Notice of Public Meeting San Diego River Conservancy

A public meeting of the Governing Board of The San Diego River Conservancy

will be held Thursday,

September 10, 2020

2:00 pm – 4:00 pm

IN PERSON MEETING PARTICIPATION PROHIBITED

TELECONFERENCE ONLY Call: (877) 402-9757

Access Code: 606349 (press # after entering code)

In accordance with the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 and N-33-20, to maximize social distancing and public safety, the San Diego River Conservancy will conduct this meeting by telephone only. Board members, staff, and the public may participate remotely using the teleconference phone number and access code noted above. Please mute your phone unless you are speaking.

For Questions Contact:

Wendell Taper at wendell.taper@sdrc.ca.gov or (619) 390-0568

Meeting Agenda

The Board may take agenda items out of order to accommodate speakers and to maintain a quorum, unless noted as time specific.

1. Roll Call

2. Approval of Minutes (ACTION)

Consider approval of minutes for the May 14, 2020 meeting.

1

3. Public Comment (INFORMATIONAL)

Any person may address the Governing Board at this time regarding any matter within the Board’s authority. Presentations will be limited to three minutes for individuals and five minutes for representatives of organizations. Submission of information in writing is encouraged. The Board is prohibited by law from taking any action on matters that are discussed that are not on the agenda; no adverse conclusions should be drawn by the Board’s not responding to such matters or public comments.

4. Chairperson’s and Governing Board Members’ Report (INFORMATIONAL/ ACTION)

5. Deputy Attorney General Report (INFORMATIONAL/ ACTION)

6. Health and Safety Report (INFORMATIONAL)

7. Helix Water District (INFORMATIONAL/ ACTION)

Helix Water District (Helix) has determined approximately 105 acres in the El Monte Valley (APNs: for portions of 392-050-47, 382-060-43, 392-130-47 and 391-061-28) are surplus to its needs. Helix has discussed selling approximately 98 acres to the County of San Diego and the remaining acreage to River Valley Equestrian Center, which currently leases that acreage from Helix. Under Public Resources Code section 32646, the Conservancy has the first right of refusal (FROR) to acquire the properties as they are public lands suitable for park and open space within the Conservancy’s jurisdiction. The Conservancy will consider whether to exercise its FROR or take other action to allow negotiations with the County and River Valley Equestrian Center to proceed. If Helix does not sell the property to the County and River Valley Equestrian Center, the Conservancy will retain its FROR with respect to future transactions.

Presentation:

Bruce Beach, Partner Best, Best and Krieger

Carlos Lugo, Jim Tomasulo, Milica Schipper and Debbie Lundy, Helix Water District

8. Summary of Final Applications for Proposition 1, Round 5 (INFORMATIONAL) Notice of funding availability posted on December 6th, 2019 announcing approximately $2 million, for Round 5. The Conservancy received final applications on August 28, 2020. The Conservancy has included a summary list of those proposals and will be evaluating, ranking and preparing staff recommendations at future Board meetings.

Presentation:

Dustin Harrison, Environmental Scientist

2

9. Guidelines for Greening San Diego (ACTION)

The Conservancy staff provided an overview of Greening San Diego Program to the Governing Board Members in November 2019. The Conservancy’s Chair instructed staff to develop grant program guidelines for the Board Members’ review and approval. The Conservancy posted the draft guidelines on its website for 30-day public review and gathered input from local partners. The Board will consider whether to adopt the guidelines.

Presentation:

Julia Richards, Executive Officer

10. Executive Officer’s Report (INFORMATIONAL/ ACTION)

The following topics may be included in the Executive Officer’s Report. The Board may take action regarding any of them:

· Conservancy’s budget update

· 2021 Proposed Board Meeting dates

· January 14th

· March 11th

· May 13th

· July 8th

· September 9th

· November 11th

· Nepotism policy for Board Approval

· Carlton Oaks segment of the San Diego Trail (GAP 44 and 45) SANDAG update

· Cuyamaca Rancho State Park – Reforestation Project

Prescribed Burn Conducted at Cuyamaca Rancho State Park May 21, 2020

· Proposition 68 Update, Round 2, Key action dates:

Concept Proposal:January 4 – February 26, 2021

Final Application:May 31, 2021

Board Review/ Approval:July, September, November 2021

11. Next Meeting

The next regularly scheduled Board meeting will be held November 12, 2020, from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m.

12. Adjournment

3

Accessibility

If you require a disability related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please call Wendell Taper at 619-390- 0568 or Julia Richards at 619-390-0534

4

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:1

SUBJECT:ROLL CALL AND INTRODUCTIONS

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:2

SUBJECT:APPROVAL OF MINUTES (ACTION)

The Board will consider adoption of the May 14, 2020

Board Meeting.

PURPOSE:The minutes of the Board Meeting are attached for

review.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes

SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY

Minutes of May 14, 2020 Public Meeting (Draft Minutes for Approval on September 10, 2020)

CONSERVANCY Board Chair, Ben Clay called the May 14, 2020 meeting of the San Diego River Conservancy to order at approximately 2:00 p.m.

Item 1.Roll CallMembers Present

Richard BurgDepartment of Fish and Wildlife Ben Clay, ChairPublic at Large

John Donnelly John Elliott

Wildlife Conservation Board

Kumeyaay Diegueño Land Conservancy

Clarissa FalconPublic at Large Ruth HaywardPublic at Large

Dianne JacobSupervisor, County of San Diego, Second District Ray LennoxDepartment of Parks and Recreation

Amanda MartinNatural Resources Agency

Gina MoranDepartment of Parks and Recreation Cody PettersonSpeaker of the Assembly

Elsa SaxodPublic at Large

Gary StrawnSan Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board

Absent

Matt AlmyDepartment of Finance

Conrad WearMayor, City of San Diego, Designee

Scott ShermanCouncilmember, City of San Diego, District 7 Stephen Houlahan City of Santee

Staff Members Present

Julia RichardsExecutive Officer

Wendell TaperAdministrative Services Manager Dustin HarrisonEnvironmental Scientist

Hayley PetersonDeputy Attorney General

Item 2.Approval of Minutes

John Elliott moved for approval of the minutes for the January 9, 2020 meeting and Cody Petterson seconded. Roll Call: Ayes: Ben Clay, Ruth Hayward, Amanda Martin, Gina Moran, Ray Lennox, Richard Burg, Dianne Jacob, Cody Petterson, John Elliott, Clarissa Falcon, Elsa Saxod (11-0-0)

Item 3.Public Comment (INFORMATIONAL)

No public comment.

1

Item 4.Chairperson’s and Governing Board Members’ Report (INFORMATIONAL)

Ben Clay thanked the City of San Diego’s Fire and Rescue service in the San Diego and Tijuana Rivers for a tremendous job rescuing people.

Item 5. Deputy Attorney General Report (INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

Hayley Peterson no report.

Item 6. Health and Safety Report (INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

Ben Clay no report.

Item 7. Contamination Study by San Diego State University (INFORMATIONAL)

Julia Richards the overall goal of this study was to evaluate and understand the potential for pathogen transmission from soils and contaminated surfaces in the San Diego River riparian zone. This project was led by San Diego St (SDSU) professors who have experience researching surface water contaminants and transport of excreta-related pathogens. The study will quantify constituents not regularly monitored in the San Diego River. Data was collected during storm events and before/after illegal encampment removal. In addition, a soil leaching experiment was conducted to better understand pathogen transport in riparian areas.

Natalie Mladenov thanked Julia for the introduction. The project lasted two years and was funded by the San Diego River Conservancy, State Water Resources Control Board, City of San Diego and San Diego State University. The study’s goal is to determine the source of microbial contamination in the San Diego River during wet and dry weather.

Her colleagues Matthew Verbyla and Alicia Kinoshita will be helping with the presentation today. Rich Gersberg from Public Health, Megan Welsh and Shawn Flannigan from Public Affairs also participated in the study. Student researchers include Jose Calderon, Mireille Garcia, Mia Gil and Federick Pinongcos. Today we will cover the background and context for evaluating different pollutants in the San Diego River Watershed

Alicia Kinoshita explained pollutant inputs can have negative consequences for aquatic life and human health. For example, high fecal bacteria concentrations during storm events have resulted in warnings to beach goers and beach closures. In June 2019, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board issued an Investigative Order to identify and quantify the courses and transport of human fecal contamination. Possible sources include sewer infrastructure for the lower San Diego River watershed are widespread. Many sewer lines run adjacent to the San Diego River and tributaries. The Investigative Order identifies open defecation from homeless encampments are potential sources of microbial pollution. San Diegans experiencing homelessness often lack access to basic sanitation and sometimes practice open defecation. Therefore, open defecation and other possible discharges from homeless encampments have been implicated when discussing pollution to the river. But the relative contribution of different sources has not been well understood.

Tents and latrine sites were identified by presence of fecal material and or toilet paper provided by trash mapping efforts of the San Diego River Park Foundation (Foundation). Data was compiled from 2017 and 2018. 2018 follows a stricter enforcement action towards homeless encampments. An important point from the dataset is that there were fewer camp sites in 2018 than in 2017 possibly due to stricter enforcement. Also, fewer latrine sites were identified in

2

2018, but it is important to note the Foundation’s main priority was to document trash sites not map latrines. Some of these changes are due to the fact observers were paying more attention after SDSU discussed their interest. A number of latrine sites were within 200 ft of the river. More intentional mapping of the numbers because these data may not be representative of the actual number. Open defection is likely to be closer to the river which becomes inundated during large storm events. Also, sheet flow running across fecal matter is not documented in other parts of the watershed.

Natalie Mladenov noted Shawn Flannigan and Megan Welsh collected data for SDSU School of Public Health and interviewed San Diegans experiencing homelessness. Individuals living in the river margin were asked a suite of questions. Among those living by the river, about 73% have practiced open defecation. About 20% of those used river water for non-drinking purposes. 2% used it for drinking. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the pollutant inputs from homeless encampments during dry weather conditions. Dry weather is a time when more encampments are observed in the river margins. There is also scarce data on the quality of the San Diego River during this time. SDSU was also interested in evaluated pollutants during and after encampment cleanups with particular interest in the potential risk to those doing the cleanup activities. SDSU is interested in quantifying the leaching of pollutants from wastewater contaminated soils and soils contaminated with feces. Those are two end member environments SDSU is investigating because the San Diego River Watershed has places with failing infrastructure.

By collecting pollution concentrations during storm events at a higher temporal resolution, SDSU felt it would help understand sources of the greatest pollutant loadings. Chemical and microbial markers were used to track human pollution. Two regularly measured fecal indicator bacteria e. coli and enterococci have bench marks set by the Clean Water Act.

HF183 is a new bacterial marker specific to humans and of interest to the Waterboard and Pepper Mild Mottle Virus (PMMoV) is a virus found in pepper-based sauces almost exclusively consumed by humans. Other microbial markers are pathogens of interest including Hepatitis A, norovirus and campylobacter. Due to the Hepatitis A outbreak, which included San Diegans who were unsheltered, there was a concern the virus could be mobilized and enter the San Diego River. The chemical markers caffeine and sucralose are predominantly in human products were analyzed from human waste. There is a difference between them where caffeine degrades quickly and sucralose persists for a long time in the environment.

Matthew Verbyla measuring pollution from homeless encampments during dry weather. The first site Alvarado Creek adjacent to SDSU, second site in El Cajon discharging to Forester Creek both had active homeless encampments at the time of sampling. SDSU measured water quality upstream and downstream to see if there were any differences. In Alvarado Creek the changes in bacterial indicators only changed slightly for e. coli. There was more variation in Forester Creek. A significant increase in the concentration of e. coli, but it ranged from almost not changing at all to increasing by a factor of 10. The next slide shows other water quality indicators that were expected to change if there had been fecal inputs from homeless encampments. There was no significant change. They also did not detect any HF183, neither upstream nor downstream. The evidence points to encampments did not have significant influence on microbial pollution of the river and streams during dry weather.

The next slide is for objectives 2 and 3 which is to evaluate pollution in water and soils during and after river bank cleanup activities. A map of the cleanup site in Mission Valley. They partnered with the San Diego River Park Foundation to collect samples the day of cleanup. SDSU returned a week after and a month after that to collect additional samples. Soil samples at location of open defecation. A photo is shown of how the site was identified with evidence of open defecation in the vicinity of toilet paper or napkins. The concentrations of fecal indicators were high during the day of cleanup and still detected a month after cleanup, although fecal indicator bacteria decreased a month after cleanup. This experiment concluded homeless encampments did result in microbial contamination of soils at the site of homeless encampments after cleanup.

3

Objective 4 examined the leeching of contaminated soils. A better understanding of the possibility leeching into the river. two different experiments; one simulated sewer exfiltration where sewage can enter the soil. Another example is sewer overflow. Soils were spiked with waste water and the concentration of microbial markers were measured after being flushed multiple times with simulated (?)rain water. This study concluded waste water spike soils continued to be a source of e. coli, HF183 and PMMoV even after 4 months. Slide 22 shows how fast these markers decayed since contamination. After 60 days there was less than .001% relative to day 1 whereas PMMoV was much slower to die off, and HF183 was somewhere in the middle. All markers were detected after 120 days. Contaminants can be leeched into soil after a contamination event.

The study contained 4 different locations of contaminated sites totaling 9 experiments flushed soil with synthetic rain water to collect e. coli enterococci and PMMoV. HF183 was only detected in 1 out of 9 sites where fecal material was the freshest. Caffeine and HF183 are high in waste water and low or undetected in stormwater runoff. This could be one way to distinguish open defection from leaking sewers.

Natalie Mladenov objective 5 was to evaluate the temporal trends in pollutant concentrations and loadings during storm events with the aim of gaining better insight of potential sources. SDSU measured concentrations of chemical and microbial pollutants in the San Diego River between January 2018 and March 2019. SDSU also performed storm sampling in two tributaries - Alvarado Creek in February 2018 and Forester Creek in November 2018. Their main finding was chemical markers showed untreated waste water is likely the major source of microbial pollution in the San Diego River.

Looking at the hydrology during storm events starts from baseflow conditions before soils get saturated. There will be sheet flow and runoff directly to the river. Panel 3 shows rain event underway and soils saturating, water flows laterally at interflow. At that point it can flush any subsurface pollutants. And Panel 4 returns to baseflow conditions. The discharge/ volume peaks when storm event is at its highest. During the storm event e. coli and enterococci, HF 183 and PMMoV. Fecal indicator exceeds benchmark for all storm events that were measured. They tested HF183 and PMMoV. Hepatitis A was not detected. Other pathogens, norovirus and campylobacter was present.

SDSU examined untreated waste water which had high HF 183 higher than PMMoV. In open defecation HF183 was rarely detected. This shows low HF183 before and during bulk of storm HF183 increases, likely due to untreated waste water. For chemical markers caffeine was higher than sucralose. On the other hand, caffeine was low at open defecation sites. The caffeine to sucralose ratio is an indicator of untreated waste water as indicated in other studies.

In conclusion, water quality evaluations did not show strong evidence that homeless encampments cause an increase in the concentration of pollutants at least in the water during dry weather conditions. However, they did see fecal contamination during cleanup. Individuals living near the river should have access to adequate sanitation and those doing the cleanup should have proper measures. The experimental work showed soils can be a source of contamination even 4 months after sewage spills. The changes in chemical and bacterial markers showed other pathogens, but untreated waste water is the main source of contamination. Efforts to repair damaged or aged infrastructure is recommended.

The outcome of this study resulted in 3 masters theses, data shared with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the San Diego River Park Foundation, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, City of San Diego, Santee and El Cajon. SDSU is thankful for the Conservancy, State Water Board, SDSU and students involved in the research. Does anyone have questions?

Ruth Hayward commented it was an interesting project and showed what changes need to be made with some infrastructure. She asked if this research and methods survived new techniques that might be able to be shared with others. This would be ground breaking research. She likes to see follow up from research being used for other applications.

4

Natalie Mladenov responded until now it has been hard to distinguish between open defecation and waste water sources. The new chemical and microbial markers when used together, also well as HF183 and PMMov, give a good signal of confidence where the majority of pollution is coming from during storm events. SDSU didn’t develop new methods for the study but applied these ratios of caffeine and sucralose as well as HF183 and PMMoV.

Matthew Verbyla noted both the HF183 and PMMoV have been studied extensively but have not been examined together. To add to that this study also evaluated the leeching of pollutants from open defecation sites. Experiments conducted in situ were difficult to coordinate but the contributions in other markers in conjunction with bacterial markers can be ground breaking. The numerous pathogens would be difficult to measure which is why indicators are used. SDSU want a good idea of all the different pathogens existing in waste and how they behave in the environment.

Ruth Hayward asked if this research can help with Corona virus which is being detected in sewage systems.

Natalie Mladenov responded they have put in a proposal to study Covid-19 in seawater and river water. Covid-19 is found in waste water. Although other schools are leading the charge, they remain interested in the topic to detect presence in water spiked with waste water. Perhaps examine real water samples.

Ben Clay asked about viral persistence. Is there a linkage between corona virus and how long it lasts compared to bacteria? Was this peer reviewed with County of San Diego Health Department?

Matthew Verbyla commented PMMoV is used because it is specific to humans. It is commonly found in human feces and waste water. It persists longer than most viruses that are human pathogens. Viruses are diverse, the Corona virus is enveloped and the PMMoV is not. Most human viruses are non-enveloped. He understands Corona virus to not be as persistent in the environment as the non-enveloped enteric viruses.

Natalie Mladenov shared this with staff from Dianne Jacob’s office. The executive summary and reporting will be shared with anyone who wants access. The Final report is not yet finished.

Item 8. Main Street - Green Street Improvements - Proposition 68 (ACTION)

Julia Richards the proposed project entitled Main Street – Green Street Improvements is within the San Diego River Watershed. It is located in a disadvantaged community and within 6ft of a severely disadvantaged community. This proposed project promotes 3 state plans, plus El Cajon’s Climate Action Plan. It is consistent with the San Diego River Conservancy’s enabling legislation and supports 3 programs from the Conservancy’s strategic plan. The proposed project includes multi-benefits of capturing and filtering stormwater, improving water quality, increasing public access, planting native trees, reducing heat island effect and improving quality of life in an urban community. This project has received a $2.5 million grant from SANDAG’s smart growth incentive program. More details can be found in the staff report. Conservancy Staff recommends approval of resolution 20-03 to the City of El Cajon in the amount of $250,000. Julia welcomed and introduced Jeffrey Manchester, Principal Civil Engineer and Tony Mendoza Associate Engineer to provide a presentation and answer any questions the Board may have.

Jeffrey Manchester said this project will improve a business urban corridor. El Cajon will plant trees and implement stormwater best management practices (BMPs) under this proposal and he truned it over to Tony Mendoza.

Tony Mendoza thanked the Board for the opportunity to present. The City of El Cajon’s Main Street – Green Street Improvement Project will improve an important gateway to the city. The project starts at Marshall Avenue and continues to El Cajon Boulevard. This half mile stretch is highly used for people moving from El Cajon to the El Cajon Transit Center. El Cajon is the 6th largest city in the county has about 300,000 people. Geographically it is surrounded by mountains, where stormwater flows into the Forester Creek channel and eventually the San Diego River. The City studied and developed the El Cajon Transit District Specific Plan (TDSP) approved in 2018 was

5

intended to boost the economy and revamp the boundary area and improve ease of access by vehicle, foot or bike. TDSP gave recommendations of 2 projects – the one discussed today and the El Cajon Community Transit Connection Improvement Project which was approved by the San Diego River Conservancy Board in January. Main Street and El Cajon Boulevard are two separate corridors similar in scope. Traffic safety measures and surface improvements will help pedestrian access.

TDSP proposes improvements along Main Street to develop a sense of arrival. Installing parkway improvements such as landscaping widened sidewalks and lighting will make it safer for pedestrians. Stormwater features and low impact development (LID) such as biofiltration. El Cajon is also looking at parkway planting including native drought tolerant species. TDSP provides for two vehicle lanes in each direction would be improved by reducing number of lanes and adding bike lanes and widening the sidewalk and install a roundabout for car traffic.

The portion funded by SANDAG is scheduled to start February and is currently in design phase. El Cajon expects 100% design by march 2021 and then begin construction in summer 2021, and project completion by summer 2022. Rendering of what the project would look like includes greenscapes and street trees which make it safer for pedestrians. Another intersection shows bulb outs, crosswalk and greenscapes. Project funding includes $2.5 smart growth incentive and Trans Net funding. Additionally, funding from the San Diego River Conservancy would help with green enhancements, LID features and low maintenance vegetation. He hopes the Board will invest to help the City accomplish these plantings and obtain the City’s Climate Action Plan in reducing greenhouse gases. The idea was created with the TDSP including public input. If funded, El Cajon would make the biggest impact by installing LID BMP to treat water.

Ruth Hayward recommended to plant as many trees as possible. She asked would bioswales collect 2,300 cubic ft of water and how many swales would be needed along Main Street.

Tony Mendoza responded the pictures are examples, and they are working with landscape architect to size the plants and trees to find the best location. It has not been finalized.

Richard Burg asked about native plants regarding western redbud and Torrey Pine. He does not recommend either of those for this project because they are not found in that location. Torrey Pines are endemic to the northern coastal area of San Diego and western red bud are found more in the foothills. To the extent practical and possible, the project should use native plants for bioswales to filter hydrocarbons.

John Elliott appreciated including native plantings and encourages them to use native plants especially by the flow. They use grasses around springs and river he can provide suggestions.

Ruth Hayward moved for approval of Resolution 20-03 and John Elliott seconded.

Roll Call: Ayes: Ben Clay, Ruth Hayward, Amanda Martin, Gina Moran, Ray Lennox, Richard Burg, Dianne Jacob, Cody Petterson, John Elliott, Clarissa Falcon, Elsa Saxod (11-0-0)

Item 9. Lindo Lake Restoration and Improvements to Public Access - Proposition 68

(ACTION)

Julia Richards the proposed project entitled Lindo Lake Improvements is located in the San Diego River Watershed. It is located in a disadvantaged community and benefits and severely disadvantaged community. It promotes the California Water Action Plan. It is consistent with the San Diego River Conservancy enabling legislation and it supports 4 program areas in the Conservancy’s Strategic Plan. This proposed project is focused on the east basin and includes multiple benefits including public trail, public park amenities and expanding ADA accessibility and the installation of fishing pier and bird viewing station. San Diego County committed $5 million for the planning, design and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). More information is located in the Staff Report. Conservancy staff

6

recommends approval of Resolution 20-04 to the County of San Diego Parks and Recreation Department for

$250,000. Julia introduced Ieszic Formeller Park Project Manager to provide a presentation and answer any questions you may have.

Ieszic Formeller Lindo Lake County Park is in the community of Lakeside California adjacent to SR-67 at the intersection of Vine Street and Lakeshore Drive. The Lindo Lake Improvements Project will be constructed in 2 phases. Phase 1 is the east basin shown on the right-hand side of the map and phase 2 on the left map. The goal of both phases is to restore habitat, improve public water quality, beautify Lindo Lake and increase recreation opportunities for public benefit. The Department’s Proposition 68 grant application with San Diego River Conservancy is to support phase 1 construction and restoration work at Lindo Lake East Basin.

Lindo Lake County Park is a popular destination in the community of Lakeside which includes playgrounds, picnic areas, all wheel skate park, outdoor exercise areas, sports fields, 1.25-mile trail around the perimeter. Lindo Lake is co-located with the Lakeside Community Center and Lakeside Teen Center which provides daily programs to families, seniors people with disabilities and at-risk youth. Lindo Lake is home to a wide variety of native animals and migratory wildlife including sensitive species. Lindo Lake is the heart of and name sake of the community.

Lindo Lake is the only natural lake in the County of San Diego. In 1962 a dam was constructed on Quail Creek to form Lake Jennings. This blocked Lindo Lakes natural water source. Due to this the main source of water became urban runoff and stormwater. Today the east basin contains water for roughly half the year and groundwater is used to supplement water levels of the west basin which is only 2-3ft deep year-round. Lindo Lake was separated by an earthen causeway decades ago in order to make it possible to fill one basin at a time. Disturbances to water flow have increased water temperature and nutrient levels. Over the years erosion stormwater and runoff introduced sediment and changed water depth leading.

Construction in two phase aim to increase health of the basin. Phase 1 is the project being considered today. Maximum depth of 10ft natural clay liner stormwater BMP to capture and filter sediment and fish habitat structures. Constructing new recreational amenities, viewing areas and trails. The project will improve aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Restored habitat and increased public opportunities benefit the environment, community and visitors. Restoring Lindo Lake has been in the planning stages for nearly 4 decades. The project was analyzed in accordance with today’s requirements and environmental studies were conducted for the project. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was circulated for public review and comment. The final review was adopted by the County Board of Supervisors May 11, 2019. The County’s consultant, AECOM had highly qualified engineers and landscape architects to design and engineer the project to ensure the supplemental EIR and other applicable requirements were met.

Construction documents for this phase were completed in February 2020. Construction project management and administration for the project will be conducted by Department of Parks and Recreation staff and will in part be supported by potential Proposition 68 San Diego River Conservancy Grant funding. The Department staff will manage ongoing operations and maintenance to the lake as they do today. A Kumeyaay monitor will be present during all ground disturbance activities as well as monitors for birds and nesting raptors. Permitting with USACE CDFW and Regional Water Quality Control Board is underway.

Phase 1 is anticipated to start July 2020 and estimated completion January 2022. Phase 2 is anticipated to start January 2022 and be completed in July 2023. Phase 2 is currently unfunded but the County is diligently seeking funding. Phase 1 supported in part consists of site hardscape and accessible stabilized decomposed granite trails and recreational amenities, fishing pier benches and bird watching stations for public benefit. Other improvements are planting of native trees and installation of a water conserving irrigation system. Open play area and 6 different native habitat types would be present. The Lindo Lake improvement project will improve water circulation and aeration, restore wetland areas reduce water loss. The new sedimentation basin and stormwater treatment facilities will prohibit sediment from entering the lake. The landscape improvements will stabilize banks and reduce erosion restore local and migratory habitat and beautiful the park for visitors.

7

Richard Burg asked about the eucalyptus woodland. It is not native.

Ieszic Formeller stated the eucalyptus woodland is existing not proposed.

Clarissa Falcon thanked Ieszic for the presentation. She asked the total cost of the project and how much requested from Proposition 68.

Julia Richards responded staff is recommending $250,000 today.

Ieszic Formeller commented on the total project cost is $7.525 million. $5.525 are allocated for construction. Remainder is for design, environmental analysis, inspections, construction administration and project management. Overall cost of the project is being determined now from publicly solicited bids to determine final cost for construction.

Clarissa Falcon moved for approval of Resolution 20-04 and John Elliott seconded.

Roll Call: Ayes: Ben Clay, Ruth Hayward, Amanda Martin, Gina Moran, Ray Lennox, Cody Petterson, John Elliott, Clarissa Falcon, Elsa Saxod. Abstain: Richard Burg, Dianne Jacob (9-0-2)

Item 10. Executive Officer’s Report (INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

Julia Richards a few more items for review. The Governors stay at home order. San Diego River Conservancy office remains open at this time. Staff are essential employees for the state of California. Staff members have been provided the opportunity to telework. Current focus at the office is on bond-funded agreements processing invoices and amendments to allow flexibility for grantees. May budget revision will be posted on the Department of Finance’s website today. Possibly an August revise for Fiscal year 2021.

Greening San Diego Program was presented at the November 2019 meeting. At the meeting Chairman Clay instructed staff to develop draft program guidelines for review. Guidelines were posted online for a 30-day public input. Document will be finalized from public input and will be presented before the Board for final approval at the July 9th meeting.

The Conservancy provided two spreadsheets summarizing bond programs in Proposition 1 – the Water Bond, and Proposition 68 – the Park Bond. These spreadsheets list the status of concept proposal and approved projects under each program. In march Prop 1 Round 5 the Conservancy received 10 proposals. The proposals are currently under review and staff will set up site visits. The final application has been extended from June 15, 2020 to August 28, 2020. Staff has notified applicants. Additionally, under Proposition 1, $9.5 has been awarded to date. $2.5 is available for Round 5, and remaining $4 million bond funds.

Proposition 68 has awarded $1.25 million to date not including today’s action items. Approximately $9 million remain for Prop 68. Round 2 is anticipated January 15 through February 15, 2021.

Ruth Hayward thanked the Conservancy staff for running a smooth teleconference.

Ben Clay agreed and adjourned the meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 3:39 pm

8

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:3

SUBJECT:PUBLIC COMMENT

PURPOSE:Any person may address the Governing Board at this time

regarding any matter within the Board’s authority. Presentations will be limited to three minutes for individuals and five minutes for representatives of organizations. Submission of information in writing is encouraged. The Board is prohibited by law from taking any action on matters that are discussed that are not on the agenda; no adverse conclusions should be drawn by the Board’s not responding to such matters or public comments.

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:4

SUBJECT:CHAIRPERSON’S AND GOVERNING BOARD

MEMBERS’ REPORTS (INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

PURPOSE:These items are for Board discussion only and the Board will take no formal action.

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 24, 2020

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 11, 2020

AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 18, 2020

AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 26, 2020

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2019–2020 REGULAR SESSION

SENATE BILL

NO. 1301

Introduced by Senator Hueso February 21, 2020

SECTION 1.

Part 2.6 (commencing with Section 71107) is added to Division 34 of the Public Resources Code, to read:

PART 2.6. Tijuana River Valley Watershed Action Plan 71107.

(a) Upon an appropriation of funds from the Legislature for this purpose, the California Environmental Protection Agency and the Natural Resources Agency, including their subsidiary agencies, shall collaborate to create a Tijuana River Valley Watershed Action Plan, known as the Tijuana River Plan. The Tijuana River Plan shall be drawn from existing and ongoing watershed planning efforts in both the United States and Mexico. The Tijuana River Plan shall be reviewed and updated on a three-year cycle. The Tijuana River Plan shall include, to the extent practicable, all of the following:

(1) Identification of key stakeholders and partnerships for data collection and information sharing.

(2) Identification of issues of concern and potential projects that may be implemented in the Tijuana River Valley watershed in both the United States and Mexico.

(3) Identification of short-term and long-term goals and targets for projects that may be implemented through the plan.

(4) Methods and strategies to restore water quality or water supply in degraded areas and to protect overall watershed health.

(5) Methods and strategies to protect the public health and limit beach closures.

(6) Methods and strategies, including target dates or milestones, interagency or public/private partnerships, and binational collaboration, to ensure implementation of the plan in Mexico and the United States, to the extent feasible.

(b) Upon completion of the Tijuana River Plan described in subdivision (a), the California Environmental Protection Agency and the Natural Resources Agency shall consult with the governments for the United States, the County of San Diego, the City of San Diego, the City of Imperial Beach, Mexico, the State of Baja California, the City of Tijuana, and the City of Tecate to develop a common watershed action plan to address issues in the Tijuana River and its entire watershed, on both sides of the border, including, but not limited to, issues relating to water quality, wildlife and fishery habitat, stormwater management, riverside development and management, wastewater discharge, and water supply.

(c) This section shall not require the expenditure of state funding or the development of any specific project without an appropriation from the Legislature.

Recent actions:

Date

Action

08/30/20

Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

08/28/20

In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

08/26/20

Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 66. Noes 1.) Ordered to the Senate.

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:5

SUBJECT:DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL REPORT

(INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:6

SUBJECT:HEALTH AND SAFETY (INFORMATIONAL)

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:7

SUBJECT:HELIX WATER DISTRICT (INFORMATIONAL)

Helix Water District (Helix) has determined approximately 105 acres in the El Monte Valley (APNs: for portions of 392-050-47, 392-060-43, and 392-130-47) are surplus to its needs. Helix has discussed selling approximately 98 acres to the County of San Diego and the remaining acreage to River Valley Equestrian Center, which currently leases that acreage from Helix. Under Public Resources Code section 32646, the Conservancy has the first right of refusal (FROR) to acquire the properties as they are public lands suitable for park and open space within the Conservancy’s jurisdiction. The Conservancy will consider whether to exercise its FROR or take other action to allow negotiations with the County and River Valley Equestrian Center to proceed. If Helix does not sell the property to the County and River Valley Equestrian Center, the Conservancy will retain its FROR with respect to future transactions.

Presentation:

Bruce Beach, Partner Best, Best and Krieger

Carlos Lugo, Jim Tomasulo, Milica Schipper and Debbie Lundy, Helix Water District

2

1

3

1 &2 County

3 River Valley Equestrian

EL MONTE VALLEY SURPLUS PROPERTY HELIX WATER DISTRICT

JUNE 2020

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS

EFFECTIVE DATE of the APPRAISAL

June 18, 2020

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS:

392-050-47; 392-060-43; 392-130-47

LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

Lots 82, 85, 89, 90 And Portions Of Lots 81, 86, 93, 94 An "Un-Numbered Lot" And A Portion Of Timber Reserve Of El Cajon Valley Company's Lands According To The Map Thereof No 289, Filed December 30, 1886, with exceptions. More fully described in Addendum B of this report.

SUBJECT PROPERTIES:

Helix Water District land identified as El Monte Valley El Monte Valley. The appraisal assignment consists of approximately 105.44 undeveloped A-70 (agricultural) and S-82 (extraction) acres. Helix identified three parcel to be valued individually and as assembled.

The subject parcels are within or adjoining the San Diego River and have level and sloping topography, floodplain/floodway influences and a mixture of habitat.

The subject is primarily at street level and about 70% within 100 year flood and floodway of the San Diego River. The property includes river bottom and other equestrian and recreational areas with minimal improvements.

Elevations along Willow Road range from 400± feet to 420± feet above sea level and 390± feet to 410± in the river bed. Vegetation is Urban/Developed, Extensive Agriculture,- Field/Pasture/Row Crops and Southern Riparian Scrub. Several trails go through the properties.

The parcels are west of a proposed El Monte Sand Mining and Nature Preserve Project. The proposed project, if approved, would extract sand and gravel over a 15-year period. The disturbed areas would be progressively reclaimed starting in year 4 of the project, to be restored to an end use of open space with an open water pond and recreational trail easements. The combined mineral extraction and reclamation project would affect 230 acres of 482 acre holding, with the additional land as buffer.

LOCATION:

The parcels are located along Willow Road on both sides of Ashwood Street approximately 1 to 3 miles northeast of Lakeside in San Diego County, California. The sites are located within the Lakeside Community Planning Area within or adjoining the San Diego River.

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:

Public Agency Lands

ZONING:

S82 (8): Extractive Use and A70 (2): Limited Agriculture.

SIZE:

Por. 392-050-47 (76.7 acres)

Por. 392-060-43 (20.8 acres)

RVE - 392-130-47 (1.34 acres) + Por. 392-050-47 (3.09 ac)

+ Por. 392-060-43 (3.51 ac) = 7.94 ac.

JAMES NAUGHTON, JR., MAI

6

EL MONTE VALLEY SURPLUS PROPERTY HELIX WATER DISTRICT

JUNE 2020

IMPROVEMENTS:None.

HIGHEST AND BEST USEPortions of the property are specifically suited to equestrian

uses and other recreation and other portions are best suited for mitigation of wetland/riparian habitats and sand reserve.

VALUE OF THE FEE INTEREST BY THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH:

Fair Market value conclusion as of June 18, 2020:

(.FAIR MARKET VALUE OF POR. 392-050-47 (76.7 ACRES)$2,685,000.FAIR MARKET VALUE OF POR. 392-060-43 (20.8 ACRES)$655,000.FAIR MARKET VALUE OF RVE - 7.94 ACRES$254,000FAIR MARKET VALUE AS ASSEMBLED (105.44 ACRES)$3,374,000)1

2

3

JAMES NAUGHTON, JR., MAI

7

Setting Standards of Excellencein Public Service

Administration Office

7811 University Avenue

La Mesa, California 91942-0427

619-466-0585

helix@helixw ater. org hwd.com

July 8, 2020

Julia Ri chard s

San Diego Ri v er Cons ervancy State of Cali forni a

11769 Waterhill Road

Lakeside, CA 92040

Re:NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF PROPERTY- EL MONTE VALLEY

(APNs: 392 -050-47, 392-060-43, 392-130-47 & 391-061-28)

Dear Ms. Richards:

Attached is a summary sheet and map detailing three groupings of properties owned by the Helix Water District in the El Monte Valley within unincorporated Lakeside, County of San Diego, which are being reviewed as potential sale candidat es. The Helix Water District Board declared the subject properties surplus to the District's needs by action taken on March 18, 2020.

Because the pro perties are within the San Diego River Conse rvancy' s statutory jurisdiction per Public Resources Code section 32633, the Cons ervancy has a right of first refusal to acquire the property . (Public Resources Code section 32646). If the Conservancy does not assign its rights to anothe r entity and subject to your written statement declining to purchase the properties , the District will send out Notices of Availability as required by the Surplu s Land Act (Government Code section 54220 et. seq.) to other potential purchasers.

In the event the San Diego River Conservancy has an interest in purchasing all or some of the subject propert y, please submit a writt en response or offer within sixty (60) days of receipt of this notice.

Please see the enclosed early response forms, which are provided for efficiency sake should your agency decide not to acquire the subject propert ies.

Cc:Jim Tomasulo, Milica Schipp er, Debbie Lundy- HWD

Adam Wilson, Senior Land Use and Pol icy Advisor to County Supervisor Dianne Jacob

60076 .0000 1\ 32848263.2Board of Directors

M ark Gracyk, President

DeAna R. Verbeke, Vice President Daniel H. McMil lan, Division 1

Kathl een Coates Hedberg, Division 4 Joel A. Scalzitt i, Division 5

El Monte Surplus Summary and Map

Zoning:

Property Groupings:

S82: Extractive Use and A70: Limited Agriculture 1. Por 392-050-47 (76.7 acres)

2. Por 392-060-43 {21.2 acres)

3. 392-130-47 (.43 acres)+ Por 392-050-47 (3.5 acres)+ Por 392-060-43 (3.15 acres)= 7.08 acres

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:8

SUBJECT:Summary of Final Applications for Proposition 1, Round 5 (INFORMATIONAL)

Notice of funding availability posted on December 6th, 2019 announcing approximately $2 million, for Round 5. The Conservancy received 10 concept proposals and 7 full applications.

Presentation:

Dustin Harrison, Environmental Scientist, San Diego River Conservancy

San Diego River Conservancy Agenda Item 8

Proposition 1 Grant Program Summary

The Conservancy staff has prepared this summary for Conservancy's Governing Board.

Background

California voters passed Proposition 1, The Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Bond Act of 2014, on November 4, 2014 (Prop 1). Prop 1 added Section 79731 to the California Water Code, authorizing the state to issue bonds, and the legislature to appropriate the proceeds, for multi-benefit water quality, water supply, and watershed protection and restoration projects for the watersheds of the state. The bond measure included an allocation of $17,000,000 for the San Diego River Conservancy (Conservancy). The Conservancy has prepared this project summary for Conservancy's Governing Board review.

Prop 1, Round 1:The Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 state budget included an appropriation of

$3 million. The Conservancy received 12 concept proposals requesting $5,448,265. The Board awarded 7 projects for $3,426,255.86.

Prop 1, Round 2:The FY 2016-17 state budget included an appropriation of $4 million. The Conservancy received 12 concept proposals requesting $5,406,847. The Board awarded 5 projects for $2,259,045.18.

Prop 1, Round 3:For FY 2018-19, the Conservancy announced the availability of approximately $4 million. The Conservancy received 8 concept proposals requesting

$5,687,814. The Board awarded 2 projects for $1,293,222.00.

Prop 1 Round 4:For FY 19-20 The Conservancy received 10 Concept proposals requesting $9,356,205. The Board awarded 6 projects for $2,500,000.00 (FY18/19 allocation).

Summary of Board approved projects to date:

Since the initiation of the Conservancy's Proposition 1 Grant Program, the Conservancy has received 52 Concept Proposals requesting more than $36,000,000. Over four competitive rounds, 20 grants were awarded and authorized by the Board for a total amount of approximately $9,400,000. Ten (10) projects are completed and closed out. While majority of the selected projects are invasive removal, there were also land conservation (112 acres), public access, habitat restoration and water quality enhancement through low impact development best management practices.

12 projects are native habitat restoration including invasive non-native vegetation removal:

· 7 in City of San Diego

· 3 in City of Santee

· 2 in unincorporated San Diego County

5 projects directly improve water quality

· 2 in City of El Cajon

· 1 in City of Santee

· 1 in City of San Diego

· 1 in unincorporated San Diego County

2 projects are acquisitions for land conservation

· El Monte Valley (37 acres)

· San Diego River Headwaters (75 acres) 1 Project supports multi-benefits

· Water quality enhancement, public access, habitat restoration Approximately $5,000,000 remains from SDRC’s Prop 1 allocation of $17,000,000.

Current Status for Round 5

Prop 1 Round 5: For FY 2020-21, the Conservancy announced the availability of approximately $2.5 million. The Conservancy received 10 concept proposals on February 28, 2020 requesting $10,436,002. The Conservancy received 7 Full Applications on August 28, 2020 and a total of $8,815,405 was requested.

Summary of Full Applications for Prop 1 Round 5

Proposed Project #044 – Constructed Wetland Revamp Lakeside’s River Park Conservancy requests $92,367

This proposed project would improve sediment transport by modifying a coffer dam. Currently, the constructed wetland input channels remain clogged during dry flow. This project would redesign the screens and lower the coffer dam to allow proper flow of stormwater and sediment and allow the channels to infiltrate. Applicant proposes $3,000 or 3% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #045 – Restoration of Alluvial Habitat in the El Monte Valley Lakeside’s River Park Conservancy requests $557,385

This proposed project would removal and control 5 acres invasive plant species (primarily tamarix sp.) and replace with alluvial scrub habitat. The project would perform a pre and post restoration herpetofauna study conducted by USGS. The project is estimated to take 36 months to complete and applicant would provide $100,632, or 18% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #047 – Broadway Creek Trash Capture Project City of El Cajon requests $750,000

This project proposes to install a 24' wide and 88' long triple reinforced concrete box culvert trash capture device near the Ballantyne Street and Hart Drive intersection. This culvert would filter pollution down to 5mm and perform 97% removal efficiency or higher. Applicant proposes $1,900,000 or 39% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #048 – Ruffin Canyon Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Phase 2 San Diego Canyonlands requests $624,916.85

This project proposes to restore 7.1 acres of habitat within Ruffin Canyon. This project would include 3.7-acre wetland and 3.4 acres upland habitat restoration along with approximately 275 palm trees removed by helicopter. Other perennial non-native species would be controlled through recommended measures and native vegetation would be monitored prior to construction and installed onsite where appropriate. Applicant proposes

$45,268.15 or 7% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #049 – Restoration of Alvarado Creek – SDSU Phase San Diego State University Research Foundation $1,839,424

This proposed riparian habitat restoration would manage 6.5 acres. Because of current conditions, a California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM) and bioassessment before and after implementation, along with water quality monitoring and hydrogeologic data will be generated. Baseline canopy would be measured using transect lines before and after restoration. Specific restoration activities include local plants re-vegetated and monitored across 6.5 acres. Applicant proposes $312,107 or 14.7% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #050 – Lindo Lake Improvements (Phase 1 – East Basin) County of San Diego Department of Parks and Recreation requests $2,500,000

This project proposes to restore the lake by increasing the depth to a maximum 10ft and reducing lake bottom infiltration by using a natural clay liner. Restoration efforts would restore terrestrial and aquatic habitat that benefit the environment and the community including stormwater filtration basins, storm-drain filtration, and water aeration systems to maintain hydrologic health and healthy oxygen levels to prevent algae blooms. Applicant proposes $8,727,318 or 76% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Proposed Project #052 – SDSU Mission Valley Development River Park San Diego State University $2,451,339

This proposed project would develop park and open space at the SDCCU Stadium site. The Riverpark includes bioretention basins, bioswales, passive and active parks, and riparian habitat to improve the storm water quality, flood protection and environment adjacent to both the San Diego River and Murphy Canyon Creek. Applicant proposes

$5,249,500 or 68% of the total project cost as matching funds.

Projects withdrawn:

Concept proposal #043Lakeside’s River Park Conservancy – land acquisition

Concept proposal #046Resource Conservation District of Greater San Diego County –

land acquisition

Concept proposal #051San Diego State University – land acquisition

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:9

SUBJECT:GUIDELINES FOR GREENING SAN DIEGO (ACTION)

The Conservancy staff provided overview of Greening San Diego Program in November 2019. At that meeting the Conservancy’s Chair instructed staff to develop grant program guidelines for the Board Members’ review and approval.

Presentation:

Julia Richards, Executive Officer, San Diego River Conservancy

SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY’S GREENING SAN DIEGO PROGRAM

DRAFT FINAL GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES AUGUST 3, 2020

SEPTEMBER 10, 2020

San Diego River Conservancy 11769 Waterhill Road

Lakeside, CA 92040

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

I. INTRODUCTION

A. The San Diego River Conservancy

The San Diego River Conservancy (“Conservancy”) is a state agency, established in 2002, to work specifically within the San Diego River watershed to implement multi- benefit projects that protect and enhance the San Diego River and its connected resources. The San Diego River Conservancy Act, the Conservancy’s enabling legislation, is contained in Division 22.9 of the Public Resources Code Sections 32630-32659.9. The Act authorizes the Conservancy to undertake projects and award grants to achieve the goals set forth in its statute. The Conservancy works along the entire length of the San Diego River, from its mouth in the City of San Diego at Ocean Beach to its headwaters in the mountains near Julian, California.

This watershed, also includes all of the San Diego River Area including several streams, reservoirs, wetlands, estuary and uplands. The Conservancy is also able to help neighboring watersheds for the Otay River, Sweetwater River and Tijuana River. The Conservancy may assist these watersheds to identify and pursue grant funding to restore and enhance natural, historical, cultural, educational and recreational resources along the rivers and enhance public access to the rivers watersheds, pursuant to Senate Bill 1367 (2018), codified as Pub. Resources Code, Division 22.9, Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 32659).

The Conservancy provides technical assistance to help develop projects in the following areas:

· Conserve land

· Protect the natural and scenic beauty

· Improve water quality

· Enhance native plants to promote wildlife linkages/corridors (https://www.calflora.org/)

· Increase pollinator habitat

· Remove invasive plant species from the river corridor and its tributaries (https://www.cal-ipc.org/)

· Restore habitat and promote the re-establishment of the area’s native species

· Reduce flood and fire risk

· Complete connections or gaps along the San Diego River Trail

· Provide public access for the enjoyment of open spaces, trail facilities, campgrounds and other regional parks

· Preserve and protect cultural, tribal and historical education and interpretation

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

1

B. Greening San Diego Grant Program

General Purpose

The Greening San Diego Grant Program (Greening Program) provides funding for tree and vegetation planting projects and related green infrastructure to reduce and mitigate against Greenhouse Gasses (GHGs) and climate change. The Conservancy is interested in projects that contain a significant shade-tree planting component or to augment, expand, or better manage healthy urban, riparian and rural forests, parks and open space areas and provide multi- benefits.

Grant Program Guidelines

The Greening Program Guidelines (Guidelines) establish the process the Conservancy will use to solicit concept proposals. Project proposals must be consistent with the Conservancy’s enabling legislation, its Strategic Plan and the Guidelines’ project selection criteria.

Comments should be emailed to dustin.harrison@sdrc.ca.gov. Comments may also be mailed to the San Diego River Conservancy, 11769 Waterhill Road, Bldg. 2, Lakeside, CA 92040. The Guidelines will be revised based on the public comments and then presented to the Conservancy’s Governing Board Members at an upcoming public meeting for approval.

II. PROGRAM REQUIRED CRITERIA AND ELIGIBILITY

A. Required Conditions

· The tree or vegetation planting component of the project must be completed within one year of signing the grant.

· There must be a commitment for active participation from community members or volunteers in the neighborhood where work is being completed. Community members must be involved in both the planning and implementation of projects.

· The project must demonstrate a nexus between important community needs and the benefits the project will provide.

· The project must provide co-benefits (e.g., improved air or water quality, workforce development, erosion control).

· If grantee is not the landowner, the grantee must enter into an agreement or Right of Entry with the land owner(s) to allow for access to the land for a minimum of five (5) years after grant end date for the designated entity(ies) providing maintenance on all plantings. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to: watering, structural pruning, mulching, fertilizing, or controlling plant pests and diseases, as outlined in the scope of work. If the grant is funded by State Bond funds, additional years may be required.

· Prior to disbursement of grant funds, grantee must install a sign

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

2

acknowledging name and logo of the San Diego River Conservancy. The sign must be installed for 5-20 years, depending on source of funding.

· Maintenance and Operating Agreement: Landowner/grantee is required to sign a minimum 8-year Memorandum of Agreement post a 2- year grant period with the San Diego River Conservancy to continue maintenance as defined above.

· The scope of work must identify appropriate species from the Conservancy’s native tree list and include benefits through the iTree application and forms (e.g. carbon dioxide avoided, carbon monoxide sequestered, filtration, rain fall interception and avoided runoff) https://www.itreetools.org/

· All plantings and locations must be accurately mapped and provided to Conservancy in progress reports and in the final report.

· The applicant must comply with all applicable local and county ordinances.

· The applicant must comply with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

· No verbal changes in scope of work will be allowed; all amendments must be documented in writing.

· Project applicant shall use California Conservation Corps and their affiliated Certified Community Conservation Corps to implement projects where feasible (see appendix).

B. Program Priorities

· Leveraged funding: May include in-kind funds or volunteer assistance. Applicants may utilize volunteer assistance as a primary component of matching funds.

· Disadvantaged/Severely Disadvantaged (DAC/SDAC) community. The project site is located within 1 mile of a DAC, SDAC as identified by a state agency, low income or vulnerable community, or engages at-risk populations and reaches individuals with diverse backgrounds.

· Water Efficiency: Projects with components that emphasize sustainable use or efficient conservation of water supplies, use of recycled water, or capture of stormwater for the plant establishment period.

C. Ineligibles expenses:

· Funds cannot be used to fulfill mitigation requirements for other projects.

· Funds cannot be used to fund acquisitions of land by eminent domain.

· Funds cannot be used to purchase beverages/water or food for human consumption or apparel (including promotional items t-shirts, stickers, etc.).

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

3

III. GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS

A. Grant Application

A grant application form will be posted on the Conservancy’s website and may be updated periodically. The Conservancy may elect to solicit targeted proposals for specific types of projects.

B. Continuous Grant Solicitation Period

The Conservancy will accept proposals on an ongoing basis and will award grants based on the availability of funding in the fiscal year. After a concept proposal is submitted, Conservancy staff may consider inviting an applicant to submit a full application. Conservancy staff may meet with an applicant to provide technical assistance for the full application, conduct a site review and evaluate the full application.

C. Application Review and Evaluation

Applications will be reviewed and evaluated based on how well the proposed project meets the evaluation criteria set forth below. To be funded under Greening San Diego Program, an applicant must be an eligible entity.

Eligibility

1) Eligible applicants are:

· Public agencies, special districts, joint powers authority if at least one of the parties to the joint powers agreement qualifies as an eligible application, public college, public university

· Any nonprofit organization that qualifies under Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code, and whose purposes are consistent with the Conservancy’s enabling legislation

· Indian Tribes that are either federally recognized or listed on the Native American Heritage Commission’s California Tribal Consultation List.

2) The proposed project must be on publicly owned land within the jurisdiction of the San Diego River Conservancy and within one of the following watersheds:

· San Diego River

· Sweetwater River

· Otay River

· Tijuana River

Evaluation Criteria

Projects will be evaluated using the following criteria with a score of 100 points possible:

1) The extent to which the project achieves program priorities. (30 total points)

· Leveraged funding (may include in-kind funds or volunteer assistance) (10 points)

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

4

· Disadvantaged/Severely Disadvantaged (DAC/SDAC) community, project site within 1 mile (10 points)

· Water Efficiency/Reuse (10 points)

2) The extent to which the project provides for resiliency to climate change. (20 points)

· Carbon sequestration

· Plant native trees/vegetation

· Soils/amendments/crop rotation

· Wetlands creation/enhancement

· Sea level rise/ flood management

3) Promotion and implementation of approved state plans and priorities (Including but not limited to the Governor’s Executive Orders, California Water Action Plan, Forest Carbon Plan, Wildlife Action Plan, Safeguarding California – California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy (Safeguarding California), the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) and the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP) and other related state plans (10 points)

4) The extent to which the project achieves Conservancy goals (statute and strategic plan). (10 points)

The Conservancy’s adopted Strategic Plan 2018-2023 http://sdrc.ca.gov/webmaster/arc/docs/StratPlan_update_2018-2023_Final.pdf

Strategic Plan

· Land acquisition

· Recreation

· Education/interpretation

· Habitat conservation

· Water quality, supply and flood conveyance

· Outreach/ engagement

· San Diego River Consortium

Statute: “The San Diego River Conservancy Act”

Division 22.9 of the Public Resources Code Sections 32630 – 32659.9.

5) The extent to which the project provides multiple benefits (10 points)

For example: improves air or water quality, workforce development, expands wildlife corridors, increases native habitat for sensitive species, increase urban canopies, reduce heat island effects, improves erosion control, project links to public access, and community improvements.

6) Government and community support (10 points)

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

5

Support from the public/private entities, jurisdiction, or department in which the project is proposed and the extent to which the public, nonprofit groups, landowners, and others will contribute to the project.

7) Project readiness (10 points)

Demonstrates the ability of the grantee to start and finish the project within grant terms.

Scoring Summary

Criteria

Points

Program priorities

30

Climate change/resiliency

20

State priorities/plans

10

Conservancy Statute and Goals

10

Multiple Benefits

10

Community, Non-Profit and/or Government

10

Project readiness

10

Total Possible Points

100

D. Returned Applications

The State reserves the right to reject an applicant during the grant process that is in violation of law or policy of any other public agency. Potential violations include, but not limited to, being in default of the performance requirements in other contracts or grant agreements issued by the State, being engaged in or under investigation for criminal conduct that could poorly reflect on or bring discredit to the State, or failing to have all required licenses. The State further reserves the right to reject any applicant who has a history of performance issues with past grants or other agreements with any public entity, including the grantor.

E. Grant Awards

Grants will be awarded when authorized by the Conservancy Board. The Conservancy Board meets approximately 6 times a year in public meetings. Recommended awards will be posted on the Conservancy’s website at least 7 days prior to the public meeting. The staff recommendation to the Conservancy will document how the project meets all of the required criteria included in these guidelines.

After Board approval a grant agreement will be prepared and signed by the Conservancy and the grantee. Grants shall have a 2-year performance period followed by a Memorandum of Agreement with a minimum 5-year period for plant establishment and maintenance. Expenses incurred before the Conservancy grant agreement is executed are not reimbursable. The agreement will include requirements of the grantee and information about how and when funds can be disbursed.

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

6

F. Board Meetings

No grant shall be awarded unless the Conservancy Board has approved the grant at a public meeting. The Conservancy typically holds six public meetings per calendar year. The meeting schedule will be published on the Conservancy’s website. The agenda for each public meeting will be published on the Conservancy’s website ten days in advance of the meeting. Conservancy staff will prepare a staff report for each proposed grant and present to the Conservancy Board at a public meeting.

The staff report will describe the project and explain how the project is consistent with the Conservancy’s enabling legislation, the Conservancy Program Guidelines, the Conservancy’s Strategic Plan, State Plans and Priorities and the evaluation criteria in the Greening San Diego Grant Program Guidelines.

G. Grant Agreement

Once the Conservancy’s Governing Board approves a grant at a public meeting, Conservancy staff will prepare a grant agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of the grant. This will be a reimbursable grant. The grantee must sign the grant agreement and comply with conditions in order to receive funds.

IV. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

A. Funding Availability

The amount of funds available will depend upon the amount appropriated to the Conservancy by the State Legislature each year. The amount awarded will also depend on the quality of the proposed projects submitted.

B. Grant Provisions

Following Conservancy Board approval of a grant, staff will prepare a grant agreement with detailed conditions specific to the project. The grant agreement must be signed by the grantee before funds will be disbursed. Several typical grant agreement provisions are:

· Actual awards are conditional upon funds being available from the state through the Budget process.

· Grantees must submit a detailed project work plan, design layout, planting pallet and budget.

· Grant funds will only be paid in arrears on a reimbursement basis.

· Grantee or Landowner must agree to a 5 to 20-year Memorandum of Agreement for continued operation and management agreement depending on source of funds.

· Grantees must maintain liability insurance during grant term and include the San Diego River Conservancy as an “additional insured.”

C. Environmental Documents

Grant applicants should consider whether their proposed project will trigger the need for an environmental impact report, negative declaration or whether a CEQA exemption applies. The applicant shall address whether CEQA applies and the status of CEQA compliance in the concept proposal and full application.

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

7

Applicant should list and discuss any other potential permits needed for the project.

D. Loss of Funding (not a complete list)

The following are examples of actions that may result in a grantee’s loss of funding:

1. Grantee fails to execute a grant agreement within six (6) months of grant issuance.

2. Grantee withdraws from the grant program.

3. Grantee fails to submit required documentation within the time periods specified in the grant agreement.

4. Grantee fails to submit evidence of CEQA compliance as specified by the grant agreement.

5. Grantee changes project scope without prior approval from the Conservancy.

6. Grantee fails to complete the project.

7. Grantee fails to demonstrate sufficient progress.

E. State Audit and Accounting Requirements Audit Requirements

All projects are subject to audit by the State of California annually and for three (3) years following the final payment of grant funds. If the project is selected for audit, the grantee will be contacted. Grantee shall provide all books, papers, accounts, documents, or other records of the grantee related to the project for which the funds were granted.

The grantee must retain and provide the project records, including the source documents and canceled checks and also provide an employee with knowledge of the project to assist the auditor. The grantee must provide a copy of any document, paper, record, or the like, requested by the auditor.

Accounting requirements

The grantee must maintain an accounting system that:

· Accurately reflects fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards,

· Provides a good audit trail, including original source documents such as purchase orders, receipts, progress payments, invoices, time cards, canceled checks, etc.

· Provides accounting data so the total cost of each individual project can be readily determined.

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

8

F. Records Retention

Project records must be retained for a period of three (3) years after final payment is made by the State. All project records must be retained by the grantee at least one

(1) year following an audit. Grantees are required to keep source documents for all expenditures related to each grant for at least three (3) years following project completion and one year following an audit. A project is considered complete upon receipt of final grant payment from the State. If funding provided by State Bonds, additional years may be required.

Inquiries: Please direct questions by email to dustin.harrison@sdrc.ca.gov or by phone to 619/390-0571.

FOR SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY BOARD APPROVAL SEPTEMEBER 10, 2020

9

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:10

SUBJECT:EXECUTVE OFFICER’S REPORT

(INFORMATIONAL/ACTION)

The following topics may be included in the Executive Officer’s Report. The Board may take action regarding any of them:

· Conservancy’s budget update

· 2021 Proposed Board Meeting dates:

· January 14th

· March 11th

· May 13th

· July 8th

· September 9th

· November 11th

· Nepotism policy for Board Approval

· Carlton Oaks segment of the San Diego Trail (GAP 44 and 45) SANDAG update

· Cuyamaca Rancho State Park – Reforestation Project Prescribed Burn Conducted at Cuyamaca Rancho State Park May 21, 2020

· Proposition 68 Update, Round 2, Key action dates:

· Concept Proposal:January 4 – February 26, 2021

· Final Application:May 31, 2021

· Board Review/Approval: July, September, November 2021

San Diego River Conservancy’s Proposed Board Meetings for 2021:

oJanuary 14th oMarch 11th oMay 13th oJuly 8th oSeptember 9th oNovember 11th

STATE OF CALIFORNIA–THE NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCYGAVIN NEWSOM., Governor

(SAN DIEGO RIVER CONSERVANCY11769 Waterhill RoadLakeside, CA 92040 PHONE 619/390-0534 WWW.SDRC.CA.GOVjulia.richards@sdrc.ca.gov)

San Diego River Conservancy’s Draft Nepotism Policy

This is a negotiable issue and may be addressed in the Bargaining Agreement(s). Consult the Bargaining Agreement to determine if it is covered in an Agreement for the Bargaining Unit in question. If the issue is not addressed, San Diego River Conservancy’s policy applies as follows: It is the policy of the San Diego River Conservancy to recruit, hire and assign all employees on the basis of merit and fitness in accordance with civil service statutes, rules and regulations. Nepotism is expressly prohibited in the state workplace because it is antithetical to California’s merit based civil service.

Nepotism is defined as the practice of an employee using his or her influence or power to aid or hinder another in the employment setting because of a personal relationship. Personal relationships for this purpose include but are not limited to, association by blood, adoption, marriage and/or cohabitation. (Statewide Guidance on Nepotism Policies, PML 2015-014)

It is the responsibility of the supervisor or manager responsible for employment and placement of employees to determine, taking into consideration the specific needs and characteristics of the agency, whether or not the employment or placement of individuals with personal relationships into any of the above employment situations will have potentially harmful or adverse effects on: work production, safety and security, employee morale, or the fair and impartial supervision, treatment, and

evaluation of employees by supervisors in the agency.

It is the policy of this agency to avoid the employment of persons with close personal relationships into positions where nepotism could potentially occur. The intent of this policy is to eliminate the potential for nepotism to occur, not to prevent qualified personnel with close personal relationships from working within the Conservancy so long as the above conditions and problems do not exist.

Exceptions

If the supervisor or manager determines that the employment or placement of individuals with close personal relationships will not have any of the abovementioned effects, or if some extreme recruiting difficulty exists, exceptions to the Conservancy’s policy may be granted on a case-by-case basis by Executive Officer.

Draft of Policy to be considered Governing Board approval on September 10, 2020

Prescribed Burn Conducted at Cuyamaca Rancho State Park

By: Lisa Gonzales-Kramer, Environmental Scientist

The Colorado Desert District (CDD) in close coordination with CAL Fire, successfully conducted a joint-agency prescribed burn on approximately 126-acres on Middle Peak at Cuyamaca Rancho State Park on May 21st.

The goals of the prescribed burn were to reduce heavy fuels and to clear space to plant seedlings for the Cuyamaca Rancho State Park Reforestation Project. The Reforestation Project is an effort to restore the mixed conifer forest, at the headwaters of three San Diego County watersheds (the San Diego River, the Sweetwater River, the Tijuana River), which was destroyed in the 2003 Cedar Fire. Along with planting seedlings and restoring the forest habitat, reducing heavy fuels, a healthy forest management practice, decreases the possibility of extreme wildfire behavior and ensures that over time as the saplings grow taller and larger, they will be less vulnerable to accidental ignition.

Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic health and safety restrictions, CDD Staff had to find creative ways to remain a separate work force while participating with CAL Fire during ignitions operations, and social distancing guidelines were followed under the circumstances. Twenty-four hours after initial ignition, CAL Fire transferred full responsibility to the CDD Fire Management Team, led by Joint Incident Commander and long-time State Parks Burn Boss, Frank Padilla, Jr., for the patrol and mop up operations. The CDD team had additional help from State Parks Fire Management Teams from San Luis Obispo and Inland Empire Districts, as well as the Mountains Resource and Conservation Authority.

Heavy fuels on the interior of the site may continue to smolder for several weeks after the ignition event and fire management staff worked round the clock for seven days and nights, patrolling for smokes to ensure they were interior to the plot and posed no threat to the control lines. All fire management personnel gained experience with managing fire in a heavy fuels environment, with newer staff being paired with seasoned leaders, as is standard operating procedure. The CDD Fire Management Team will continue to monitor the site to ensure a safe and successful burn.

The burned plot will be planted with native tree seedlings and this site, along with over 1600 acres which have already been reforested, will provide important forest habitat, protect and enhance watershed function, and become unique sky Island forests again for future generations to enjoy.

Photos and Captions

A rising smoke plume is indication that ignition operations have begun on the morning of May 21st. In the foreground, a CAL Fire engine is positioned to assist with holding operations.

In a heavy fuels such as this, where there are many snags (standing dead trees) and downed logs, the fire will continue to burn for several weeks.

State Parks Fire Management staff patrol the site round-the-clock for seven days and nights. Colton Kegler, (Firefighter 1) listens to a briefing before beginning nighttime patrol.

Prescribed burn holding operations are supported by Madison Gilmartin (Firefighter 2) who uses a State Parks Type 6 engine to transport water to resupply a portable water tank near the site.

The goals of the prescribed burn were met as the fire has consumed most of the dead and downed wood and brush, providing open space and reducing the heavy fuels while leaving many of the oaks to survive and add to the diversity of the restored forest habitat.

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:11

SUBJECT:NEXT MEETING

The next scheduled Board Meeting will be held Thursday, November 12, 2020 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m.

State of California

San Diego River Conservancy

Meeting of September 10, 2020

ITEM:12

SUBJECT:ADJOURNMENT