for the public.

[1:49:12] And we hope that we request that you respectfully, we respectfully request that the Board support, the recommendations presented in the report.

[1:49:22] And I'm here to answer any specific questions.

[1:49:27] Questions from Board?

[1:49:28] Director Creman, I see your name, sir.

[1:49:32] Oh, I'll go out to slide.

[1:49:34] All right.

[1:49:35] I'll go out to ask you if you can.

[1:49:37] Okay.

[1:49:40] Thank you, Chair.

[1:49:41] And I want to say that the IMC, again,

[1:49:48] day the great job in looking at the third annual report.

[1:49:57] This report has become, come.

[1:50:00] I'm here to the first report. It's improved significantly. And then a lot easier to read, a lot easier to understand the information. And it's all thanks to you, your leadership, and your very diligent committee members.

[1:50:17] So your suggestions this year, I thought they're great, actually,

[1:50:23] one idea about having every project listing all the regulatory agencies that needed

[1:50:30] to issue permanent in order for project to move forward.

[1:50:34] I was thinking about similar things that for the CIP committee that's under the

[1:50:46] So I want to say that I support this, there's an IMC additional support that's needed.

[1:50:55] They requested about like field trip and then receiving presentations on various things.

[1:51:04] I don't know if we need to have a motion to direct staff to do that or just go ahead and say

[1:51:10] we supported and then the staff can follow up on those activities with the INC.

[1:51:18] We tried to once a year go out to several of the sites.

[1:51:22] We've had low participation from the committees, but we do have committee members that do

[1:51:27] go out to the sites with us and we ask for several sites from the staff and then we'll go out

[1:51:33] to the sites and normally we'll do that around all of this are September.

[1:51:36] So it's already in the process.

[1:51:39] I need to take a full money out of it for this.

[1:51:42] Thank you.

[1:51:43] Thank you very much.

[1:51:44] And thank you, and that's to see you again.

[1:51:47] You're welcome.

[1:51:47] And thank you for bringing that up.

[1:51:48] Because I've been on several of the tours.

[1:51:51] And there's nothing like being on the site to give you a much better sense of the work that the district does.

[1:51:58] So I just find them to be incredibly helpful in understanding the projects.

[1:52:03] Yeah, and in addition to the fuel trip, there's, I guess, IMC likes to receive presentation on several items.

[1:52:10] I think those are also important for you to continue to be engaged for the review of the next report.

[1:52:19] Thank you.

[1:52:19] Thank you very much.

[1:52:20] Thank you, Director.

[1:52:21] Director Kagan.

[1:52:24] Thank you, Miss Sutherland and also thank you for responding in the affirmative when I asked you to

[1:52:32] the representative for my district on the committee.

[1:52:38] I know you've worked really hard.

[1:52:39] I was at one of the recent IMC meetings.

[1:52:42] And I continue to be impressed by the caliber of our members

[1:52:46] and the level of discourse.

[1:52:49] Everyone is well informed, is prepared, is intelligent, engaged,

[1:52:55] and we're very fortunate to have a group of people like that

[1:53:01] assisting us. And I just also wanted to add, you know, in my mind, the Independent Monitoring

[1:53:06] Committee is kind of a reality check. You know, I think staff and the board sometimes

[1:53:13] were so close. We don't see the forest for the trees. We get kind of involved at a

[1:53:23] minutiae kind of level. And really, one of the big values that I see with the IMC is

[1:53:30] ability to step back and take that big picture approach and really hone in on some of the

[1:53:36] serious issues like well what are the permitting hurdles that these particular projects might

[1:53:42] have and I think that's very informative to the larger community and I think that it also

[1:53:47] sensitizes people to the fact that there are a number of obstacles that we have to overcome

[1:53:54] in the delivery of projects and to the extent that we're greater able to educate the public

[1:53:59] on those challenges, I think that that may help us as we make the case for are there opportunities

[1:54:06] to streamline are there agencies that are not perhaps being objective and how they apply

[1:54:11] things.

[1:54:12] So again, thank you very much.

[1:54:14] You guys do great work and I know all the board members join me and there are appreciation

[1:54:18] and thanks.

[1:54:19] Thank you very much.

[1:54:21] Director Lizard?

[1:54:24] Thank you Mr. Chair.

[1:54:25] Kathy, thank you.

[1:54:25] see you again and appreciate your willingness to be re-appointed.

[1:54:31] I didn't have any questions for you. I did want to have a question for the CEO.

[1:54:37] In the nonagenda item was the performance audit for the Safe Clean Water and there were

[1:54:43] a whole host of recommendations. I'm assuming the administration is going to have a response to

[1:54:48] that. Do you know when that's going to be forthcoming?

[1:54:50] Let's

[1:54:56] see on the exact date we're looking at perhaps.

[1:55:03] I just want to make sure that we just want to make sure that we get those responses to the board so that those responses can be taken into consideration as we're going through the budget process.

[1:55:14] Right, because I saw several that may need some legislation.

[1:55:18] Okay, thank you.

[1:55:20] Thank you, Director.

[1:55:21] Any other comments from the board?

[1:55:23] I have no public comment.

[1:55:26] Thank you.

[1:55:26] Thank you, Mr. Southern, for that report. Very good.

[1:55:30] Good honor to be agenda, we have the concept calendar.

[1:55:36] Okay,

[1:55:39] I have a motion to approve in a second,

[1:55:41] but come in from Director Cremon.

[1:55:44] Just a small comment to be sure in the CO's report,

[1:55:49] everyone pays attention to the boat downgrading

[1:55:52] and upgrading of our bonds and the comment

[1:55:54] that the bond underwriter had about, you know,

[1:55:57] our large capital plans and rising debt.

[1:56:00] by having a fact that just be sure we pay attention.

[1:56:07] But that's all I want to say.

[1:56:08] Just saying no, what is wrong with you?

[1:56:12] Yeah, yeah.

[1:56:13] Yeah.

[1:56:13] Oh, yeah.

[1:56:15] Good for you, David.

[1:56:17] OK, so I have a motion in a second.

[1:56:19] All those in favor of signal, was this a, OK.

[1:56:22] All those, favor of signal, five by saying aye.

[1:56:25] All opposed?

[1:56:26] That motion passes unanimously, consent calendar.

[1:56:29] Moving on to Board of Directors reports, 4.1, Board Daniel assessment of its performance

[1:56:37] for 2016.

[1:56:39] I think we did a hell of a job.

[1:56:42] A conducted board self-assessment based on the 26th performance, share the 2016

[1:56:45] Daniel Board performance report broadly with stakeholders such as customers, board committees,

[1:56:51] community groups and employees among others.

[1:56:55] I see Chris Elias in the room to give us a report.

[1:57:00] I do not have Chris Elias in the room.

[1:57:02] Yeah, unfortunately, Chris Elias is out sick today.

[1:57:06] Okay.

[1:57:07] But basically, we're presenting the report to you,

[1:57:10] and just want to find out that the board has any additions or comments in regard to the

[1:57:16] performance report.

[1:57:19] Okay.

[1:57:20] Director Sway.

[1:57:21] Thank you chair. I just want to report to the board that last year's, I don't remember

[1:57:29] it's the last year or last six months, the self-assessment report came to the board.

[1:57:36] I had many comments and I met with staff and want to thank staff for incorporating all

[1:57:42] my kind of comments. So they're already included in this performance report. I just wanted

[1:57:48] point at to the whole board.

[1:57:53] So, no additional action in any other comments from the board.

[1:57:57] Okay.

[1:57:57] So, that report is received.

[1:57:59] Thank you very much.

[1:58:00] Item 4.2.

[1:58:03] If that's so too.

[1:58:04] fiscal year 2017, Board Policy Planning and Performance Monitoring Calendar.

[1:58:09] Recommendation, review and revise the fiscal year 2017,

[1:58:11] Board Policy Planning and Performance Monitoring Calendar.

[1:58:15] We have a report.

[1:58:16] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:58:17] for you is the most current board policy planning and performance calendars.

[1:58:23] I think the only changes from the last meeting was on the Performance Monitoring.

[1:58:29] They updated

[1:58:33] the district communication program.

[1:58:36] Update is being will be presented to the board in April.

[1:58:40] And the cybersecurity security in general is scheduled for a main presentation in the close session.

[1:58:46] So, at this point, I leave it to the board if there's any additional items or if we need to move these things.

[1:58:51] Okay, I do have a request to the comment.

[1:58:56] The Chair would like to propose that we, in fact, believe it's on the CIP,

[1:58:59] but I want to confirm that the Chair would like to propose that we support the,

[1:59:03] the obtaining federal assistance for flood protection projects again,

[1:59:06] again, along Coyote Creek, that will ensure public safety for those impacted regions.

[1:59:12] And I'm sure that the board will concur along with that on that.

[1:59:17] So if that's not on the CIP, planning that agenda,

[1:59:22] that's not common to them.

[1:59:23] OK,

[1:59:26] so I jumped against, so then OK, fine.

[1:59:29] So then Director Keegan, so hold that comment and I'll make it again.

[1:59:33] OK, just very quickly, I do want to again thank the talk of the board for all of the

[1:59:40] great assistance that she provides to the committee.

[1:59:42] Thank you very much.

[1:59:44] Okay, next item, performance monitoring,

[1:59:56] I'm still on 4.2.

[2:00:04] All right, I included my comment on that for the record.

[2:00:11] All right, so there's no action on that 4.2 then required.

[2:00:14] So we move on to 4.3, board committee reports, and I'd like to start out with Gary Cremand to give us a report on the recent activities with Pacheco.

[2:00:25] Yeah, so this is moving forward, we actually have on our agenda tonight, which is good, the 900, the 200,000 kind of with an option to do the 700,000 study for potential potato past storage and good news for once.

[2:00:51] We got signed document back from the newly formed Pacheco Pass Water District and San Benito County Water District

[2:00:59] So I think all we have to do is sign it ourselves. I don't know if we can do that now or we have to

[2:01:06] We can't we can't sign

[2:01:15] And we under against a timeline. Did we discuss this at that board meeting and couldn't we take action from that board meeting?

[2:01:22] Yes, okay

[2:01:23] You're on.

[2:01:25] Yeah, Mr. Chair.

[2:01:27] We have under five three, the consultant contract.

[2:01:29] Maybe I'll be a appropriate place for the board to consider this action.

[2:01:33] And in fact, the handout says item five three A on the attachment of the

[2:01:37] principle that you had received.

[2:01:38] So we can certainly take it that time.

[2:01:42] Given times of the essence to get measure prop one funding in.

[2:01:54] So we go to this or any clarification from legal.

[2:02:01] The chair, this agreement, is not only agenda, if the board is going to try and shoe-worn

[2:02:09] that into another item that talks about a contract with someone else, I don't know how you

[2:02:14] do it.

[2:02:16] It's up to the board.

[2:02:21] The issue at hand is that we were under at a special meeting that we had a week ago with

[2:02:28] parties, partners, that we were under a very intense timelines of performance to get documentation

[2:02:34] in, et cetera.

[2:02:36] And one of the missing pieces was this agreement to be signed and be brought to us by tonight's

[2:02:41] board meeting.

[2:02:44] That's specific.

[2:02:45] I don't think we should have been placed on the agenda.

[2:02:51] Mr. Chair, yes.

[2:02:52] Stan, we were trying to find out that it's not in the 5-1, it doesn't relate to 5.3.

[2:02:58] No, that this is a specific item with respect to a contract.

[2:03:04] Yeah, I'm not trying to be difficult, Mr. Chair.

[2:03:06] I don't take it that way at all.

[2:03:08] By concern here, I concern here, is I understand there's some boring interest in

[2:03:14] entering into this contract with two of the water agencies.

[2:03:18] If it's done improperly, the agreement will be void.

[2:03:23] So you're suggesting that we have to move this to the next board meeting in March,

[2:03:28] or schedule special, special me in our product.

[2:03:34] We'll do the 14th of the picture.

[2:03:37] It'll give us 10 days of the year.

[2:03:42] Jim, sorry.

[2:03:42] I just want to remember that the board members know that you received a supplemental board

[2:03:46] agenda memo on this item.

[2:03:48] And in there, one of the recommendations, Ace, is to discuss the outcomes of the

[2:03:52] February 23rd meeting of the Pacheco Reservoir Exploratory at Hock Committee with board

[2:03:56] members of the San Bernard Pachaco pass.

[2:03:59] In other words, I mean, I think, I started my discussion with Director Crement as to what

[2:04:04] action you could take on that I defer to our attorney, but did the discussion of what

[2:04:08] occurred at that meeting and really what the outcomes of that, I think, are open at least

[2:04:12] white.

[2:04:13] My understanding, that was part of the supplemental.

[2:04:15] That's given to me.

[2:04:16] Those are the answers from the committee members that were there.

[2:04:20] The public has no access necessarily to Silicon Valley agendas, and there's clear

[2:04:28] court case that just came out this year that said we're not really on whether or not

[2:04:32] supplemental agenda items or even agenda memorandums, meet the tests of the Brown Act,

[2:04:40] is the agenda that rules.

[2:04:43] My concern again is that if the board makes an improper action, they're green in itself

[2:04:48] can be void. That's by concern. That's that's good point. Okay, so it's been in the

[2:04:56] 4th year to share among the 10 days. Yeah, okay, I've got a few people out.

[2:05:00] I'd like to speak. Dr. Sway?

[2:05:02] Well, I'm going to report on a different committee, so maybe if there's other, so you want to hold on one?

[2:05:08] Yeah, I mean, hold on.

[2:05:09] Dr. Fiddler, you already spoke, is that correct?

[2:05:11] We're done? Michelle?

[2:05:13] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to remind the board, the committee members.

[2:05:18] When you went down to San Bernardino and you met, we were not sure if the two other boards could meet prior to this meeting.

[2:05:26] And that is the reason why we could not put that action on today's agenda.

[2:05:33] It just so happens that they actually held their meeting yesterday and were able to get this agreement signed.

[2:05:38] So the action was just to report out.

[2:05:40] The action for staff was bringing it back to the next meeting, which would be the March 14th.

[2:05:45] It just happened that they were able to get the action by their two boards before we were able to...

[2:05:54] much sooner than we thought they were going to be able to do that.

[2:05:58] Director Santos?

[2:06:02] Yep.

[2:06:05] I think Michelle is running away.

[2:06:07] And I understand it.

[2:06:08] We have no problem.

[2:06:09] We're doing more than 14th.

[2:06:10] Give us a 10 day notice.

[2:06:11] No problem.

[2:06:12] I'm happy.

[2:06:13] Thank you.

[2:06:13] Thanks, Dan.

[2:06:14] Thank you.

[2:06:15] Director Cronin.

[2:06:18] Thanks.

[2:06:18] I'm happy too.

[2:06:20] You know, it's good we're all happy.

[2:06:21] So I think what we're going to do in five three is we'll prove the consulting

[2:06:25] contract to work on this if they're support.

[2:06:27] We know they're going to sign it because they've signed it already and we just put it on the agenda for the meeting on the 14th and it'll tie up

[2:06:34] It's not like we're not going to sign it. Okay, I don't know what people are going to do, but this is good. We got this and

[2:06:43] Thank you, Dr. Luzat, do you have a comment?

[2:06:47] We're all done. Okay, any other board committee reports?

[2:06:54] You're all. Thank you chair. I'm going to do a overreporting

[2:06:59] support of the CIP at committee meeting, the committee met yesterday, and we started the review

[2:07:09] process for funding challenges for all capital projects that's using property tax and

[2:07:18] safely in water, special tax.

[2:07:21] It's going to be a multi meeting discussion, so we will report to the whole board about our status as we move on.

[2:07:33] And then the other thing, the committee worked on was to review our purpose.

[2:07:40] So the committee voted to ask the board to approve our proposed revision to first of all change the committee.

[2:07:51] status from Alha Committee to a standing committee, since the committee was formed in 2012,

[2:07:57] so after five years still exists, it's probably not Alha at Alha Committee, and then also

[2:08:02] we're adding the monitoring of the implementation progress of key capital projects into

[2:08:09] our scope of work and purpose. And that item needs the whole board's approval. It will

[2:08:17] back to the board sometime in March.

[2:08:20] Thank you.

[2:08:21] Thank you, Director Lizard.

[2:08:24] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[2:08:27] I don't want to get into a big discussion because it's not on the agenda.

[2:08:32] I just want the chair to clarify the suggestion that you made with regard to funding

[2:08:41] if I coyote were you just suggesting that that be added to the CIP work agenda?

[2:08:47] Okay.

[2:08:49] That's just a direction to, okay.

[2:08:51] That's all I wanted to know.

[2:08:52] That was my recommendation.

[2:08:52] Do I need to repeat that?

[2:08:53] No, I get one of the make sure that that's, we weren't having a conversation, we were just sending

[2:08:58] it over there.

[2:08:58] Thank you.

[2:08:59] Okay.

[2:09:00] Any other comments?

[2:09:02] Yeah.

[2:09:03] On the particular committee, I want to thank, of course, our chair was there, was a very

[2:09:07] and of course, you're a member of our being there and working with everybody and Michelle King and everybody's setting that up and it was a very good meeting

[2:09:15] because we had to do a lot of catching up and so on but those relationships by that share

[2:09:20] Kremlin that has paid off and dividends and relationship with the CEO of Sabanito Watershed,

[2:09:30] It was very, very helpful, and Gary, I want to thank you for getting those relationships

[2:09:36] started.

[2:09:37] I want to echo that.

[2:09:38] That was an extremely productive and also very well-attended meeting for those that were

[2:09:43] there and the people that were there, very committed and excited, very excited to be part

[2:09:49] of this potential, so it was a great meeting.

[2:09:52] Okay, any other board committee reports? Moving on, item 5.1.

[2:10:00] The agreement number A3675A with the GIA consultants incorporated for planning and environmental consultant services for a not to exceed fee of 1.316 million dollars,

[2:10:13] result in in a total not to exceed fee of 6.29841 million dollars and extend the agreement

[2:10:19] term of the Colaro and Guadalupe Dam seismic retrofit project project number 91084020

[2:10:29] San Jose District 1. In the recommendation is as mentioned. And I have, you know, look

[2:10:38] Catherine Ovin.

[2:10:40] Good evening, chair Marella, members of the board.

[2:10:44] My name is Bal Ganju.

[2:10:45] I'm a senior project manager with the water utilities capital division.

[2:10:52] The item 5.1 is related to what you just mentioned and the amendment number 2 to a

[2:11:08] exceed fee of $1 million in $16,000 and $11,000.

[2:11:15] And the item also relates to extending this agreement term for the

[2:11:20] Clareau and Guadalupe Dam seismic retrofit project.

[2:11:24] The staff recommendation is for the board to approve amendment number two to

[2:11:34] consultants for planning and environmental consultant services for the Khilir and Guadalupe

[2:11:39] dams, seismic retrofits project. For a not to exceed 301,316,000 and 11, resulting in a total

[2:11:49] not to exceed fees of 6,219,841 dollars and to extend the agreement term. That's all I have

[2:11:59] to say and I stand here for any questions that the board may have.

[2:12:02] Thank you, any questions?

[2:12:05] Board action?

[2:12:08] Oh, excuse me, Mr. Director Estomer.

[2:12:10] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[2:12:13] Was this amendment contemplated?

[2:12:19] I'm sure we all were.

[2:12:20] Well, it wasn't when we started this project about three years ago,

[2:12:27] but as we progress in the project,

[2:12:30] it was obvious that we would need an amendment.

[2:12:35] So it was contemplated, I would say.

[2:12:38] What was it that engendered the need for the amendment?

[2:12:47] Well, remember, when you started the planning process, at that time, you tried to make an estimate of how long this particular thing will take.

[2:12:58] And what are the elements of this project going to be?

[2:13:02] as we went through our planning process, our problem-dead mission process.

[2:13:07] Remember, earlier we just went to retrofit the embankment.

[2:13:11] But as we investigated the dam, there were issues on the outlets,

[2:13:16] there were issues on the spillway, for example.

[2:13:23] There were issues which we found out as we went along.

[2:13:27] And also what happens is it's something like this when you touch a infrastructure which was designed about 75 years ago.

[2:13:37] The retrofit always has to comply with current standards.

[2:13:41] So the scope of the eventual retrofit is larger, it's bigger than what we visualized in the beginning.

[2:13:49] So again, more work, more time.

[2:13:51] So in that sense, yes, this amendment was not in the beginning, but midway in the planning process, which allows, yes.

[2:14:03] What's the process that you use to determine whether the contractor has performed its requirements under the contract, up to the point when they ask for an amendment?

[2:14:18] Well, as a planning process, part of our planning process is a big task called problem definition.

[2:14:28] And then our contracts lay out all the tasks and deliverables that a contractor or a consultant has to deliver.

[2:14:35] So the project manager as he goes along or she goes along with the project.

[2:14:41] You know, you look at the deliverables, did the contractor provide those deliverables in a timely manner?

[2:14:46] And as I said, on all these dam projects, on most of them, we have found more problems than we visualized.

[2:14:55] But that's not an unplanned thing that happens.

[2:14:57] Many of you touch infrastructure.

[2:15:00] So, you will discover issues. And that's why in our planning stage, we have a whole process called

[2:15:07] problem definition process. So, yeah, it is, it's not unusual to have the planning process redefined

[2:15:17] parts of the project. And when you redefine generally, you add stuff to the project. That takes more

[2:15:25] more investigation and, you know, more money.

[2:15:32] Here's my concern.

[2:15:35] We have a contract that has a particular amount of hours,

[2:15:40] that has a particular amount of money,

[2:15:43] that has specific requirements that contract is supposed to perform.

[2:15:48] My concern is that we don't seem to have a contract compliance review

[2:15:55] where we're assured that that contractor had basically performed what is required under the initial contract.

[2:16:06] And then if we require them to do more, now more hours, but more work.

[2:16:13] Okay, more work.

[2:16:16] Then we negotiate with them, we negotiate an amendment with them.

[2:16:20] Now is this a situation where the contractor has performed all the work and so you need to amend it because you have new work?

[2:16:31] Or is this a situation where the contractor has run out of hours and money?

[2:16:36] But hasn't completed the initial required work on the contract?

[2:16:40] No, it's all of these and again I want to take you back to the planning process.

[2:16:46] When you start the planning process, everything is not defined, and as the project moves through

[2:16:52] from planning into design towards 30% to 60% the project gets better defined, and you have

[2:17:01] a more definite cost.

[2:17:02] That's why you have a planning level cost, a pre-planning cost, and a final construction.

[2:17:07] When I interrupt your presentation, this is a feature.

[2:17:10] Yes, Mr. Chair.

[2:17:11] I just wanted to see if I can help staff here.

[2:17:13] The question I think has to do with what assurances ball, can you give the board that the work undertaken thus far by the consultant has been adequate?

[2:17:24] And so that's the question I think he's having.

[2:17:26] And then the other question is, what specific work is now being requested in this amendment?

[2:17:32] That was not foreseen or changed at the result of the current work that the consultant has been doing.

[2:17:38] I think you can address that, it might address the concerns I think he's raising.

[2:17:42] That's correct.

[2:17:44] On to the first question.

[2:17:46] We have a very rigorous way of method of checking the contractors work.

[2:17:51] All his deliverables have been well checked and they have performed well in our opinion.

[2:17:58] As was the second question, the additional work.

[2:18:01] Essentially we have had to extend the contract by another three years.

[2:18:05] So there is a component of the management costs for the next three years.

[2:18:13] We also undertook a lot of investigation, unknown investigations.

[2:18:20] I mean, unknown at the beginning of the planning process,

[2:18:23] we had to do investigations which came up unexpectedly.

[2:18:30] And so we spend money on that.

[2:18:34] Plus, our part of the component of this project is the environmental services.

[2:18:40] What we are finding is not dealing so far with the agencies.

[2:18:46] The reviews that are required have been more than what was anticipated.

[2:18:51] So we have added a little component of money for those additional reviews on environmental permitting

[2:18:57] and environmental review of our documentation.

[2:19:01] So those things have kind of happened up to you again, Mr. Friedler.

[2:19:04] Mr. Chair, might I say just, I mean,

[2:19:06] let me bring this item back to the board at their next meeting

[2:19:09] to be going to address some of the questions I think has been raised,

[2:19:12] because I don't think it was clear in the agenda,

[2:19:13] memo, what has been undertaken by this consultant,

[2:19:16] what confidence do we have at the work has been adequate,

[2:19:20] and then also what's the real work that's really being proposed here,

[2:19:24] unless the time urgency, I don't know if it's the time,

[2:19:26] emergency, having this work done, it's a contract

[2:19:29] expiring.

[2:19:30] Was expiring on the 30th of May, so we have to have some time then.

[2:19:34] We have time to bring it back in.

[2:19:37] Is that sufficient?

[2:19:39] Okay.

[2:19:40] Director Creman has a comment.

[2:19:42] Thank you, Chair.

[2:19:43] Yeah, I agree.

[2:19:44] I remember you saying very clearly,

[2:19:45] and we all landed our heads no more amendments.

[2:19:48] And what I'm hearing is you're saying it's 75 years old.

[2:19:51] But isn't that why we have contingencies of like 15%

[2:19:55] in the contract. To me, I'm happy she fetal or grab this.

[2:20:00] Because that to me is not an excuse. 75 years. We knew that ahead of time unless that's a pity. So I'd like when it'd be brought up, figure out why we have all these amendments. We're always talking about that. What do we do wrong? I think it's part of any amendment. We should say why we have to do amendments.

[2:20:16] It's fiddler here in board, and that will be could also do it the time we bring this back.

[2:20:23] And like Anderson, we've had a lot of briefings with the board. We haven't really discussed with you.

[2:20:31] about you can filter them in a minute.

[2:20:32] Some clarity on that.

[2:20:34] Thank you.

[2:20:35] Director Kagan.

[2:20:38] Thank you.

[2:20:39] A couple of things.

[2:20:40] I will say with design consultant contracts, it's it can turn into a case of pay me now or

[2:20:47] pay me later.

[2:20:48] I would rather have a tightly defined scope up front and be paying the consultant for the

[2:20:55] actual tasks that we're asking them to do.

[2:20:58] And then though I don't think it's been perhaps as clearly articulated tonight as

[2:21:03] I think it will be when we see it back again, what I believe I'm hearing from a rather lengthy explanation from staff is that

[2:21:12] what we are asking the consultant to do is above and beyond what was originally written into their agreement.

[2:21:18] And so that's I think the information that the board needs to see.

[2:21:23] I would hate to have us tell staff that what we don't want to see any amendments and consultant agreements again

[2:21:30] because what would be the outcome of that?

[2:21:32] We might have overly generous initial contracts.

[2:21:37] So this is a balancing act.

[2:21:39] There's a happy medium.

[2:21:40] But I think that the board,

[2:21:41] I certainly support my fellow board members

[2:21:44] in wanting to be assured that we're not just continuing to pay

[2:21:49] because the consultants working more hours.

[2:21:51] If they work more hours, but it's still for a defined task,

[2:21:54] that's on them.

[2:21:55] And we shouldn't be paying for it,

[2:21:57] and I don't think we will be.

[2:21:58] The other thing I want to say

[2:21:59] is that I think now is maybe probably the appropriate time for me to be making a board member request.

[2:22:13] And I alluded it to it earlier, and it really is about the whole idea of should Anderson

[2:22:19] Dam have some flood management incorporated into the project.

[2:22:25] So my request is first I want to ask when and how that's been considered whether it's ever

[2:22:34] come to the board for the board to weigh in on whether there should be, it should not strictly be

[2:22:42] a water supply dam but that it should be kind of serving more interest.

[2:22:48] And then also as part of that I would like to see some sort of analysis about what kind of benefit

[2:22:56] that we could see by having greater flexibility in the operations of the dam.

[2:23:01] Right now we're talking about spending quite a bit of money, putting things like floodwalls

[2:23:07] and plays, things of that nature, there may be some things that we could do operationally

[2:23:12] with Anderson Dam that could be less expensive and less of an impact to the community, but

[2:23:18] I don't have that information to make that kind of decision, and I don't think the board

[2:23:22] So if this could be considered a board member request and staff I think can let us know as we're looking at some of these other options.

[2:23:32] Thank you.

[2:23:33] Thank you.

[2:23:35] Yeah.

[2:23:35] I didn't want to let that decision go.

[2:23:38] The very important issue.

[2:23:39] I agree with that.

[2:23:41] The ticket would respect to.

[2:23:43] It's not that we don't want to pay for what we need.

[2:23:45] I'm just concerned that we don't have contract compliance ability in some of these contracts.

[2:23:54] And I want to be assured by somebody who is dedicated to making sure that consultants and contractors perform their responsibilities.

[2:24:07] I don't think it should be put on managers who are required to finish the project at any,

[2:24:15] at any possible situation.

[2:24:20] I think you have a different pressure than one of contract compliance.

[2:24:26] I think you have the pressure of getting the work done, getting the project completed,

[2:24:30] And that, in itself, creates a conflict with respect to getting us the best deal.

[2:24:38] And so I have a problem with that.

[2:24:41] Now, maybe I'm too far out.

[2:24:46] But I think when you're dedicated to making sure that you get the project done at any cost,

[2:24:52] that that becomes the issue at any cost.

[2:24:54] And that when a contract says, well, you know, I need more hours and more money.

[2:25:00] To finish this contract, and to satisfy you,

[2:25:07] that you end up having no choice.

[2:25:12] And so, that's my concern. I don't know how to hide in the ball here. I'm being very frank and very clear that that's what my concern is.

[2:25:20] And I don't know how we address that. I'm tied to the amendments, and I think some of the amendments have that ingredient in them,

[2:25:28] that managers want to make sure that they perform, get things done, at any cost, and consultants

[2:25:35] can take advantage of that, and I don't know how we address that.

[2:25:40] So, I appreciate it if we have some answers that connects.

[2:25:44] Next time it comes up.

[2:25:46] And I think that that's what we respect to the next one also.

[2:25:49] But we can talk about the next one we get to it.

[2:25:52] Thank you, Director.

[2:25:52] Mr. Director.

[2:25:55] So, how to agree on that? I don't know if our contract department needs to be more independent,

[2:26:02] or they need to be as a check-off box to agreeing to amendments.

[2:26:07] So, I'd like, I don't know, we do an operational review. Maybe we put that on specific.

[2:26:11] I'd like to add that to the agenda. We agree what we're doing in this contract's department.

[2:26:17] Number one, I don't know if that's a motion or the chair could add that.

[2:26:21] And number two, it seems to me when we're adding just as a general $1.3 million, it would be good to have the person who gets the contract to be here, you know, in case we have some questions, so maybe in the future, I don't know if that's a request, they have them here before we end them, 1.3, you know, not, you know, and then they can answer some questions about it, so maybe before we do amendments, the people show up, that might make us more comfortable.

[2:26:48] That's a good point.

[2:26:50] So, does there any of the comments from Board?

[2:26:53] Any up?

[2:26:54] I did not have the Board tonight.

[2:26:57] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair.

[2:26:58] Yeah, I think everybody here is on the right page.

[2:27:00] It's all about performance when it's all said and done.

[2:27:02] And Tony is right about everybody wants to complete things.

[2:27:05] Any calls for a time issue and I understand it.

[2:27:08] But out of this, may come with a legal staff.

[2:27:11] Maybe we'll have less challenges.

[2:27:13] Legal issues that derive out of this.

[2:27:16] I think what Tony is saying is that when you check that performance and before you make any and I don't believe anybody's saying don't do any more amendments because we all want things done, but I think it'll it'll bring it up to our staff to say hold it

[2:27:29] The head of time before we even get their performance is going to be monitored, then if there's some kind of problem, maybe they'll stop this legal issues that come later on that do we have to identify

[2:27:39] over the end of the cost of not more money so I think it brings on the right page.

[2:27:43] Thank you, Director Santos and the other board comment.

[2:27:46] I have no comments from the public.

[2:27:49] So, Gary, do you, Director Cremany, you suggested a motion, you want us to restate your motion?

[2:27:55] Thank you, Chair, would be a motion to maybe it would be adding to the board planning calendar,

[2:28:02] or maybe just in general to look into this issue of the Independence Contract Department.

[2:28:09] And what's the procedures around it?

[2:28:14] The value of a...

[2:28:16] I'm having trouble formulating it.

[2:28:19] Yeah, you might want to just kind of compact your narrow down.

[2:28:24] Could you add to the agenda that we have people come in and talk about a contract procedure in the independence of it when it comes to amendments?

[2:28:33] Okay, the board get that as a motion, do I have a motion to approve and I have a motion

[2:28:37] to second director?

[2:28:41] I hear it, but you made a motion, so we're going to follow the director's way?

[2:28:45] I just have a suggestion that maybe this is the item that can be referred to the CIP committee

[2:28:53] and then it's a, it's a, it can facilitate more detailed discussions

[2:29:00] by the committee members and in staff and in staff and in staff.

[2:29:07] Dr. Kerman, are you good with that?

[2:29:08] Sir, I'll accept that.

[2:29:10] Okay, Director Lizard?

[2:29:12] Yeah.

[2:29:13] I agree with that, but I was also going to make this suggestion that we have requested district council

[2:29:18] to every now and then bring in one of the attorneys to talk about what they're working on,

[2:29:26] and I know that Leslie does most of our contracting, so it might be an opportunity for her

[2:29:33] to come in at our close session to talk about the contract and contract compliance and what

[2:29:42] the legal council's role is with regard to that to respond to director Cremans question.

[2:29:48] I'm just throwing that out as something that might be acceptable as well as taking it over

[2:29:54] see I pick me, actually our office can be both.

[2:30:00] We could bring it to a committee and if they feel the information is valuable, we could actually bring

[2:30:06] a report onto the host agenda of the board. If that's the case or the board. On contract compliance.

[2:30:15] Do we do contract compliance? We'll review them. And when the questions come up as to whether or not an amendment should go through, we do look at them.

[2:30:27] I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you Mr. Mr.

[2:30:30] You said, do you look at them before the amendments get through?

[2:30:34] That was just, that was just point.

[2:30:38] Let me look at the amendments.

[2:30:39] I mean, you checked compliance.

[2:30:42] Yeah, that sure is.

[2:30:44] Could they comply with the request?

[2:30:45] I'm lessly order from the District Council's office.

[2:30:47] I do do most of the consultant agreements that are related to capital programs.

[2:30:51] You know, the other attorneys in the office do other consultant agreements for other types of services

[2:30:56] the district contracts for, but I review most of the engineering and other consultant type

[2:31:01] agreements that relate to the construction projects.

[2:31:04] And so the role of our office is to help in drafting and creating the consultant agreement.

[2:31:09] This staff articulates to us what their purposes, what they would like, or we're adding

[2:31:13] scope, or we're changing something, you know, what are the requirements for the firm to

[2:31:17] do, and we make sure that the language is unequivocal to the best of our ability so that

[2:31:22] if there's a problem with their performance, you have some contract language to, in

[2:31:26] force and back you up, but we don't have the interaction with the firms to know if they're

[2:31:30] performing appropriately, that's really the engineers that are overseeing the projects.

[2:31:34] If there's a problem or an issue, they do bring those to our office, and we try to assist

[2:31:37] with that with enforcing the contracts when we're asked to do that.

[2:31:41] But as far as an ongoing program for how the consultants are performing, it doesn't really

[2:31:46] pertain to the work of our office.

[2:31:48] We're happy to assist with that, but when the circumstances brought to us, we do weigh in and support

[2:31:53] staff.

[2:31:56] I think for the CFP committee to work on this item then step wide is definitely looking

[2:32:02] at what's the existing process and who is involved to it's not involved and then we can

[2:32:06] go from there.

[2:32:08] Good.

[2:32:10] Thank you.

[2:32:11] I just wanted to suggest that perhaps it might be helpful.

[2:32:15] There was an internal audit done a couple of years ago that actually looked at our

[2:32:20] contract compliance process, and it might be good to bring that to the CIP and see whether

[2:32:26] the recommendations for improvement have been implemented and so forth.

[2:32:30] So we don't need to reinvent the wheel. I think some of this stuff we've already identified.

[2:32:34] Good point. Thank you, Director.

[2:32:36] Thank you.

[2:32:37] Any other comments?

[2:32:39] Board action.

[2:32:40] So we're clear on this.

[2:32:42] CIP committee will take it from there.

[2:32:45] Okay. Thank you very much for your report.

[2:32:46] I appreciate that very much.

[2:32:48] Okay, next item on the agenda is 5.2, budget adjustment in the amount of 750,000 to, yes.

[2:32:58] Good evening Mr. Fiddler.

[2:32:59] Before you get started, I just want to point out that this one is a little different than the previous one,

[2:33:06] because as I mentioned earlier that we've had a number of briefings with the board, and as the board is well aware,

[2:33:11] over the course of time, this project has expanded

[2:33:15] of a variety of issues, which I think we brought to the board.

[2:33:18] What you're going to hear reflected here is the result

[2:33:20] of that expanse of this project and the need

[2:33:23] for additional consultant services that I'm on,

[2:33:25] can describe more fully for you.

[2:33:28] Good evening, Chair Varella, and members of the board.

[2:33:31] Himong, this I engineering manager, dam safety unit.

[2:33:35] So item 5.2 is for budget adjustment for an amount

[2:33:40] of $750,000 for this fiscal year for Anderson Damse

[2:33:45] seismic retrofit project.

[2:33:47] It is also for amendment number six for the consultant agreement

[2:33:52] with Black and Beach for project management services

[2:33:55] for not to exceed amount of $7,539,000, $795.

[2:34:03] And it also includes amendment number three

[2:34:07] to consult an agreement with HDR in ink for planning and environment services for not to exceed

[2:34:15] fee of $561,000.

[2:34:18] The staff recommends to approve the budget adjustment of $750,000 from Pacheco and Santa Clara

[2:34:26] conduit right away at position project to address the seismic retrofit project so that we can

[2:34:33] continue with the work for this fiscal year.

[2:34:35] It also, the staff also recommends to approve a amendment number 6 agreement number 8355A with Black

[2:34:45] and Wiche for project management services and for not to exceed fee of 7,539,795 dollars.

[2:34:57] and

[2:35:00] And see, the staff also recommends to approve amendment number 3 to the HDR service agreement for planning and

[2:35:09] vimals service for not to exceed 30561,000 dollars. All these amendments and the budget adjustment

[2:35:18] is needed to continue with the Anderson dam seismic retrofit project, which has been changed substantially due

[2:35:27] the recent findings, but that I opened up in questions.

[2:35:30] Dr. Santos, did you have a comment?

[2:35:34] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[2:35:36] Well,

[2:35:42] anyway, it was a number one topic in San Jose County.

[2:35:48] Of the 140 million dollars or plus, whatever is appropriate for this, how much have we used so far?

[2:35:55] And do we meet the state requirements when we're doing all these things?

[2:35:58] In other words, are we getting the permits all things we need to continue?

[2:36:01] Yes, so the services here for the HDR agreement includes all that acquiring the permit for forming the environmental, you know, completing the environmental document, the permit application and so on and so forth.

[2:36:17] I also want to say when I was up there in a tour with folks and you did a heck of a job of making a presentation.

[2:36:22] So thank you very much. I know this is a major topic, not just in John Zeritz, all of Santa Clara County, so I'm going to support this as my motion.

[2:36:31] Thank you.

[2:36:32] Director Kremlin?

[2:36:33] Have a motion at a second.

[2:36:34] Thank you.

[2:36:34] I got a couple more questions here.

[2:36:37] So we're taking $750,000 away from the Pacheco right away.

[2:36:44] Why is that?

[2:36:44] Are we not doing that project anymore?

[2:36:46] No, we are.

[2:36:47] It will be replenished for the next fiscal year.

[2:36:50] This is the money which is not needed in the project.

[2:36:52] And therefore, it's being transferred to Anderson Dam promise.

[2:36:57] Because it's not needed.

[2:36:58] Well, this was a year. Yeah, okay. So the procedure there is we don't leave it and we don't just make a general budget in us. Okay

[2:37:08] Yeah, I mean this is clearly an important project, but it's seven and a half million not a bot

[2:37:13] I'm supportive of it, but seven and a half million other people from black and beach here to talk about it. Yes, they are

[2:37:20] Before that I'd direct to

[2:37:25] Thank you. You know

[2:37:26] Thank you for your comment, Director Kremlin, because I do feel our practice of moving money

[2:37:34] from project to project, rather than returning it to the ending fund balance, and then

[2:37:39] re-begining it in the following year, does leave us potentially open to a perception that

[2:37:46] we are, you know, robbing Peter to pay Paul, and that's not really the case.

[2:37:52] And so I think, you know, in the future, we might want to look at a different way.

[2:37:59] Like I said, having it go back into the fund and then have those dollars be reprogrammed

[2:38:03] rather than looking like one project is winning at the expense of another.

[2:38:08] We're not really doing that, but to the general public, it could appear that we are.

[2:38:14] Thank you.

[2:38:15] To that comment, I think the people in South County have waited so long now for Anderson

[2:38:19] that they're a little impatient with the occurrences and with this meeting that we're

[2:38:25] having on the 16th, I would invite the board members to come down and to listen to some

[2:38:29] of the comments you're going to hear. The people there are very impatient and are wanted to

[2:38:33] move this project along. So I just want to go on the record on that. Director Estumera.

[2:38:40] I wanted to put it off, but what you can, but I had a question regarding the retroactivity, because this is retroactively extended agreement, and there appears to be two amendments.

[2:39:05] So, both these agreements have expired one expired in December.

[2:39:11] and the other one in January.

[2:39:14] And basically, the retroactivity is to make sure

[2:39:17] that we cover the change in the agreement.

[2:39:21] So Leslie probably can tell you a little bit more about that.

[2:39:25] You guys just didn't want to bring it in December.

[2:39:28] I can't answer that.

[2:39:29] But I can answer that.

[2:39:30] We don't want any gap in the contracting term

[2:39:33] with the parties, you know, the water district

[2:39:35] and the consultant firms.

[2:39:36] And so we want to make sure that the term is continuous.

[2:39:39] and so that there's no gaps, so it has a retroactive term.

[2:39:43] The firm's continue to provide services, and as long as they do, there's a mutual exchange

[2:39:47] of consideration.

[2:39:48] They're working for us and we need to pay them for that work.

[2:39:51] So we don't want a gap in the coverage, so there's any issue with insurance or any contract

[2:39:56] obligations.

[2:39:57] And so that's why they have retroactive dates.

[2:40:00] This is because this is when they were brought to the board, and it's to cover that time period.

[2:40:05] Yeah, Mr. Chair, maybe a staff could help lighten the board. When you knew the, obviously, the

[2:40:11] contract was going to come to a termination because you knew the contract. When did

[2:40:14] staff begin working on the amendment for these, these two amendments?

[2:40:19] Right. The staff working on started working on these amendment in October 2016.

[2:40:25] So it's September October timeframe. That's when we started.

[2:40:30] Let me get this right, let's say that this meeting we said we're not doing this, are you

[2:40:37] saying we own money, I mean, that seems like a wrong policy right there in that.

[2:40:43] Well, the water district can't experience a windfall, you know, that the firm

[2:40:47] performed services for us and we don't pay them for them.

[2:40:50] But it could be a quantum error or something else, why are we, I mean, that's why, why are

[2:40:55] we even voting on, that's, we might want to look at that, that doesn't seem like

[2:41:00] and I think staff would have to address the issue of the timing, what I can tell you is from a legal standpoint we would like to remain in contract with the firms and not have a gap.

[2:41:09] But theoretically we don't have to pay them. Correct because I think it's a public meeting and they.

[2:41:15] They've continued to perform services for us in good faith and so. Why are we asking the performed services?

[2:41:21] I can't. Staff will have to address that.

[2:41:23] These keep mandated and federally mandated projects, they're not.

[2:41:27] And I know.

[2:41:29] Can you give a killed clarification on that, please?

[2:41:33] I understand you aren't, so I want Jim to speak first.

[2:41:36] Yeah, recall that we have a commitment to the Division of Safety of Damres

[2:41:40] and the Federal Energy Revitory Commission to move expeditions

[2:41:44] on the retrofit work.

[2:41:47] And we had the most recent meeting we had with them with an October,

[2:41:50] where we had both divisions, safety dams, and for a present, and we did go over the ideas for

[2:41:55] the concept that the board told me that he saw in terms of the, and so the last

[2:41:59] comments to us were move forward with due diligence to get these project retrofitted.

[2:42:04] Yes, that's what I understand. Director Kagan?

[2:42:06] Well, that was the time.

[2:42:11] Oh, you weren't done? Okay, Excuse me, Director Kagan.

[2:42:13] So, Director Kagan, would you finish your question about his day and I support his

[2:42:19] day?

[2:42:20] In general, maybe we need to really re-adress why Staff would keep a consultant going if there's no authority to do so by the board.

[2:42:30] That's my comment.

[2:42:31] It's an internal control issue.

[2:42:35] Staff should tell people to stop if there's no more money.

[2:42:39] For this particular project, I think.

[2:42:41] I'm not against this project, I'm probably this project.

[2:42:45] Why has Staff not told people to stop it?

[2:42:51] I guess I'd like to make a board member request to find out when this has happened before

[2:42:54] in the last 12 months when people have worked without board authority.

[2:43:03] Dr. Kagan, I have CIO to have a comment. Would you like her comment first?

[2:43:07] Would you want to make your comment? Go ahead.

[2:43:11] I would just say that in general, because I have been on the other side of the table,

[2:43:17] I do tend to be somewhat sympathetic to staff with some of the constraints that they operate

[2:43:22] under.

[2:43:23] However,

[2:43:25] I'm not very, I do agree with Ms. Orta that we have an obligation to pay the consultant.

[2:43:33] But I also think that we had an obligation.

[2:43:35] We knew that when the terms of the agreement were going to expire, I know we started,

[2:43:46] we

[2:43:46] I think that it's something that the public looks at and doesn't deal too good about the fact that

[2:43:55] we're on a sort of handshake kind of deal essentially telling people to move forward.

[2:44:01] I do understand we did not want to stop the work on this project and I'm not suggesting that we should have done that

[2:44:07] but I'm also suggesting we should have amended the agreement before it expired.

[2:44:12] Thank you.

[2:44:13] Thank you.

[2:44:15] CEO.

[2:44:15] Thank you.

[2:44:20] I just want to address that this is a symptom of need for us to really look at our contracting

[2:44:28] and amendment process and to take a close look at what the process is currently where

[2:44:34] are the hangups because really amendments shouldn't be, you shouldn't have to start

[2:44:39] six to eight months in advance to get an amendment through to a contract.

[2:44:43] I know Susan Stanton is going to be conducting a process review on the contract process within

[2:44:51] our organization looking at the audit that was referenced earlier at the board meeting and

[2:44:57] really come up with some recommendations.

[2:45:00] To streamline the process as well. I know that we're just filling the positions, the contract positions right now to help our project managers develop better contracts, scopes of works that can be that are very descriptive and accountability could be very clear and transparent.

[2:45:21] Those are in the works right now with getting these new people on board and we'll provide a future presentation for the board on the progress that we make through this process.

[2:45:32] And I think it's really important when we have this process that all of the district staff that are involved in contracts need to participate in this process improvement program.

[2:45:47] and that I hope I have the support of the board to assure that this is very important,

[2:45:53] and so we all need to participate in this process.

[2:45:56] Thank you.

[2:45:58] Do you have any questions?

[2:46:03] Yeah, that.

[2:46:04] Thank you, Norma.

[2:46:05] Yeah, you have our support.

[2:46:07] That's why I raise it because I think you will pursue it and the committee will assist you.

[2:46:15] And I don't mean to say that we need to be Donald Trump and get work that we don't pay for.

[2:46:21] I just raised it as a process again because we don't need to have excuses.

[2:46:29] We need to perform.

[2:46:31] When the newspaper calls up and says, you know, how come you guys are running around,

[2:46:35] retroactively paying for stuff?

[2:46:38] They don't understand what the process is.

[2:46:40] They don't appreciate the pressure we have.

[2:46:42] And when they say, when they say, why are you moving money for one project to another, why are you stealing money for one project to another?

[2:46:50] That's not the case, but that's what it looks like.

[2:46:53] So we need to be a little bit more sensitive to that, because we have different communities who think that we're taking money from one to the other.

[2:47:01] And certainly that's not the case, but we don't want to give anybody that impression.

[2:47:05] So it was the process that I raised.

[2:47:08] But I appreciate the pressures that staff have.

[2:47:12] I just want to make sure that we have the right processes.

[2:47:17] In this particular case, I think managers need help in dealing with contractors.

[2:47:26] You don't need to do everything.

[2:47:28] You just need to perform your area.

[2:47:31] And then we need to support the rest of your work.

[2:47:34] So it's not that we're picking on anybody.

[2:47:37] I just want to make sure that we're doing these things right, and where we need support

[2:47:41] then we need to provide that.

[2:47:44] And I know that the board supports me in that endeavor.

[2:47:48] We need more people, but we've got higher and more people.

[2:47:51] We have more stuff to do.

[2:47:52] We need more process.

[2:47:54] We've got to do that.

[2:47:55] So that's been my intentional night about some of these issues.

[2:47:59] I think there's a few more that I'm going to have to raise.

[2:48:02] But that's what that's what they aimed at.

[2:48:06] Thank you, Director.

[2:48:09] Director, can I?

[2:48:11] Yeah.

[2:48:11] So I think this is right for process improvement because it does hit me that we probably

[2:48:16] violate one of our executive limitations which is spending money that the board did an

[2:48:21] authorize in a contract that expired.

[2:48:25] So maybe that's really my board member request is this led to violations.

[2:48:30] But I'm happy we have a process to fix this or we're contemplating it.

[2:48:35] Thank you.

[2:48:37] Thank you, Directors. Any other comments? I have no other public comment. I have a motion

[2:48:41] by Director Santos in a second by Director Shway. You need a roll call to just say, okay,

[2:48:47] all those in favor signify by say, aye. All opposed? That motion passes unanimously.

[2:48:53] Thank you. Thank you. We're moving on now to item 5.3.

[2:49:00] Consultant contract to stand

[2:49:02] and consulting services incorporated for the Chaco Reservoir Proposition One Application Study.

[2:49:12] Okay, you have a motion in a second.

[2:49:16] Any discussion?

[2:49:17] Comment?

[2:49:19] Have a comment by first-hand?

[2:49:22] Please take me off.

[2:49:23] Thank you.

[2:49:24] Do you have a comment?

[2:49:26] No.

[2:49:27] Okay.

[2:49:28] Do you have a comment?

[2:49:31] And I think staff at the last time we brought this to you had a couple of concerns.

[2:49:35] One was a meeting that was going to be held with the Pacheco Pass and the other district

[2:49:39] which was held as we heard and some of the summary of that is contained in the right

[2:49:42] up in the supplemental.

[2:49:44] And two, I think there was concerns raised and making sure we don't approve a conduct and

[2:49:47] we bring it back to you for a consultant agreement.

[2:49:50] I think the important thing that was talked about earlier briefly but it contained in some

[2:49:54] of the information is that we do have apparently the concurrence of the other parties,

[2:49:59] which is so important.

[2:50:00] We are important to us as we consider the idea of submitting an application for a prop one. So I think with that, I already had a motion a second.

[2:50:07] We can continue.

[2:50:09] Okay, great. Director, south coast.

[2:50:12] Yeah, thank you Mr. Chair. I think we're just going to get these guns on. I appreciate them.

[2:50:19] I have a question.

[2:50:24] Can't get these phones at work. But anyway, going back.

[2:50:27] And we've got to do something more about this IT because this stuff is getting to me.

[2:50:30] But I want to thank everybody from Garth, the Cindy, to everybody, and the gentleman who came out and I just forgot your name, but thank you for being there. Everybody did a good job.

[2:50:39] So thank you.

[2:50:41] We echo that.

[2:50:42] Near the comments.

[2:50:44] We'll call the comments.

[2:50:45] Okay, I have a motion.

[2:50:46] Santos, did you make that motion?

[2:50:49] And I have a second here from Mr. Dork, you're coming.

[2:50:53] All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

[2:50:55] All those opposed?

[2:50:57] That motion passes unanimously.

[2:50:58] Thank you.

[2:51:00] 5.4, a particular reservoir exploration at a committee update,

[2:51:12] 5.4.

[2:51:14] I have to have this on mind, is that been removed?

[2:51:19] Do I have to have a supplement?

[2:51:23] Then why did I get it?

[2:51:25] Fine.

[2:51:28] Well, I guess.

[2:51:29] I guess so.

[2:51:30] All right, so the next item is 7.1.

[2:51:38] Where am I?

[2:51:40] Now we move that.

[2:51:42] That item has been moved to follow 8.1.

[2:51:45] So we're moving to a chief executive officer,

[2:51:48] 7.1 annual diversity and inclusion program report,

[2:51:52] recommendations to receive information about programs,

[2:51:54] events, and initiatives that support and develop a diverse and inclusive

[2:51:58] work environment at the district, and I have a report here for manager Susan Staffin?

[2:52:20] Mr. President,

[2:52:24] Mr. President, the first thing I would like to talk about is

[2:52:30] going to come in through, can we get her mic?

[2:52:38] I'm going to have an IT summit, can we tell you what I'm talking about?

[2:52:42] Since I'm joining the district, I have been, I have been tasked with providing some administrative

[2:52:48] direction of our diversity and crucial program, into the last four weeks or so we've been working

[2:52:54] on this presentation to really give the board kind of a holistic approach to what we've been

[2:53:01] doing for the last year. We're contemplating doing in the next coming six months and talking

[2:53:08] a little bit about the staffing function that we're trying to incorporate to really make a difference

[2:53:13] both in the impact that we're having in diversifying our organization, as well as to make

[2:53:22] that we'll make the workforce more inclusive in both the hiring as well as the promotion

[2:53:27] process.

[2:53:28] So, will that let me turn it over to tomorrow?

[2:53:32] Good evening, Chair Varella and distinguished board members.

[2:53:35] My name is Solam Beckler and I'm the new Program Administrator here at the district.

[2:53:38] I've had the pleasure of meeting many of you at ERG events and on one and one meetings.

[2:53:47] And so what I'm here to do today is come to you to talk to you about the progress of

[2:53:53] the program which we do every single year.

[2:53:56] The way I'd like to present today is to talk about diversity and some of our areas of progress

[2:54:03] in our opportunity areas, and inclusion, and with the same formula, opportunity areas in some

[2:54:11] some areas where we've been doing particularly well. So with that, let's begin. I don't want

[2:54:19] to be labor metrics here, but what I do want to do is start from a very, very high level to show

[2:54:28] where we are in terms of ethnicity and gender demographics here at the district.

[2:54:34] We compare us into benchmarks that make sense to us.

[2:54:38] So, for example, the benchmarks you'll see here are the city of San Jose workforce

[2:54:42] because it's a public agency similar to us and it's in the same geographic area.

[2:54:47] The workforce of the Santa Clara County because that's where we draw most of our applicants from.

[2:54:52] And then I put in this book and Google here by engineering companies in our areas.

[2:54:56] So what you could see here is that while we...

[2:55:00] We're making significant progress in some areas. There are specific targeted demographics that we'd like to focus on in terms of outreach.

[2:55:10] I'd like to start off, like I said, on diversity, to talk about some of the areas where we've been doing particularly well.

[2:55:15] So this shows us four areas over the course of ten years where we've been trending in a upward direction in terms of, and they are unclassified ranks.

[2:55:30] And the second two graphs are engineering ranks, which is our main work demographic here.

[2:55:38] We see that Hispanic employees and female employees for both of those over the last 10 years have been

[2:55:45] Move the stats been moving up and then we also see that with female unit managers over the course of the 10 past 10 years

[2:55:52] So how is it that we got here over the course of 10 years

[2:55:56] With these areas of significant improvement and like I said we'll get to our areas of opportunities later

[2:56:03] This is a busy slide, I don't want to belabor it, but I just want to say that we start early.

[2:56:09] We start our outreach early and we reach thousands and thousands of students through our really amazing education

[2:56:16] for outreach program.

[2:56:18] We're reaching students in their classrooms and we're bringing students here for these stewardship commission

[2:56:23] and we're doing more and more of it each year.

[2:56:26] The teachers have been rating it really, really effective at that it's effective and we're tracking these students.

[2:56:32] So when they go off to a high school in college, we're staying in touch with them because we want to try to get them on board as interns.

[2:56:40] We also have this really developed internship process here at the district and you'll hear more about many of these programs in our workforce development report.

[2:56:49] But suffice it to say here, we have summer interns, we have high school interns, we have year-round interns, college interns,

[2:56:55] We're really beefing up our trade trade interns and then, you know, the question becomes, is this a diverse group?

[2:57:06] So last summer, this is just a snapshot of our demographics last summer, where the demographics for ethnicity of our summer interns reflected our community and the workforce we pull from better than our actual workforce.

[2:57:20] And you'll see with the gender of the interns we are actually overrepresented with our female interns.

[2:57:28] So are these interns converting?

[2:57:30] This is the big question.

[2:57:32] They are.

[2:57:33] We've been tracking this information for about the last five or so years.

[2:57:37] We've had 23 former interns come on board as full-time employees.

[2:57:43] So that's showing us that the work in the pipeline is actually working.

[2:57:48] and we hope we're that to increase.

[2:57:51] Once we have our interns on board,

[2:57:53] we have a meticulous onboarding process.

[2:57:56] We have an annual schedule that shows what

[2:57:58] needs to happen throughout the course of the first days,

[2:58:01] weeks, months of a new hired coming on board,

[2:58:04] bus tours, buddy programs, and all of this

[2:58:06] is to make sure that when a person comes on board

[2:58:10] to the district, they're ramped up quickly

[2:58:12] and they're feeling welcome and included.

[2:58:16] And this is the program that I'd like to spend

[2:58:17] a little bit more time on. So we have outreach, we're outroaching to people, we're getting them on

[2:58:22] as interns, they're converting into full-time staff members, we're onboarding them, and then

[2:58:28] we are at the point where we're identifying high potential employees, a diverse group this year.

[2:58:34] There's 26 of them, male female diverse in terms of ethnicity and in areas around the district.

[2:58:40] And we put them through this really rigorous 200-hour program where at the end of the program,

[2:58:47] They're able to satisfy the minimum qualifications for a supervisory role that they wouldn't otherwise have had the chance to do because they don't have supervisory experience.

[2:58:59] So onboarding reaching out into the pipeline in terms onboarding people and then identifying the high potentials and helping them progress through the career.

[2:59:07] I think we would be remiss to talk about diversity without just in the vacuum of our employees.

[2:59:14] We also do a lot of outreach into the community.

[2:59:18] We do tours and multiple languages.

[2:59:21] We are strong members of the participants of they works in the water group pathway consortium,

[2:59:28] which helps people get into the water resources industries.

[2:59:31] And we've seen you all many times and we thank you for your support at our community sponsors.

[2:59:37] ship events. So those are, that's what we're doing good. And we, we're

[2:59:44] planning to continue doing that. Now, we have some challenges. And here they are

[2:59:49] identified for you on two graphs. The first one is this a time period graph that we

[2:59:55] talked about again over the last 10 years. So over the last 10 years we've seen a

[2:59:59] trend where...

[3:00:00] The female unclassified have actually been going down. In addition, when we take the county of the workforce of Santa Clara County, which is, again, where we pull most of our applicants from, and we look at Asians and Hispanics within the entire workforce and compare that to the Santa Clara County, we could stand to reflect our community a bit better.

[3:00:22] So, what are we going to do about this?

[3:00:25] Well, you know, there's a new team on this.

[3:00:28] It's myself and Susan and we're working very closely with HR.

[3:00:33] Neil is here and he's going to speak in a minute after this presentation.

[3:00:37] But we're really trying to create that bridge between HR and DNI and solidify that relationship.

[3:00:44] And the re-org of my group under our new chief, Susan Stanton,

[3:00:50] and is going to make it so that their synergy between DNI and HR, so that our goals are

[3:00:57] in line, and ultimately we're held accountable to the same group and the same chief.

[3:01:04] The next thing that we're focused on is being really results oriented and outcome oriented.

[3:01:10] We have this really great master plan that has lots and lots and lots of tactics and we've

[3:01:15] implemented the vast majority of them, but now it's focused on where is it that we need

[3:01:20] to focus on and what best practices at the industry and in the industry and within our district

[3:01:26] are going to help us achieve the results that we need. It's about measurement, measurement,

[3:01:31] measurement and that's what we'll be focused on.

[3:01:35] So at this point, I'd like to move on to inclusion.

[3:01:38] And again, talk about our areas of strengths and our areas of our opportunity. So this slide,

[3:01:48] I'd like

[3:01:50] 7 or 8 months ago the district participated in an employees had a section survey and this

[3:01:56] set of section survey was different than the rest that we've taken because such a great

[3:02:02] amount of people took it. There's 71% of the district employees actually took the survey

[3:02:07] which is higher than it was and ever recorded at the district. So it was through organization called

[3:02:19] we've done it before, and they have a trust index, and the index is made up of credibility,

[3:02:26] respect, fairness, pride, and camaraderie.

[3:02:29] I want to explain really quickly the organizational score in the work group score.

[3:02:33] Everybody was asked each question on the employee satisfaction survey twice.

[3:02:39] They had to answer once for what they thought about the organization and once for what

[3:02:43] they thought about it for the work group.

[3:02:45] So you'll see our organizational scores, lower the work group scores.

[3:02:49] That's common among all organizations.

[3:02:52] Now I think where I will really go is to the last column,

[3:02:55] which is the benchmark of the 50 best San Francisco

[3:02:58] Bay Area companies.

[3:03:00] That benchmark is particularly high,

[3:03:02] not saying that we should have strived to meet that,

[3:03:04] but that benchmark is,

[3:03:07] doesn't have public sector agencies in it.

[3:03:10] So on the one hand, while we're ahead of the game,

[3:03:13] because there's no public sector benchmark,

[3:03:15] we're at three degrees this is to work,

[3:03:17] We're ahead of the game because we're actually taking these in-depth surveys.

[3:03:21] On the other hand, even if you got rid of that last column and just looked at our organizational

[3:03:25] scores, they are low by any stretch of the imagination.

[3:03:30] So, but let's start off with where we're doing well.

[3:03:33] So, these four categories, and I'd like to just read you a little bit of how you're going to

[3:03:41] If your presentation, we have a comment from Director Swaya.

[3:03:45] Thank you, Chair.

[3:03:47] For the previous slides, I just have a quick question.

[3:03:50] Are these numbers like percentage or number of employees?

[3:03:55] So they are percentage of people who answered the question

[3:03:58] as agree or strongly agree?

[3:04:03] When we move on to the next slides, you'll

[3:04:05] hear specific questions that make up these.

[3:04:08] I couldn't find a footnote anywhere.

[3:04:09] I was wondering, what are these numbers, okay, so it's strongly agree or agree, and what

[3:04:17] this credibility, what does that mean?

[3:04:19] What does that mean?

[3:04:20] Quite a ability.

[3:04:22] I think that has to do with organizational trust, you know, trust in your work or how much

[3:04:26] do you trust the communications that are coming from leadership and management?

[3:04:35] Okay, thank you.

[3:04:38] So, where we are doing well is a majority of our employees thought that people are treated

[3:04:45] fairly here, regardless of their sexual orientation.

[3:04:48] A majority of people thought that they were able to take time off work when they needed

[3:04:52] to.

[3:04:52] A majority of people thought that they were not people are here and not ridiculed due to their

[3:04:57] background, personal traits or characteristics.

[3:05:00] People thought that when they joined the organization, they were meant to feel welcomed. And people felt really good about the ways that we contribute to the community.

[3:05:09] So these are our strong suits. And again, I want to talk about how it is we got here. This is the first thing that comes to my mind. And it's the two decades worth of our ERG Programmer Employee Resource Group Programme.

[3:05:23] And not only do these employee resource groups serve as a business function to the business

[3:05:28] and for outreach to the community and providing different perspectives,

[3:05:32] but what I think is one of the key advantages to having all of these groups is there.

[3:05:37] A built-in support network, the second people walk into the district.

[3:05:41] And I just wanted to tell a quick story when I first got here about seven months ago.

[3:05:45] I took it upon myself to meet with all of the ERG leaders,

[3:05:48] and I was meeting with the drip group, those are the millenials.

[3:05:53] And they were telling me the story that when a new hire comes on board and who's perceived

[3:05:58] to be a millennial, a hiring manager will walk them down to the cafeteria where all of

[3:06:03] the drip millenials sit at the same table at lunch every single day, and they'll say,

[3:06:07] this is so, and so, you're new friend, and they told it to me, oh, candidly, it's funny story,

[3:06:12] but to me it's signified right when you walk in, whether you're a person who comes from

[3:06:18] a group that's been historically discriminated against or if you're a millennial, and you

[3:06:21] might not see as many millennials around as everyone else.

[3:06:25] Here is your support group and it's ready made and it's built in and so that's been very

[3:06:30] important to advance our inclusion numbers.

[3:06:34] We also have a really robust employee recognition program.

[3:06:37] We have service awards that we give out annually on the spot awards gift cards for people

[3:06:43] who go above and beyond and we have the employee recognition program which is coming up in

[3:06:48] Maine and I hope to see you all there.

[3:06:50] So these are the types of programs that are helping make making people feel included here at the district and engaged.

[3:06:58] But with diversity, we have our areas of opportunity.

[3:07:02] And this I'll go into the specifics on so that you could hear what the scores of credibility like you asked director.

[3:07:12] Not a very low percentage of people thought that there were consequences for poor performers

[3:07:19] at the district.

[3:07:21] Very few people thought that promotions go to those who best deserve them.

[3:07:25] Very few people thought that managers tried to avoid politicking or backstabbing.

[3:07:31] That managers involved them in decisions that affected their jobs or work environments.

[3:07:35] that managers actions match their words and that people could voice their concern without fear of retaliation.

[3:07:42] So these are significant issues for us, and particularly so, because if we put in all our effort and resources and energies into the diversity side of the house without paying attention to the inclusion side, it all falls apart.

[3:07:58] So, definitely a double-pronged approach.

[3:08:03] So, what have we been doing and what can we be doing?

[3:08:08] The CEO, Kamacha, which she came on board, she started CEO office hours.

[3:08:12] And that's been really well received.

[3:08:15] She sees two to four employees who just walk into set up an appointment

[3:08:17] and walk into her office and talk to her about anything.

[3:08:21] She posts on her CEO corner, which has also been very well received updates

[3:08:26] for meetings just like this, and for a meeting from MLT meetings, LT meetings, chief

[3:08:30] meetings, hey, the chiefs had a meeting, and this is what we spoke about, and that has

[3:08:34] worked to help increase that credibility issue.

[3:08:39] So, these are some of the strategies we've been putting into place.

[3:08:42] One, I wanted to spend just a particular amount of time on, because it's near and dear to

[3:08:45] my heart, was my first assignment when getting here is the all employee meeting, and the reason

[3:08:50] that I wanted to focus on that, and I think all of you were there, is not just because it

[3:08:55] this fantastic event and there we had the comedians on the stage and the breakfast and the music

[3:09:00] and it was off site and but because for a month's prior we had taken the all employee,

[3:09:07] the satisfaction survey and in that survey the question was asked do you think that the

[3:09:11] district is a great place to work and only 58% of the people said that it was? We did a post event survey

[3:09:18] after the all employee meeting and that percentage jumped up to 80% so you know putting on programs

[3:09:23] like this where we have the chiefs come up and they talk about, here are a mission, here are

[3:09:27] a vision, here are our values, and this is the direction we're taking the organization

[3:09:30] really helps boost those credibility scores and makes people feel engaged in what they do.

[3:09:37] Something else we're working on and I'll wrap this up. I know I've taking a long time.

[3:09:43] We're working on what I like to call the Culture Innovation Lab and this not only came from

[3:09:48] our great places toward consultant but it also came out from a grassroots level when we were having

[3:09:53] our listening session post survey and if people said we need to have this group of people.

[3:10:00] People, the key culture influencers at the district who helped shift the culture at the district.

[3:10:07] And so what we've done is worked with emerging leaders program, already high potential employees,

[3:10:13] created a culture innovation lab, and what they're going to do is go back to all of the past employees

[3:10:19] had a satisfaction surveys, conduct interviews themselves, and then come up with talk to stakeholders,

[3:10:23] like the bargaining units and the chiefs, and then come up with a list of actionable strategies

[3:10:28] that they would like management to implement, and they have the full support of CEO Camacho.

[3:10:33] So we're very excited about that.

[3:10:35] And then an inclusion initiative that's in its very early stages, that will help brand us as an innovative agency within the district.

[3:10:44] That's worthy of being next door to all the tech giants because we're as innovative as they are in our industry.

[3:10:51] So branding ourselves not only externally, but internally with ourselves in our employees to let them feel that

[3:10:57] we're making a difference here in the world and getting them more engaged and more productive.

[3:11:04] So, summing it up, in terms of diversity, we're going to have a targeted and specific focus

[3:11:10] on outreach and an inclusion we're focusing on transparency throughout all levels of the organization.

[3:11:16] Happy to take any questions.

[3:11:20] Any comments from the board?

[3:11:23] The public, I have some public testimony here before that.

[3:11:25] I've got director Sathas.

[3:11:26] Good to go.

[3:11:28] The testimony.

[3:11:29] Thank you.

[3:11:30] Thank you.

[3:11:30] So I have the Sam Kassat.

[3:11:40] Thank you for the Salam.

[3:11:42] Good evening.

[3:11:42] Chair Ralella.

[3:11:43] Board members.

[3:11:44] My name is Basam.

[3:11:45] And I'm a district staff here.

[3:11:47] I send here to acknowledge the board's past investments in diversity and inclusion.

[3:11:52] And urge this board to continue on the same path.

[3:11:55] Since the turn of the 21st century, the world district demographics has been changing.

[3:11:59] We currently have the most diverse staff in the district history, not only based on race and gender, but in other areas too.

[3:12:08] And diversity is not limited to the staff level.

[3:12:12] Our leadership team is more diverse than we would have ever imagined.

[3:12:17] And also the current elected board is as diverse as this valley.

[3:12:23] But diversity is not just about numbers or how many staff from a certain group are hired or promoted.

[3:12:29] hiring and promotion has always been about merit and should remain the

[3:12:35] way. However, what matters most is the sense of inclusion that we have been

[3:12:41] enjoying here at the district under the diverse and inclusion program. The

[3:12:46] program supports 12 employee resource groups or ARGs and for any staff to feel

[3:12:53] included, they need to feel safe at work, they need to feel accepted by their

[3:12:58] for who they are and respected by management and I could go on and give an example when I

[3:13:06] started here working at the district as a junior engineer and me and a few other people who

[3:13:12] I wanted to start at the LGBT resource group and I back then we didn't have any manager onboard

[3:13:20] supporting us and there was some fear that maybe upper management or don't support that idea

[3:13:27] And one, the deputy, she is a soft-spoken woman, she has an accent like me, a very gentle person.

[3:13:38] I approached her by email asking her if she can become our supporter.

[3:13:43] And she said yes, what do you need? Anything you can have by name?

[3:13:47] I can give money to the group, I said no money, but just need your name.

[3:13:50] And after she did that, many unit managers started to join the list of supporters.

[3:13:55] and then later on at least one manager followed her and now she's retired and she's sitting among you.

[3:14:01] So that's what diverse and inclusion means to me to have that atmosphere of support at the district,

[3:14:07] while we work and I hope this program continues and we keep on supporting it.

[3:14:12] So staff feel welcome while they are and energy us to do the best they can do.

[3:14:17] Thank you.

[3:14:18] Thank you, Sam. That was very nice.

[3:14:21] The Cardo Barajas.

[3:14:24] You know, I think the Cardo and Jessica wanted to speak, but

[3:14:29] we had to leave. We went late. I guess.

[3:14:33] Then I have this, like, so I don't have Jessica Vasquez's dot here.

[3:14:38] She's not here.

[3:14:39] Okay, so I'm going to have this Beth and Court.

[3:14:52] Good evening, Chivalrella.

[3:14:54] And members of the board. I'm with Beth and Court.

[3:14:56] I'm the president of the Employee Association.

[3:14:58] I asked me local one.

[3:15:00] I'm here tonight and I had a place to go so I was at my desk for a while, but I'm here tonight to offer my observations and EAs on the Diversity and Inclusion Program.

[3:15:11] First, we're really happy to see that the program will continue to have a place of priority.

[3:15:19] I think the placing it under the new chief for administration is particularly helpful.

[3:15:27] I'll also please to see that staff resources are being provided to something that hasn't happened in a quite a long while.

[3:15:37] It's nice to see not only board support but support at the executive level all the way up to the top.

[3:15:44] We're also glad to see that the focus is going to be on inclusion and that we're integrating

[3:15:50] DNI in everything we do here at the district.

[3:15:53] It's not a program unto itself, but it is in every single thing that we do here.

[3:15:59] We do a lot of good things here in the field and the work that we do, but we're also doing

[3:16:04] a lot of good things internally as well.

[3:16:07] And we've never taken enough time to showcase that.

[3:16:11] And what are the things that's pretty cool for me?

[3:16:14] And I'm sitting back here watching Salam do presentation.

[3:16:18] We've got things going on in HR.

[3:16:21] We've had the succession development, which is our cultivate program,

[3:16:25] happening for a number of years.

[3:16:27] We've got all kinds of development happening.

[3:16:29] And now we've captured it all into one place.

[3:16:31] So you can see everything that's been going on.

[3:16:34] Aside from the projects and the work that we're doing out there, all the stuff we're doing inside in here.

[3:16:40] It's so important.

[3:16:42] It's nice to see it all in one spot.

[3:16:45] So, from the EA perspective, we're glad to see that this is a high priority for you all.

[3:16:51] Glad to see that executive management is taking it extremely serious.

[3:16:55] And we hope to continue to see and work with you all on things like staff development

[3:17:01] And outreach to the community and hiring the best of the best that we can.

[3:17:07] Thank you.

[3:17:10] Thank you, Ben Court.

[3:17:11] That's the final speaker I have on this.

[3:17:13] Any board?

[3:17:14] discussion, okay.

[3:17:15] I have a question, Mayor.

[3:17:17] I have a big first.

[3:17:18] Well, he was an I didn't say him up.

[3:17:19] Okay, Dick.

[3:17:20] I'm a professor.

[3:17:21] I'm a professor.

[3:17:23] I'm a professor.

[3:17:26] I'm a professor.

[3:17:28] I'm a professor.

[3:17:31] born in Basama, LA and LGBT and ABE employees and the unions all come together and that makes

[3:17:38] a difference.

[3:17:39] Of course, with board direction.

[3:17:40] I'm very pleased with the board that we have because we're given the direction, so you

[3:17:44] have to live it and we'll direct it, but we'll come a long way since the 1964 civil rights

[3:17:49] but not enough.

[3:17:52] And we talk about the work place and televisions and so on and complaints, I have seen

[3:18:00] change. It is less. Maybe it's the change of CEO, maybe it's the change of board members of

[3:18:06] whatever, but I see it less because when I have meetings with the employees, I don't find

[3:18:10] that being the topic. But I still feel that I'm like, I totally agree, I'm not worried

[3:18:17] about statistics. They don't sway me at all because I have real good eyes at 72 and the folks

[3:18:22] elect me out there don't reflect enough in this workplace and that's the challenge. But I

[3:18:28] I don't want to keep on talking about this.

[3:18:30] I've been doing it for 16 years,

[3:18:32] on with my fellow director, Mr. Merrill.

[3:18:36] And we'll go back a long way.

[3:18:37] And so, what's this master plan that you have?

[3:18:40] How's it going to affect it?

[3:18:41] That's what I got to see, and we need action steps.

[3:18:44] I had a chance to meet with this statin just briefly.

[3:18:47] And I'm going to meet again tomorrow with her.

[3:18:49] And so, her being new, we had a chance to chat.

[3:18:52] And I really feel we're going to connect

[3:18:53] and get some things done.

[3:18:54] But again, for me, I can go on and on.

[3:18:58] Action steps is the key to this thing. Culture events, the outreach is so

[3:19:03] on and just like whether it be flood conditions and so on by naughty areas.

[3:19:08] We've got to take care of these things and make a difference here so I'll stop for

[3:19:14] now but I expect to see an action plan here within six months and that's not to be

[3:19:21] in short. That's long enough, 64 one more time, for a long time ago. But I was

[3:19:26] I believe back in 1776, we're all equal.

[3:19:28] Why we went for 64 and why is this place

[3:19:31] we went, but you know we've been leaders here

[3:19:32] because we have daycare centers,

[3:19:34] Cedar Shabbas, day lot of things.

[3:19:35] So I want to give credit where it's due.

[3:19:38] And so we need to step this thing up

[3:19:41] and I'm looking forward to it.

[3:19:42] Thank you.

[3:19:43] Thank you.

[3:19:44] Thank you Director, Director Keegan.

[3:19:46] Director, Mr. Mayor.

[3:19:48] Thank you.

[3:19:49] Thank you.

[3:19:50] Thank you Mr. Chairman.

[3:19:50] Just a few questions.

[3:19:51] I'm a process person, of course, that's what I'm going to ask about.

[3:20:00] May your action, do you have your office, does you office have a personnel?

[3:20:05] Because I notice you said you guys have some interaction.

[3:20:12] I mean, I appreciate process as well.

[3:20:14] And I think that it needs to be put in place and I'll talk a little bit about what we've done.

[3:20:19] But I also am a relationship person, and I feel like the relationship.

[3:20:23] I have personally built with an ill and his staff is moving the needle.

[3:20:27] For example, I got to call the other earlier this week that said we're hiring an MA1 in HR

[3:20:34] sit on our panel and I sat on the panel all day today.

[3:20:38] So on one hand, it's that relationship that I have, but on the other hand, it's the process.

[3:20:43] So we've set up a joint committee with myself, Yolanda Perez, she's the PIR1, PIR2 on my

[3:20:52] staff and Peggy, who is your head recruiter at HR.

[3:20:56] We meet weekly, and we have finally, finally, excuse me, we have standing agenda items.

[3:21:01] What kind of diversity career fairs are coming up?

[3:21:04] For example, recently we have our internship programs coming up,

[3:21:09] and so D&I's agenda on that point on that meeting was,

[3:21:12] we want a D&I question on the supplemental application process,

[3:21:17] and you know, we're having this great relationship with HR,

[3:21:20] and so they've put it on there, and now our next meeting will be this week,

[3:21:23] and D&I's agenda item will be, we want to meet with the hiring managers to tell them what we're

[3:21:29] looking for in an answer to this D&I question. So these standing meetings with standing agenda items

[3:21:36] where we walk through the process of, you know, you need to get through a year first and that's what I'm

[3:21:43] realizing here. So this is the first time we're recruiting for interns and I'm seeing the process.

[3:21:47] I'm seeing who do you outreach to? What does the application look like? Who are the hiring

[3:21:51] managers and what agenda D and I has and how we could influence what HR is doing and

[3:21:58] they have been really receptive back to them so you know I hope that these standing meetings

[3:22:03] continue I think that when we're but since we're both under the same boss that's going

[3:22:09] to hold us all accountable to the same goals.

[3:22:13] Do you approve you approve the composition of panels to assure diversity?

[3:22:19] Now, but what I understand from HR is that they strive and make every effort for us, but...

[3:22:26] Yeah, no, I'm with you.

[3:22:29] And

[3:22:32] so, I think we have a great inclusion program. We might have a good diversity program, but there's really no assurance and there's really no way to tell.

[3:22:45] unless we have reviews that are regular, unless we look at what the application pool looks like and what the hiring pool results from that pool.

[3:23:00] And we don't have that here.

[3:23:02] We used to, and I think we need to do that, because that's the only assurance that we have.

[3:23:09] And it's not, it's a process, so it's not just a question of result.

[3:23:14] It's a question of being able to confirm and at the same time lay down some standards.

[3:23:23] If people know that you have a process that has to be confirmed, then people then will act accordingly.

[3:23:33] They will not only be committed, but they will definitely activate accordingly.

[3:23:41] So if we have a situation where we talk about our commitment, we also have to confirm that commitment in the result.

[3:23:50] And so I think we need to include in our plan some aspect of review.

[3:23:57] What did the African pool look like and what so what did the candidates look like and what did we do with those folks?

[3:24:06] And I think we need more reports than once a year because once again it supports the whole idea by showing results and the only way that you show results is by the pictures that you draw.

[3:24:23] you know, what we do, what came in, what went out and what we have to show for it, because

[3:24:30] I do think that we have tremendous inclusion, we take care of our employees and that part

[3:24:38] we just need to continue to support, but I think we have to work on these opportunities

[3:24:44] that we have and then confirm that we're addressing it.

[3:24:48] So I'd like to see more reports and maybe quarterly and some review of what it is that we're doing.

[3:25:02] Thank you, Director, Susan Scott.

[3:25:08] I didn't see you. I got you. No, because you gave me a lot of meat. Sorry about that.

[3:25:13] I took a gig in. You're on.

[3:25:16] I can't say you on my board. Thank you. Thank you. These damn microphones.

[3:25:22] I agree with Dick. I think this location is bad. So, so first off, I also had the opportunity to meet with Ms.

[3:25:33] and we were scheduled to talk, I think for only half an hour I'd ended up an hour and went

[3:25:38] by in the blink of an eye, it seemed like I really want to say that I'm very, very happy

[3:25:46] that we did the great places to work trust index survey because I think the results of it

[3:25:53] show we do have some work to do on inclusion and I think one thing that I work briefly at the

[3:26:03] strict and one thing I noticed at the time was it did not seem to me to be a high trust

[3:26:07] organization compared to some other agencies that I worked at and I think the data reflects

[3:26:11] that but the good thing about data is that you measure it and you're able to see how do we improve

[3:26:18] and I think that sometimes it's good to see sort of the words and all right because if everything looks

[3:26:24] good and happy then how do you improve and so I think that we do have we've identified

[3:26:30] what are some of our strengths, and we're also looking at what are some of our inclusion opportunities,

[3:26:36] and I think particularly fairness and accountability are really critical.

[3:26:43] I've been very happy with the intern program and what we've done with it over the last few years.

[3:26:49] My experience as a public agency manager is that internship programs are a wonderful way to increase

[3:26:58] diversity within an organization because you are bringing in a diverse pool of talented young

[3:27:05] people and it's there's a great deal of support I think by the existing employees when they have

[3:27:14] that opportunity to work with and engage with those young professionals of tomorrow. I will say

[3:27:24] that I think that the district has the best support network I think for the LGBTQ community here at the district.

[3:27:39] It's far superior to anything I've seen at any other public agency and I think we should take a great deal of pride in that.

[3:27:46] One of the things that I think is really important is this concept of building the bench.

[3:27:51] You know, it's not enough to say, well, I want to see, you know, faces that look a particular kind of way.

[3:27:57] I look at us, it's like there's a lot of hard work that needs to happen.

[3:28:02] And what that means is making sure that everyone gets the opportunity to,

[3:28:07] if a promotion requires experience in a particular area.

[3:28:11] And I think we're already doing that with our supervisory classes that we're offering.

[3:28:16] We need to make sure that people have the opportunity to get the training and get the experience

[3:28:25] they need to be ready to move up.

[3:28:29] And some people perhaps come from a place of privilege or they've had more opportunities

[3:28:35] in certain areas.

[3:28:36] Well, we need to make sure that all of our employees get the kind of opportunities to develop

[3:28:42] themselves to the best that they can be.

[3:28:44] And then that gets back to kind of this whole thing of, I know that in my past as a manager I was held accountable for making sure that people were getting the opportunities that they needed to be the most qualified person to move forward.

[3:29:03] And so I think that, you know, can take a lot of different forms including, you don't always have to have a formal mentoring program, right?

[3:29:12] have managers that have internalized that and understand that's just part of their job is to

[3:29:17] mentor their subordinates and help their subordinates develop those skills and abilities

[3:29:23] for their greatest potential and that really helps the organization overall. So I think that

[3:29:30] we're not where we want to be quite yet. We're certainly much better than we used to be

[3:29:38] And I think that we do have a blueprint for how we can move forward.

[3:29:43] And I'm looking forward to seeing this new approach, working more closely with HR.

[3:29:51] And having some specific areas where it looks like we've identified, hey, here's some things that we really need to work on.

[3:30:00] Thank you for seeing the outcome of those efforts. Thank you.

[3:30:04] Thank you.

[3:30:04] Excuse me.

[3:30:07] Excuse me.

[3:30:08] Excuse me.

[3:30:12] A couple things, I guess. One of the things that I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I want to elaborate on is that the, the, I think, the strength of.

[3:30:21] Kind of reorienting this program under administrative services that it is going to be very.

[3:30:27] closely collaborating with HR I don't know how you can really have a successful

[3:30:32] diversity and inclusion program if it's not working hand in glove with human

[3:30:37] resources. I think also as somebody who's now, I guess, completely my fourth

[3:30:43] week here, you know, our strength as an organization sometimes tends to be our

[3:30:47] weakness. We are a very task oriented engineering center type of an

[3:30:52] organization. We tend sometimes not to think about the things that we have to

[3:30:57] do, in order to make people really feel included, feel welcomed, feel appreciated, because

[3:31:02] we're very focused on projects, tasks, things that make the will go around.

[3:31:12] So part of this program as well as is trying to make the time not only as managers, but

[3:31:18] as an organization that really recognizes and creates the opportunities to value and create

[3:31:26] emotional opportunities in an organization. And that certainly is something I'm going to be doing.

[3:31:34] Also, it's something that we talk a little bit about with the legal department, you know, when we look at trying to create outcomes.

[3:31:46] We need to balance the need to make sure, obviously, our pool is rich and we have a nice

[3:31:53] diverse candidates when we're interviewing people and that we're doing things to attract

[3:31:59] people to want to come working for the district, but yet also be very mindful that there's

[3:32:04] still statutory provisions that prevent us from engaging in a lawful practices that you

[3:32:12] no longer hiring the best, but you're hiring an orange person or a pink person.

[3:32:19] So the most important thing is making sure we ultimately hire the person with the best credentials

[3:32:25] and the best qualities while also making a superior effort to have having a rich diverse

[3:32:31] candidate pool.

[3:32:32] And that's something that both HR and the diversity and inclusion effort are really trying to

[3:32:39] is pretty people from the outside. Of course, recognizing those and the more currently employed

[3:32:44] to give them the professional development opportunities to prepare them from those chances

[3:32:49] to rise in the organization.

[3:32:55] Thank you, Susan. Any other comments?

[3:32:58] Okay.

[3:33:04] You touched on something that you talked about, you know, colors and so on and

[3:33:09] is the best quality of our person. But that's what director Esther Mary and I've been saying all along.

[3:33:13] You've got to make sure that pull applicants has the opportunity, then it all works.

[3:33:20] The best qualified person is, but if they're not called, for instance, you know, whether

[3:33:25] it be engineered or so on, here we just made some changes before you came here for the first

[3:33:30] time.

[3:33:30] I should have been done a long time ago.

[3:33:32] Again, I go back to the 64 civil rights thing, but if you don't go out and out reach and

[3:33:37] bring folks in, opportunity and out there.

[3:33:40] So you get to just hurt someone saying the statistics here that our numbers were down.

[3:33:46] So there was no question, but it's been for me 60 years, it's way too long.

[3:33:50] So I'm going to say one more time, before I leave here, we're going to speed this process up.

[3:33:56] Because I came from another agency when I left it was a lot better than when I got there.

[3:34:01] And the numbers speak for itself.

[3:34:03] But again, I'm not in Tony's right, we need the quarterly report to solve, but when it comes to promotions,

[3:34:08] session planning. We're not there. So I just want to make sure that in the way I feel

[3:34:13] up here, we got the majority board feels the same way. And so that's going to be taking

[3:34:18] place. So you've been here for whatever for four weeks and it's too soon. But once that

[3:34:25] month and a half is over, let's go to work. Absolutely. Thank you, Director Dr. Dr.

[3:34:31] Yeah, I want to certainly agree with what Susan's comment, we want the best, but we also

[3:34:38] need to have the panels reflect the community because too often people who think they're

[3:34:47] the best look like themselves and that's not good enough.

[3:34:52] So what we need to have is, we need to have panels that reflect the community.

[3:35:00] We know that everybody gets a fair shake. So we want the best, but we also want to give everybody a fair shake. The only way to provide a fair shake is to make sure that everybody is on board.

[3:35:12] And so if we have panels that leave people out, then we can assure a fair shake. So that's why I have a concern that we review these panels and we approve them.

[3:35:27] So that we don't prevent anybody from being considered.

[3:35:31] I agree.

[3:35:34] OK.

[3:35:36] Anything else?

[3:35:37] So when I'm out in public and I'm talking about people

[3:35:40] asking me what the water district is like.

[3:35:42] I say it's like walking into the United Nations building.

[3:35:46] All colors, all skin tones, diversity, languages.

[3:35:52] I said it's very much like walking into the United Nations.

[3:35:55] Those of you that have been there and know there I have.

[3:35:58] You'll understand exactly what I'm saying, so even though we're saying there's a need for improvement,

[3:36:02] I think we're doing a fine job of our currently and there's always room for improvement, so thank you for that great report.

[3:36:09] Appreciate that.

[3:36:12] Okay, let's move on to item 7.

[3:36:16] Two recommended position on federal legislation, HR448, Huffman, water conservation rebate tax, parity act.

[3:36:23] I'll get you being in the chair of the relevant members of the Board, Rick Calendar, Deputy Administrative Officer, for the Office of Government Relations.

[3:36:30] We have one recommended action in front of you tonight, and that's a support position on HR488.

[3:36:37] Excuse me, four, four, eight.

[3:36:38] I have to be in the bill. This is dealing with the water position.

[3:36:42] I have to get a motion to approve and the second.

[3:36:46] All those any discussion?

[3:36:48] The comment.

[3:36:49] I'll listen.

[3:36:51] Favorite say aye?

[3:36:52] I'll oppose the motion passes.

[3:36:53] Thank you, Rick.

[3:36:57] Next item is.

[3:37:01] Okay.

[3:37:02] Next item is.

[3:37:06] No.

[3:37:07] 7.

[3:37:07] 3.

[3:37:08] Chief Executive Officer.

[3:37:09] We did that earlier.

[3:37:10] So 6.1.

[3:37:11] We go back to the.

[3:37:15] Capital.

[3:37:16] Improve.

[3:37:17] Program.

[3:37:18] See.

[3:37:18] Okay report.

[3:37:19] Item 6.1.

[3:37:26] No, we did 8.1.

[3:37:29] Can we do 8.1?

[3:37:34] Okay.

[3:37:35] Right, 8.1, no.

[3:37:37] Okay.

[3:37:38] Report in structure of the office of ethics and corporate governance.

[3:37:42] That's a category of words.

[3:37:47] Ha.

[3:37:48] How many envelopes?

[3:37:51] Thank you, Ward.

[3:37:53] Okay, this is your win.

[3:37:54] Okay, you're on.

[3:37:56] Okay.

[3:38:00] The purpose of this report is to present the results of a study conducted by a consultant

[3:38:06] SOA projects, Inc., if you recall, on June 9, 2015, the board discussed the structure

[3:38:15] of the Office of Ethics and Corporate Governance and the request to review of the structure

[3:38:19] of similar agencies.

[3:38:23] The consultant made 11 recommendations, which listed in the report along with staff recommendations

[3:38:29] and responses.

[3:38:33] The consultant discussed several models for reporting structure of ethics function and staff

[3:38:38] after careful consideration shows one of them.

[3:38:42] As a result, the ethics and corporate governance function was moved out of the Office of

[3:38:48] the CEO and into human resources.

[3:38:53] I should point out that the consultant originally suggested

[3:38:55] and strongly favored that the Office of Ethics

[3:38:59] be moved under the District Council's office.

[3:39:06] But they're now also showed that only 2%

[3:39:09] of the cases that went before the Ethics function

[3:39:12] were actually legal related.

[3:39:15] Most of the issues were related to human resources, and so were referred to in the labor

[3:39:21] relations of other functions within the human resources department.

[3:39:29] So as a result, in October 2016, the interim CEO moved the two ethics staff, primarily

[3:39:36] Norega, sorry, Norega, who leads the ethics function to the human resources office.

[3:39:46] With that, I'll just in my comments and be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[3:39:53] You have your right, you have your right.

[3:39:56] Okay, anybody else?

[3:39:58] Let me make a comment.

[3:40:01] So as I've heard, tell me this, for a person back there, can't you put that, what we have on the regular

[3:40:10] catchup on our own screens up here, that presentation?

[3:40:16] Can't you do that? We didn't have a, we didn't have pop on the presentation.

[3:40:18] But the one we have in our little device here, can't they put up here? Is it right now? Is the ethics understand the office or is it back to human resources?

[3:40:27] It's back in human resources.

[3:40:29] I never did want it there, so what's the rest of the board field like?

[3:40:34] Because no matter what issue you have,

[3:40:37] if this guy's going to go to legal to get clear, go ahead, Gary.

[3:40:42] Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

[3:40:44] What I don't understand, when he's presentation,

[3:40:46] come up, why aren't they on the board to monitoring?

[3:40:50] Yeah, I

[3:40:54] would like that.

[3:40:56] Any comments from, I don't know what I'm saying.

[3:40:58] You know, I saw that, I have it on my agenda either, yeah.

[3:41:03] What's the pressure of the board do you want to keep the way it is or do you want to change it?

[3:41:07] Go ahead, Barbara.

[3:41:12] These mics do not work properly.

[3:41:15] I think I had some concerns in the past, which made me interested in seeing it under legal.

[3:41:24] But I think at the same time we have professional staff here.

[3:41:29] They've come forward with recommendations and I'm certainly willing to give their recommendations a chance to see

[3:41:35] if they work. If they don't work, we can always change it,

[3:41:42] but our job is to basically say

[3:41:44] the kind of outcomes we want from staff, and I'm confident that our management team can

[3:41:50] make this organization structure work. Thank you.

[3:41:53] Thank you. Here you go.

[3:41:58] Red swing, director swing.

[3:42:03] Just plug it in yourself. It'll work.

[3:42:08] Thank you, Vice Chair.

[3:42:16] I read the agenda memo and staff's analysis.

[3:42:22] I support staff's analysis.

[3:42:25] I think it makes sense, the logic that you laid out.

[3:42:29] And as Director Keegan said that we as a board member,

[3:42:34] we trust the management has the best way of managing this function,

[3:42:40] knowing that it's an important function to the board.

[3:42:44] And if it doesn't work, then now we can change it accordingly.

[3:42:50] But I think we should give the opportunity for staff to do it,

[3:42:57] and then review it on the regular basis.

[3:43:02] Thank you, Director Director.

[3:43:03] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[3:43:07] I just wanted to say that I concur with what's been said.

[3:43:12] I think that the analysis that was done in the reasoning for moving off the ethics officer

[3:43:20] over to HR makes sense and I'm supportive.

[3:43:28] Thank you very much.

[3:43:30] Thank you.

[3:43:30] Rick or Santos?

[3:43:31] Yes, but the chair.

[3:43:32] Yes, of course.

[3:43:33] I disagree.

[3:43:33] When I had it before, it was a conflict.

[3:43:35] There's no question.

[3:43:36] We had a thorough discussion here and that's why I went to legal.

[3:43:38] And it's all said and done and legal is going to have to review this.

[3:43:41] When you have an in-house of any way, you don't care how good your staff is.

[3:43:45] It's going to become political, it's become employee problems, it's not good.

[3:43:50] When Stan's off against it, he just says, I'm going to ship it out, it becomes independent.

[3:43:54] And this is there's no connection.

[3:43:56] And you've got to be sure this way. This is the best way to do it.

[3:43:59] It's not just adamant about it. It just makes common sense.

[3:44:01] If it don't make sense, it's nonsense.

[3:44:03] If you don't do it that way, you're going to have the same problems we had before.

[3:44:06] And he's going to have somebody attach to somebody.

[3:44:09] He goes like one more time, goes to legal office, he ships it out, and we sit there and we get the results.

[3:44:14] And there's no connections.

[3:44:15] That's clean.

[3:44:17] So I don't support your recommendation at all.

[3:44:20] Thank you, Director Dr. Cremon.

[3:44:25] Thank you, Chair.

[3:44:25] Yeah, I don't think this is about, I definitely see what Director Santos has.

[3:44:29] This isn't about trusting management.

[3:44:30] I mean, in many organizations, for example, the CFO reports up to the board with a dotted line relationship.

[3:44:37] relationships. So it's not about trust. I think at the end of the day almost all these ethics things do go to legal

[3:44:43] some way at least for review.

[3:44:46] But I do hear you said you surveyed.

[3:44:48] Did you say it's in the bottom two percent of structures?

[3:44:53] No.

[3:44:54] What I was saying was that only 2 percent of the cases we actually received in the ethics office.

[3:45:00] Office are actually legal related to be referred to the legal office. The other 98 percent are essentially conflicts of employees that have to do with questions or concerns about some process or that need to be referred to the labor office has nothing to do with legal issues.

[3:45:19] And so I just want to make it clear.

[3:45:22] Every time there's a, we work very closely with the legal team.

[3:45:26] And every time there's a issue that requires legal intervention,

[3:45:29] it is shipped to the, to the district council's office.

[3:45:32] Also, just so you know that the new procedures have designed,

[3:45:36] including the floor charges presented to you in your packets,

[3:45:40] has clearly outlined that if there's an allegation against myself,

[3:45:44] the CEO, Susan Stanton, the interim CEO, or the board, those issues will be referred directly to the district council's office, so that takes away the conflict or even perceived conflict.

[3:46:01] Did our did we discuss this with representative, our representative employees?

[3:46:09] Yes.

[3:46:10] to all the bargaining groups and they all didn't have any changes.

[3:46:14] In fact, I think one of the presidents called me and said he was very happy to see

[3:46:17] there at the newly structured process.

[3:46:20] Because we don't want to have one of these cases like we had last time with

[3:46:23] ethics people investigating their own employees.

[3:46:27] That one happened.

[3:46:31] Thank you, Director.

[3:46:31] Director Sma.

[3:46:33] Okay, just two things.

[3:46:34] Is there a reporting mechanism to us about these things?

[3:46:43] If the current system exists where if there is a legal issue, including a lawsuit, you'll

[3:46:50] be presented that information in close session.

[3:46:53] That's why I'm asking about the other side.

[3:46:56] I want to know about the other stuff that's not reported.

[3:47:00] Is there reporting mechanism?

[3:47:02] Right now to the board.

[3:47:03] Right now, currently to the board, no.

[3:47:05] There is no mechanism directed to the board.

[3:47:09] You might consider that because I think we, you know, it's helpful for us, maybe we should

[3:47:16] have a report in a year. I don't know. But we have something like this in the process like

[3:47:20] that we ought to have a report. So we know it's fine and we can forget about it. But I got

[3:47:25] one question that I have always asked, and everybody that's been here for more than a couple

[3:47:29] is what that is. That's 4,700. Who enforces 4,700? I am not under any illusion. We

[3:47:42] have had problems in this organization with people who have conflicts, legal, financial,

[3:47:50] conflicts, and then nobody regulating these 700.

[3:47:56] Well, actually, we have a staff in the ethics office that manages that program.

[3:48:00] I mean, we do a tell you to report.

[3:48:01] I want to know who's, I want to know who's monitoring these things, because, again,

[3:48:08] you know, we have had cases where they have been economic conflicts.

[3:48:15] And in some cases, even reported by people, but no monitor, no, and council can tell you about some of those.

[3:48:23] So that's what we need to prevent. I've asked about this at least 10 times a year.

[3:48:29] Every time it comes up, when we have the ordinance come up, we approve it annually.

[3:48:35] Two or three other times, I ask about it, and nobody everybody keeps saying we're working on it.

[3:48:40] This is the 20th year that I've asked about it. No, 21st.

[3:48:46] Well, for truth is that we are actually in the process of updating a policy on that matter.

[3:48:50] I should be updating our ethics policy in general, and we can certainly take a attempt to address that.

[3:48:56] That's counsel to share with you some of the cases, so you know that I'm not making this up.

[3:49:00] No, I believe you. I will, I will get pretty serious.

[3:49:03] And you know, the very serious cases, we don't monitor stuff, then I do it.

[3:49:12] You know, I'm sure there's a lot of managers including myself who says,

[3:49:16] Why should we file it if nobody's watching?

[3:49:19] I have a follow-up question on it, if there's a comment or a complaint or about a form

[3:49:25] 700 conflict, is that reported to the FEPC?

[3:49:30] Yeah, we find out about it.

[3:49:32] Well, but what consequences are from the FEPC to those complaints and questions of violation

[3:49:39] of form 700?

[3:49:41] If there's a violation of the conflict, there's a conflict, there's a conflict.

[3:49:45] Well, it's certainly a violation of the district's current ethics policy.

[3:49:49] We're revising it, but it's certainly a violation of the current ethics policy.

[3:49:53] And it could also be referred to the FEPC for could be.

[3:49:57] So that means I'm here in that it has not been.

[3:50:00] I don't think in the past, well, let's stay in address this.

[3:50:07] Mr. Chair, there's a board. I've been here seven years. I don't recall a forms of invalidation being reported.

[3:50:18] So then there are no violations in.

[3:50:20] I'm not. I could almost say there's been this been reported.

[3:50:24] Well, then I'm confused because these are public documents.

[3:50:27] some public complaints should be reported automatically do the FPC and let them handle it.

[3:50:32] They have their own board and governance that will handle it.

[3:50:34] I think this goes back to, is the question of the director of St. Merra asked, who

[3:50:40] which he has not had a satisfaction for answer?

[3:50:44] Well, I think he's absolutely correct, Norma, I'm sorry.

[3:50:54] Yeah, so I just want to make sure I'm clear on what the board wants to see here.

[3:50:59] And I think that the board wants us and as managers to be actively monitoring the

[3:51:07] form 700 of people who are making key critical decisions and to have that data accessible

[3:51:15] to them as well because I think it is accessible to some but I don't know what the accessibility

[3:51:23] the is to all managers and that we should make a part of the managers protocol to have a robust

[3:51:34] look at conflicts that they do exist within the units of the fairly regular basis. And so I

[3:51:40] just want to understand is that what the board is looking for and to also have some report back

[3:51:46] on some of the findings from those, from that process?

[3:51:54] And just one additional minor point I did want to make to the board.

[3:51:57] And the ethics training we do provide employees, which, as you know, we have to put on

[3:52:02] every two years, there is an admonition in the training that the Form 700 is not an empty exercise

[3:52:08] that it is really incumbent upon people to use them as tools to identify conflicts and

[3:52:14] managers to be aware, but I do understand your concern in terms of whether there could be

[3:52:20] a way to bolster that process to ensure that there are no conflicts.

[3:52:27] And I think that's a good one.

[3:52:28] To just to follow up, if there's an appearance of a conflict of interest, what does that

[3:52:33] go?

[3:52:34] Well, people with any concerns can certainly address those concerns to the ethics unit currently.

[3:52:39] And what does it go beyond that?

[3:52:41] Well, they would investigate it and if there is determined to be a violation, there would be a warning.

[3:52:47] So there's no recording this to the FPC.

[3:52:53] It really depends on the applicability, having worked elsewhere in the last two years,

[3:52:58] where there was, in fact, a violation.

[3:53:01] I did refer that case to the FPC, and they investigated it and addressed it.

[3:53:06] So, I would not, and I'm sure we would not hold ourselves back from reporting a case to a PVC event, it's applicable.

[3:53:22] I also want to point out that.

[3:53:22] Do you speak?

[3:53:25] Do you have any questions?

[3:53:26] Do you have any questions?

[3:53:28] I think, and I always, is there a question?

[3:53:31] Just going to say 100% of our employees who are required to complete the form 700 during the last cycle completed.

[3:53:38] So we have 100% response rate. Just want to share that.

[3:53:41] Okay. That's not the question. Okay, but that's like director Kremlin.

[3:53:45] Actually, I think I-

[3:53:46] Yeah, director.

[3:53:47] Do you get a dive bump for you again?

[3:53:48] Sorry about that.

[3:53:50] Okay.

[3:53:52] So a couple of things.

[3:53:54] When is-

[3:53:55] I think the board has expressed their opinion that it sounds like our current process is-

[3:54:08] Obviously, as we are responsible for that information, but it may be appropriate for at least some level of review to make sure that there are no conflicts and that's an issue.

[3:54:20] And then, as Director Estimera was suggesting,

[3:54:24] and I have kind of mixed feelings about this.

[3:54:28] Do I think there's a workaround and that's this idea of reviewing the ethics complaint and maybe it needs to be part of our CEO review process.

[3:54:39] I don't need to see the details of every ethics complaint and how it was resolved.

[3:54:45] I think the board is interested in seeing are their trends, are their risks that we're running, where we're seeing the same kinds of things happen over and over again.

[3:54:54] right now, we don't have a handle on them at all, so just a kind of summer.

[3:55:00] Free reports unto the board, I think, might go away towards alleviating some of our concerns and if the data

[3:55:08] suggests there's a need to dig deeper than the board could do that at that time, so that would be my recommendation.

[3:55:15] Thank you, Director of Directors Mayor.

[3:55:17] Yeah, I want to be clear about what I'm talking about and I think the CEO described it.

[3:55:23] And that is this.

[3:55:27] We up here are required to file 4,700.

[3:55:30] It's okay? Well, we get in trouble. Somebody finds out somebody reports it. We and employees

[3:55:36] like some folks here, and we don't sit on on millions of dollars of authorized expenditures,

[3:55:45] okay? We have managers that have authorization to expend millions of dollars. And when

[3:55:52] they do that, and they have a conflict with somebody, who discovers it? That's my point. The

[3:56:00] manager who's in charge of that person ought to be monitoring because that's why we filed

[3:56:05] these.

[3:56:06] We filed these so that a manager can say, but I got five people, I got five people and

[3:56:11] all I have to do would make sure that their relatives aren't buying from us and they

[3:56:15] ain't approving contracts.

[3:56:18] That's what this is about.

[3:56:20] All we need are assurances that we have a system where managers are required, they don't have

[3:56:26] to check everybody.

[3:56:27] They just get whatever they get. That's why you've found forms 700. So you don't go around and say we got 800 employees. We've got to watch them all.

[3:56:34] No, it's just the people who file them the reason they file them is to give notice to us as an organization that they may have conflicts.

[3:56:44] And if they have conflicts, it's worth a lot. We have a big exposure. That's what this whole system is about.

[3:56:52] That's great that we give people a final.

[3:56:55] But who's bothering them, right?

[3:56:58] How do we know who is following it?

[3:57:03] And all we need is some system that whether the manager, whoever it is, gets these and says,

[3:57:12] let me see, you know, how much money you spend this month or you approved this month

[3:57:16] and make sure that it wasn't a remedy.

[3:57:17] I don't care how you do it, but the point is, oh, we need a system that the whole world

[3:57:24] says, yeah, those people forms 700s a file, they have somebody to monitor them and that's

[3:57:31] how they know that there's no conflicts, that there's no problem, where there are conflicts

[3:57:36] that be monitored and so everybody can sleep very comfortably and not worry about it.

[3:57:42] That's all I'm trying to get to.

[3:57:44] Once we do that, we don't need to know because we have a system.

[3:57:47] Bill, six, six, eight.

[3:57:49] That's all.

[3:57:52] Dr. Kremlin?

[3:57:53] Thank you, Chair. Yeah, I agree. You know, we have this public trust.

[3:57:59] And a ministerial system to be sure people filled something out, which they could just put their name on.

[3:58:05] That means nothing.

[3:58:07] That's, you know, that's nothing.

[3:58:09] I think we need a manager review and an ethics review here if not a legal review, but let's not.

[3:58:14] If we're putting the ethics department not under legal, and I actually see Dick's point,

[3:58:21] I got to think about it a little bit more, but I don't know where, if this is a motion

[3:58:26] or this is at another time, but basically we need to go beyond, I believe this is going

[3:58:31] beyond a ministerial filling out the form to managers affirmatively reviewing as a condition

[3:58:37] of their job and an ethics review looking to the forums and applying common sense on what

[3:58:42] going on here, because this procedure right now is a waste of time, just being sure people

[3:58:49] fill that was forms out, or sign their name to it, that's useless.

[3:58:54] That's a bare legal requirement that is not a best practice, and it's a little bit shameful,

[3:58:59] actually.

[3:59:04] So, one of the things I should share with you, managers are instructed during the training

[3:59:09] that they receive, that it's their responsibility to monitor their subordinates' forms.

[3:59:16] They also look informed way to find those forms, it's on their one of our x drives.

[3:59:21] And so we will certainly look at other options, that's certainly a good idea.

[3:59:25] But more importantly, I think we will be a little more explicit in our instruction to them

[3:59:30] to your point that they need to be taking active role in that responsibility,

[3:59:39] taking

[3:59:39] those files are.

[3:59:42] Yeah.

[3:59:43] Well, can you take the policy?

[3:59:47] It's an extra commotion way that we've brought this to you for, to receive information

[3:59:53] on when the policy is updated.

[3:59:56] It doesn't need your approval, but we can provide it for the board to the deal.

[4:00:00] Do you have a comment? It's an administrative policy, which is not one that's normally approved by the Board.

[4:00:19] We might read it before we proceed.

[4:00:21] Well, no. You've made your desires very clear, so it will be brought to you.

[4:00:25] Yes.

[4:00:27] No.

[4:00:28] Well, I just wanted to add on the previous conversation in terms of the expectations of

[4:00:32] the managers to review that, and it sounds more and more that this is a very important

[4:00:39] issue for the board, something that we should be putting into the managers work plan to ensure

[4:00:46] that that is one of the issues that they're doing just like safety training, ensuring that,

[4:00:53] and ensuring that they're qualified in all the forms of hundreds of

[4:00:57] apical people in their units is something that we should have as well

[4:01:01] as a standing item in everybody's work plan, who manages people who have

[4:01:07] potential conflicts.

[4:01:13] So just Susan.

[4:01:15] Yeah, I guess to follow up, what was Commissioner was saying,

[4:01:20] we can expand.

[4:01:22] And I think I know what you're looking for, we can come up with something in, and put

[4:01:32] more definition into the process.

[4:01:35] I think the challenge in this area is often what is legal, sometimes is not ethical.

[4:01:42] And what is not right, and this is not necessarily a cup of the law.

[4:01:48] So, well, well, I will bring something back to you.

[4:01:55] Director Santos?

[4:01:57] I just leave the fellow board members of this.

[4:01:59] The less you have in-house fingerprints on any document, the safer it is.

[4:02:06] I've been here long enough to see where it becomes political.

[4:02:09] It comes connected and will repeat myself.

[4:02:11] You got to think about this.

[4:02:14] The less you have to do with some file of complaint or ethics,

[4:02:17] The better off we are, stand and get it. Again, outside council, nobody has figured

[4:02:22] President, take my word for it. I'm telling you. It's a way of,

[4:02:28] okay,

[4:02:31] anybody else? Okay,

[4:02:34] so there's no board action required just to receive the report. Is that correct?

[4:02:39] Oh, we

[4:02:40] do have a speaker excuse me. Liz Bettencourt?

[4:02:53] That's you're going to forget me.

[4:02:56] It was a bit in the court, I'm a president of the Employee Association.

[4:03:01] A couple of things on this, I was taking notes while you were attacking, so forgive me

[4:03:06] for reading from my phone.

[4:03:08] On the 700, the Form 700, I totally agree with the concept of some sort of monitoring and

[4:03:16] But in addition to that, some clarity to everyone, employees all the way up, on how it is

[4:03:27] discerned who will and who will not have to fill out the form, whether, and I say that because

[4:03:35] at some point, you're doing it by classification or you're doing it by position.

[4:03:40] Sometimes the inconsistencies are confusing to people.

[4:03:43] I have folks who come to me all the time and say how come I'm having to fill it out and she does and then we're doing the same job

[4:03:48] So some kind of explanation that's that's out there for people would be very very helpful

[4:03:54] Also

[4:03:58] on the issue of

[4:04:01] The assignment you heard me here before our recommendation our suggestion was that it would go under legal

[4:04:09] we

[4:04:11] We talked to CEO about it, basically what we said was kind of what you did, which is based

[4:04:20] on her word, we're willing to hear this out and give it a shot and see how it will work.

[4:04:26] But I am concerned about the fingerprints that Director Santos mentioned, and it's not

[4:04:33] a reflection on who the current staff or managers are right now.

[4:04:36] It's just that it has happened, it's happened more than once,

[4:04:40] and even my short 13 years here.

[4:04:43] So we don't want to see it happen again.

[4:04:45] We also, I also think that regular reporting to the board

[4:04:48] in some fashion on ethics and e-o issues

[4:04:53] makes a lot of sense to us to, we think that you should be seeing

[4:04:56] what that looks like and whether there are trends in there.

[4:05:00] And finally, on policy review, administrative policies are generally looked at as stakeholder review.

[4:05:11] We get to look at them. We get to have two cents put into them. I would consider you as stakeholder.

[4:05:17] So I would fire you. I would recommend that you do see them. And then perhaps when we're looking at them as stakeholders from the labor side of it,

[4:05:27] We can share our thoughts on what works and what doesn't work in some of them.

[4:05:31] Thank you.

[4:05:34] Okay.

[4:05:36] That closes item 8.1.

[4:05:38] Next item is 6.1.

[4:05:41] The CIP.

[4:05:51] Good evening, Javler, Ralla, and members of the Board.

[4:05:55] My name is Notwin.

[4:05:57] In Turin, Deputy Officer with the Watershed Design Construction Division,

[4:06:02] when we tonight from the wanted utility capital program,

[4:06:05] We have Assistant Office of Chris Hacks and Unit Manager, Beth Redmond, and we here present

[4:06:12] an item 6.1 to you, requesting the board to review and authorize, stop the distribute

[4:06:23] the draft fiscal year 2016 to fiscal year 2022 capital improvement program to the

[4:06:32] these in the county and county of Santa Clara. This is our annual process of reviewing and

[4:06:39] update in our capital improvement program with the what authorization staff is prepared to transmit

[4:06:49] the copy of the draft, capital improvement program to the county and to the cities within

[4:06:55] county for that input and also confirmation that our program is consistent with that general

[4:07:03] plant.

[4:07:12] Good.

[4:07:15] I have a motion and a second to drop any discussion.

[4:07:20] I'll close the favor signify by saying aye.

[4:07:22] I will oppose the carries.

[4:07:26] Thank you.

[4:07:27] I just have one appointment clarification.

[4:07:31] I know that earlier, Chiverelli, you had talked about seeking federal assistance for

[4:07:37] the coyote creek.

[4:07:39] It's a great project in regards to flooding issues and so I just wanted to make sure that

[4:07:45] as part of the CIP that you wanted CIP at HUD Committee to actually look at that and

[4:07:55] see how we could potentially expedite any of the coyote creek flooding issues to come to

[4:08:02] for resolution to look at any types of funding opportunities that may be out there to try to

[4:08:08] pursue that to the fullest.

[4:08:10] That is correct.

[4:08:12] I wanted to ensure that that was.

[4:08:14] So that includes the action in the motion that we've just made in past.

[4:08:19] We clear on that.

[4:08:21] Director Sway.

[4:08:23] I'm clear on that.

[4:08:25] And I also want to report that.

[4:08:26] Actually, the staff to come to me already started that process.

[4:08:30] Okay.

[4:08:30] Great.

[4:08:31] Okay, so just a council,

[4:08:38] nothing to report, okay?

[4:08:40] Committee reports,

[4:08:44] it starts with Director Kagan.

[4:08:54] Not a lot to report tonight as I mentioned earlier.

[4:08:59] Well, I did make a number of visits out to the William Street Park area, and I also

[4:09:11] to Deb Kramer and Steve Holmes, Creek Advocates,

[4:09:16] who really played a leading role in that effort.

[4:09:19] Thank you.

[4:09:21] Thank you, Dr. Zot.

[4:09:23] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[4:09:25] I've had several meetings with the interim CEO.

[4:09:27] I had a briefing from the CIP staff prior to my first CIP meeting.

[4:09:36] I also attended my first CIP meeting.

[4:09:38] And I attended the Recycle and Waste Reduction Committee meeting.

[4:09:43] Thank you.

[4:09:44] Thank you.

[4:09:45] Thank you, Director.

[4:09:45] Dr. Satoz.

[4:09:48] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[4:09:48] Yeah, I've been real busy, but anyway, I've just mentioned a couple of the Ross and

[4:09:51] Roundtable, water demand management meeting with the Union.

[4:09:55] The last thing I'll report to the chair and myself went to the emergency training.

[4:10:00] For elected officials, I guess what the topic was, you give your other agencies all the information, and then they make the evacuations and stuff like that.

[4:10:12] It was just as simple as black and white there and talked about these things and all elected officials there.

[4:10:18] An example of the governor Brown, he makes a decision based on all the information, so it was pretty easy for me.

[4:10:24] Thank you.

[4:10:25] Thank you, Director.

[4:10:26] So I had a full slate of activities, but I'll

[4:10:30] highlight here.

[4:10:32] Did the emergency ops council was alluded to?

[4:10:35] Did a flood briefing last week with CEO Camacho?

[4:10:39] Of course, the joint Pacheco Sembanydoska

[4:10:41] is the Center for Valley Water District Meeting in Sembanydos.

[4:10:45] The NIMED with Susan Stanton.

[4:10:48] And did a celebrate Morgan Hill, which

[4:10:50] This is a chamber's annual event accompanied by CEO at Camacho and Susan Stanton, ten of

[4:10:57] that event.

[4:10:58] And then on Saturday afternoon I was able to tour the Conservation Center, the Conservation

[4:11:02] Corps, and visit the flood site along with observing the work crew doing their hard work.

[4:11:10] So that's my report, Director Samarra.

[4:11:15] I felt it's just a few meetings with the CEO and the successor agency and San Jose.

[4:11:23] Whereas around table, the CIP committee meeting is the name of you.

[4:11:30] Very good?

[4:11:34] Sure.

[4:11:36] Thank you, Chair.

[4:11:38] I attended the demand management committee meeting, the CIP committee meeting,

[4:11:43] And also that I want to report to the board that I went to the Rinkanada Reliability Improvement Project, Public Meeting.

[4:11:57] It's a quarterly meeting with the neighbors around Rinkanada Treatment Plan.

[4:12:04] this time, where I took had quite a few neighbors

[4:12:08] come to the meeting of very positive feedback,

[4:12:13] and at the end, I think staff even got a lot of applause

[4:12:19] about what's going on.

[4:12:22] And then the comment that stated by neighbors in past meetings,

[4:12:30] staff took it seriously, and then implemented

[4:12:32] It measures to address those comments.

[4:12:34] So I think that part of the House neighbor really appreciate that.

[4:12:39] Thank you.

[4:12:40] Dr. Swedricker.

[4:12:41] Come on.

[4:12:44] Delta Mendoza San Benito.

[4:12:48] Mountain View Community People.

[4:12:50] CEO.

[4:12:55] Got it?

[4:12:55] Seems like I've been working every day.

[4:12:57] We're the water district.

[4:12:58] That's a change.

[4:13:06] Thank you for your reports.

[4:13:09] Clerk review and certification of board requests.

[4:13:12] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[4:13:13] I have a few requests so bear with me and make sure I get got them correct.

[4:13:17] I have a request from Director Kremlin to provide the board with a list of district water treatment facilities that have an uninterruptible power.

[4:13:26] Is that correct?

[4:13:29] Okay, so we'll never mind that one.

[4:13:34] Request from Director Santos.

[4:13:36] Make sure I got this right.

[4:13:37] Director Santos provide the board with the Anderson Dam release data collected since 1983,

[4:13:42] and identify any of these data is comparable to the releases over the president's day store.

[4:13:47] Is that correct?

[4:13:50] Request from Director Keegan.

[4:13:52] Staff to provide information on previous information and board direction on the opportunity for flood protect but flood management on the Anderson dam project and also provide analysis on the benefits to operation of the dam is that correct or

[4:14:09] And the last one another request from director Kevin to provide the board with information on how many times the last 12 months staff has authorized work on expired contracts or agreements and identify a process for improvement.

[4:14:23] That's the last of them.

[4:14:24] That's it.

[4:14:26] So we adjourn this meeting to our next meeting, which was at 12 p.m. close session.

[4:14:33] And a 1 p.m. regular meeting on March 14th.

[4:14:36] Mr. Chair, we have a session.

[4:14:38] We have a session.

[4:14:38] We adjourn to our meeting tomorrow at 1 o'clock here at the board meeting,

[4:14:42] especially 1 o'clock 130.

[4:14:48] Are you all confused?

[4:14:50] Okay.

[4:14:50] Good.

[4:14:51] Well done, meeting's adjourned.

[4:14:52] No, we got it.

[4:14:59] Well, I have an idea about it.

[4:15:00] I'm going to, I'm already, it's already on my bucket list. It's on my bucket list. Okay.

Closed Session & Regular Meeting - Feb 28th, 2017

Transcript