SLVWD Board Meeting Summary
February 3, 2022
Mark Dolson
Highlights:
Onboarding Process.
Construction Contracts.
Proposition 218 Process.
Next Board meeting is at 6:30 PM on February 20th.
Preliminaries
President Mahood reported that the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) had selected her as its new chair. She will add a report on SMGWA to the agenda for one of the SLVWD’s March Board meetings so that she and Director Ackemann (the Board’s other SMGWA representative) can get feedback on SMGWA activities.
Unfinished Business
There was no Unfinished Business on the agenda.
New Business
Onboarding Procedures and Documents for Board of Directors and Committee Members
District Manager Rick Rogers explained that the Administration Committee had developed a new set of procedures and associated documents to standardize and optimize the orientation process for new Board and Committee members.
Director Ackemann, the newly installed Chair of the Administration Committee said she was happy to have this moving forward from the committee as the culmination of many months of effort by both Staff and committee members. The committee has already agreed that further changes are still in order, and it expects to revisit this topic in the summer of 2022. Meanwhile, Director Ackemann moved to have the Board approve the current version as submitted.
Director Fultz (former Chair of the Administration Committee) seconded this motion. He said the package had gone through three iterations and comprised a pretty comprehensive set of information to enable new members to get up to speed quickly.
Director Henry agreed that this was a good idea, and said she was happy to see it. Director Smolley similarly commended the Administration Committee for completing this project, and he noted that he himself had requested something like this soon after joining the Board at the end of 2020. He was a little surprised to see business cards and tours (which can be burdensome for Staff) listed as essential items, but Director Ackemann clarified that these were really meant to be optional. District Secretary Holly Hossack explained that business cards were more in demand prior to the onset of purely virtual meetings.
Director Smolley sought further clarification on the recommended handling of Board questions for Staff. President Mahood said the Board Policy Manual provided guidance on this, but some judgment was also required to decide when to merely email Staff vs. asking the question in a Board meeting. If the question is significant and of general interest, it is appropriate to ask it. Director Fultz agreed, and Rick Rogers added that Staff will reply to all Directors when responding to a submitted question. Director Smolley concluded by noting a possibly confusing typo and suggesting that some of the documents listed for mandatory introductory reading (e.g., the 300-page LAFCO Sphere of Influence report) impose unrealistic expectations on Committee members.
President Mahood agreed that the required reading list was too long and could discourage some candidates from seeking positions. She recommended that new members merely read relevant sections of the Board Policy Manual and the Brown Act. She also suggested focusing on relatively recent documents (as opposed to, say, old Grand Jury reports). She liked the District Secretary’s checklist of key tasks to complete.
President Mahood recommended against including the separate summary of “Practices and Procedures.” Not only was this duplication undesirable in principle, but it also introduced new material that the Board had not approved, some of which was at odds with the guidance in the Board Policy Manual. President Mahood particularly objected to the suggestions that the Board should always aim for unanimity, that non-unanimous items should be sent back to committee, and that Board members should be required to “support” all Board actions. She made a distinction between demanding that Board members never speak negatively about actions they disagree with (which she found excessive and inappropriate) and requiring that they refrain from actively obstructing such actions. For instance, Board members should be allowed to express their disagreement to a reporter who questions them. Lastly, President Mahood suggested that new Board members should be gifted with a copy of “The San Lorenzo Valley Water District—A History” (by R. Brown) and a paperback “Roberts Rules of Orders in Brief”.
Director Ackemann said she thought these points were well taken. She said she would consider a friendly amendment to her motion specifying that the “Practices and Procedures” in the submitted document would be replaced by an appropriate link to the Board Policy Manual. She added that the friendly amendment could also state that new members “may” review the listed documents, rather than “should” review them.
There was one public comment. Larry Ford asked whether there should also be some mention of the Bagley-Keene Act. District Counsel Gina Nicholls advised that the Brown Act is most applicable to local agencies whereas Bagley-Keene is most applicable at the State level.
The motion, with the two specified friendly amendments, passed 5-0.
Award of Construction Bid for Alta Via Pipeline Project
This agenda item was introduced by Josh Wolff, Engineering Manager. Josh explained that the District had recently solicited proposals for construction to replace fire-damaged main pipelines along Alta Via Drive in Brookdale. The project includes new 6-inch and 8-inch ductile iron pipe mains, abandonment of the existing undersized and temporary mains, installation of additional fire hydrants, upgrade of existing fire hydrants, installation of required appurtenances, testing of all newly installed facilities, and restoration of the project area.
Six bids were received ranging from $2,107,470 (Anderson Pacific Engineering) to $3,828,220 (Pacific Underground Company). The three lowest bids were reviewed by Staff for completeness, in conformance with established processes, and found to be complete. Josh recommended accepting the low bid, noting that Anderson Pacific had done good work for the District in the past.
Director Smolley, Chair of the Engineering and Environmental Committee, supported this recommendation. He observed that the five lowest bids were all within a range of 15%, and he thought this reflected well on both the District’s request and the resulting responses.
Director Fultz agreed that this was a good response. He requested that the District track the depletion of its allocated loan funds as future such contracts are awarded. Rick Rogers said he would work with Finance Manager Kendra Reed to produce a quarterly report.
Director Ackemann sought clarification regarding the lack of a contract for the design phase of this project. Josh explained that the design-phase work had been performed in-house, but a typo in the supporting Staff memo had left the mistaken impression that the design work was still pending.
Director Henry had no comment. Rick Rogers provided some further elaboration: he noted that the new Alta Via pipeline runs parallel to Highway 9 from Brookdale almost into Boulder Creek. The old line (dating back many years) was above ground, crisscrossing the mountain, and was heavily damaged. It is being completely relocated from the mountain down to the road.
President Mahood moved that the Board direct the District Manager to enter into a contract with Pacific Anderson Engineering as recommended by Staff. Director Henry seconded this. There was no further Board discussion and no public comment.
The motion passed 5-0.
Award of Construction Management Bid for Alta Via Pipeline Project
Josh introduced this agenda item as the companion to the just-discussed construction award. Three bids were received ranging from $192,185 (Sandis) to $240,744 (MME), and all three bids were deemed to be solid. He recommended awarding the contract to the low bidder, Sandis.
Director Smolley, Chair of the Engineering and Environmental Committee, concurred. He found the Sandis proposal to be satisfactory and observed that the District has worked with Sandis on many prior projects. He asked whether the various comments included in the Sandis proposal had any special significance, and Josh said he believed that these were minor and intended purely to demonstrate the thoroughness of their response.
Director Fultz asked if this project was eligible for FEMA reimbursement, and Rick said that it was (and that related Staff time was eligible as well). Director Henry voiced her support as well.
President Mahood moved to direct the District Manager to enter into a contract with Sandis as recommended in the Staff memo. Director Fultz seconded this. There was no further Board discussion and no public comment.
The motion passed 5-0.
District’s Policy for Conducting Proposition 218 Proceedings
This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Director Fultz. He explained that he received feedback during the most recent Proposition 218 process (in the summer of 2021) in two areas having to do with access to information and timing: (1) there was frustration that the Q&A session and debate was held on the very last day available to make a decision about whether or not to protest, and (2) since the hearing was conducted virtually, there wasn’t an opportunity to submit a protest at that time had anyone been inclined to do so. Director Fultz proposed that the Board consider multiple revisions to its process (including the addition of a second hearing) which would go significantly beyond the Prop. 218 requirements in terms of facilitating increased community participation (particularly since he viewed the process as tilted against “No” votes).
District Counsel Gina Nicholls had concerns about making these types of changes to the Prop. 218 policies and procedures. She said the District's current Policies and Procedures were written as a road map to navigate and conform to the required Prop. 218 process. Modifying these could create confusion and possible legal questions about what the District is conforming to. She recommended against baking a modified procedure into the official Policies and Procedures.
Rick Rogers said he had looked at the minutes from the August public hearing, and he didn’t see these types of complaints. Not all 41 public attendees spoke. but of those who did, the majority, 16, were on record as supporting the proposed surcharge, and 3 were opposed. His view was that Staff had actually spent an incredible amount of time on outreach, far more so than for previous Prop. 218 processes. There was a Media Day with coverage on TV, radio, in the Press Banner, etc. He also recalled a previous public hearing where there was a free-for-all, and the Sheriff was called. This left him disinclined to mandate an extra hearing. He said he liked the current process.
President Mahood had two points. First, she agreed with Gina that it was unwise to make the District’s procedures stricter than the statute requires. She appreciated Director Fultz’s argument that the law provides only a floor (in terms of what actions the District should take), but she felt that the District still retained the flexibility to change procedures slightly as appropriate. For example, for the situation this past August, the District could conceivably have addressed the few complaints that Director Fultz was responding to by simply taking a recess to allow time for people to respond via email between the end of the hearing and the final tabulation of responses (such a recess was the case prior to the onset of pandemic-related meeting restrictions, allowing the District Secretary to add the number of protests presented at the hearing to those already received).
Second, she didn’t see a need for the District to change its Policies and Procedures based on the very small number of people who felt they didn’t have sufficient information in advance. She noted that only 547 protests were received despite extensive outreach by Director Fultz in opposition to the surcharge. She said had this been a close vote, one could argue that different procedures might have produced a different outcome, but this wasn’t a close vote.
Director Ackemann shared President Mahood’s concerns and similarly favored taking no action. She asked whether the Board still has latitude to customize its handling of any particularly Prop. 218 process without formally revising its Policies and Procedures. Gina said the District always brings the final rate study to the Board, and there is always an opportunity for the Board to modify its procedures and strengthen its outreach.
Director Smolley said his recollection was similar to what Rick described. A small number of people did comment on the time frame and the overall process, but he still believed that sufficient information was made available to adequately inform the public. He didn’t see a need to amend the process.
Director Henry said she thought the biggest complaint that people have with the mandated Prop. 218 process is that it is extremely difficult to ever get enough “No” votes to stop the process because not enough people will get involved to ultimately produce a majority of “No” votes. She didn’t think the complaints were about the available information.
Director Fultz agreed with Director Henry. In response to a request from President Mahood for a motion, Director Fultz said, based on the preceding Board comments, he was simply looking forward to a very robust discussion in advance of the next Prop. 218 process. He saw no need to make a motion at this evening’s meeting.
President Mahood agreed that the Board should give this some thought the next time that it is faced with a Prop. 218 process, particularly in light of the increased challenges presented by remote meetings. Director Ackemann felt comfortable with the process the Board employed this past August, particularly in light of the challenges that the District was facing due to the unique circumstances of Covid and fire recovery. Director Smolley appreciated the work that Director Fultz did in putting together a thoughtful memo on a topic that he felt deeply concerned about. He too welcomed a future robust discussion.
There was no public comment and no motion.
District Reports
Engineering Report: Director Smolley asked when work will begin on the Quail Hollow Pipeline, in light of the reported 120-day delay due to materials. Josh said he was regularly reaching out to the contractor (Granite Creek), and his best guess now was late March or early April. The contract was awarded in December. Director Fultz asked whether Granite Creek could increase their fee if delays continue, and Josh said they could not.
Finance Report: Director Smolley asked about the downward trend in payments. Kendra explained that, prior to the transition to new accounting software in July 2021, the District had no way to filter out closed accounts. The new software enabled the District to show only active accounts (as detailed in Footnote #3 of the report). Director Smolley also wanted to understand why the District ended up refunding $29,950 to the State in connection with State payments for Covid-related arrearages. Kendra explained that this was the amount paid by customers on their past-due accounts between October 2021 (when the District requested the State funds) and January 2022 (when the District actually received the funds).
Director Ackemann requested that the District do more to publicly explain the availability of State funds for assisting in the payment of past-due accounts. The District has sent letters to affected customers, but Director Ackemann asked that this letter be shared publicly and with local non-profits who assist those in need. She explained that too many people are still not understanding the process and are expecting funding directly from the State. Kendra agreed to work on this.
Director Fultz asked if all tenant accounts had now been transferred to owners, and Kendra said they had. Director Fultz also requested that the summary of operating revenue, expenses, and income break out the Fire Surcharge which can’t be used for general operating expenses. Kendra said it was already broken out in the summary, but she agreed to do this for the table as well.
Environmental Report: Director Fultz requested that reporting be organized by year, and Carly Blanchard, Environmental Programs Manager, agreed to do this. Director Fultz added that he was pleased and impressed with the progress the District was making in obtaining grant funding.
There was no public comment.
Written Communications
The Board Packet included a communication from Christina Wise, a reporter for the Press Banner. Christina’s email described an errant press release (plagiarizing content from the Sentinel) by, and subsequent email exchange with, the director of the company that the District has contracted with to assist in its public outreach. Christina concluded by saying that she would not be reading or referring to any subsequent press releases from this team.
Director Fultz expressed concern about this development, and Rick Rogers said the issue had been addressed, and the Administration Committee would be reassessing the District’s outreach in general. He said an understanding had been reached with the relevant parties, but he was unable to provide details. Carly Blanchard added that apologies have been sent to the Sentinel and the Press Banner. Director Ackemann said everything had been handled appropriately, and a thoughtful discussion within the Administration Committee was pending. Gina Nicholls noted that this item was not on the agenda for this evening’s Board meeting, and she therefore advised against any further discussion.
The meeting was adjourned just after 7:45 PM.