RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT A M -SERVICE …...RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT A MULTI-SERVICE INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT 31242 Hilltop Boulevard • P.O. Box 2206 Running Springs,

RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT A MULTI-SERVICE INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT

31242 Hilltop Boulevard • P.O. Box 2206 Running Springs, CA 92382

WATER (909) 867-2766 • WASTEWATER COLLECTION (909) 867-7352 • WASTEWATER TREATMENT (909) 867-3689 • FIRE (909) 867-2630

TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATE POSTED: JULY 11, 2014 RE: REGULAR BOARD MEETING FROM: BOARD SECRETARY The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Running Springs Water District will be held on Wednesday, July 16, 2014, at the hour of 9:00 A.M. at the District Office located at 31242 Hilltop Boulevard, Running Springs, California. This agenda was posted prior to 5:00pm on July 11, 2014 at the Running Springs Water District Office and Website. The Board may take action on any item on the agenda, whether listed as an action item or as an information item. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to Joan C. Eaton, Board Secretary at (909) 867-2766 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Copies of documents provided to members of the Board for discussion in open session may be obtained from the District at the address indicated above.

AGENDA

1. Call Meeting to Order and Pledge of Allegiance 2. Recognize and Hear From Visitors/Public Comment 3. Approval of Consent Items – The following consent items are expected to be routine

and non-controversial and will be acted on at one time without discussion unless an item is withdrawn by a Board Member for questions or discussion. Any person wishing to speak on the consent agenda may do so by raising his/her hand and being recognized by the Board President.

A. Approval of Meeting Minutes for June 18, 2014 Regular Board Meeting Page 4 B. Consider Adopting Resolution No. 15-14, finding that certain properties located

in the District constitute a public nuisance and ordering notification to property owners and setting a public hearing Page 13

C. Consider Adopting Resolution No. 16-14, Amending and Adopting Local

Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Page 18

1

July 16, 2014 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Posted July 11, 2014

D. Receive and File the Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Annual Board and Employee Expense Report Page 24

4. Action Items – The following action items will be considered individually and each

require a motion by the Board of Directors for action.

A. Consider Appointing an Ad Hoc Committee to Examine the Renegotiation of the 1977 Wastewater Transportation, Treatment and Disposal Agreements with Arrowbear and CSA-79 Page 27 (Presenter: Ryan Gross, General Manager)

B. Consider Authoring Staff to Proceed with Advertising for Construction Bids for

the Ayers Acres Groundwater Well Infrastructure Project Page 29 (Presenter: Ryan Gross, General Manager)

C. Consider Approving the Purchase of Surplus County Property Page 31 (Presenter: Ryan Gross, General Manager)

D. Consider Voting to Elect a Representative to the California Special Districts Association Board of Directors Page 51 (Presenter: Ryan Gross, General Manager)

E. Consider Awarding Contract for Above Ground Fuel Storage Tank Upgrades to

Comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District Regulations (Presenter: Randy Bobroff, Water Division Supervisor) Page 58

F. Consider Approving Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use with the California

Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Page 61 (Presenter: Tony Grabow, Fire Chief)

G. Consider Adjustment to Legal Services Billing Rates

(Presenter: Ward Simmons, Legal Counsel) Page 65 5. Information Items – The following information items do not require any

action by the Board of Directors and are for informational purposes only.

A. State Board Proposed Emergency Water Conservation Regulations Page 67 6. Reports from Management

A. Water Division Report Page 92 (Presenter: Randy Bobroff, Water Division Supervisor)

B. Wastewater Treatment Division Report Page 96 (Presenter: Trevor Miller, Wastewater Treatment Division Supervisor)

2

July 16, 2014 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Posted July 11, 2014

C. Wastewater Collection Division Report Page 98

(Presenter: Isaiah Hall, Wastewater Collection Division Supervisor)

D. Fire Department Report Page 100 (Presenter: Tony Grabow, Fire Chief)

E. Administration Report Page 112 (Presenter: Joan Eaton, Administration Division Supervisor)

F. General Manager’s Report Page 114 (Presenter: Ryan Gross, General Manager)

7. Report from Engineer 8. Report from Legal Counsel

9. Board Member Meetings

10. Board Member Comments 11. Closed Session

A. Public Employee Performance Evaluation, Title: General Manager. Pursuant

to Government Code Section 54957 12. Open Session

A. The Board and/or Legal Counsel will report any action taken in closed

session. 13. Meeting Adjournment Upcoming Meetings: Regular Board Meeting, August 20, 2014 at 9:00 am

3

3. A.

RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT

M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVING MEETING MINUTES FOR THE JUNE

18, 2014 REGULAR BOARD MEETING RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Directors review and approve the attached meeting minutes. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION Approval of meeting minutes. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The attached draft meeting minutes are from the Regular Board Meeting that was held on June 18, 2014. FISCAL INFORMATION N/A ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Draft Meeting Minutes

4

MINUTES – JUNE 18, 2014 PAGE 1 OF 8

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA JUNE 18, 2014

The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Running Springs Water District was held on Wednesday, June 18, 2014 at the hour of 6:00 P.M. at the District office located at 31242 Hilltop Boulevard, Running Springs, California. The following Directors were present: Kenneth Ayers, President Everett “Ed” Brittain, Vice-President Mike Terry, Director Pamella Bennett, Director The following Director was absent: Henry Heredia, Director Also present were the following: Ryan Gross, General Manager Joan C. Eaton, Secretary/Treasurer/Administration Supervisor Tony Grabow, Fire Division, Chief Trevor Miller, Wastewater Treatment Plant Division Supervisor Randy Bobroff, Water Division Supervisor Ward Simmons, Attorney, Best, Best & Krieger Visitors Present: Connie Riach, President, Running Springs Chamber of Commerce Joan Moseley, Resident, Media Reporter Adolf Wetzstein, Resident Brian Twomey, Resident Richard Luczyski, Resident Karl Berger, Resident Mike Scullin, Resident Dennis Baker, Resident Anne Fernandez, Resident Roger Ellis, Resident Darryl Frisbie, Resident Craig Rasmussen, Resident MEETING MINUTES AGENDA ITEMS 1. Call Meeting to Order and Pledge of Allegiance

5


The meeting was called to order at 6:01 P.M. by President Ayers who also led the assembly in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

2. Recognize and Hear From Visitors/Public Comment

Visitor Connie Riach, Running Springs Chamber of Commerce Representative, reported on the proposed Eagle Scout project to plant five (5) Douglas Fir trees on the District Downtown property adjacent to the library that was discussed at the May 21, 2014 Regular Board Meeting. The Board authorized Manager Gross to provide a letter to the County of San Bernardino regarding the project, and the County responded saying they will be responsible for maintenance of the water system. The County expressed concern regarding liability of the project with Manager Gross stating the District requires an updated insurance certificate that includes language naming the Running Springs Water District as an additionally insured. Ms. Riach will take this requirement back to the Chamber of Commerce and provide the required certificate to the District.

3. Public Hearing and Consideration of Adopting Resolution No. 13-14, Establishing Water and Wastewater Rates, Fees and Charges for District Services and Adopting the Fiscal Year 2014/2015 District Budget

A. Open Public Hearing: The Public Hearing was opened at 6:05 P.M. by President Ayers

B. Staff Presentation: Manager Gross opened the Proposition 218 Public Hearing with a

power point presentation regarding the proposed water and wastewater rates, fees and charges for District services and for consideration of the Fiscal Year 2014/2015 District Budget. Manager Gross stated the proposed water and wastewater rate increases are due primarily to the loss of the non-operating revenue that will no longer be collected from the County of San Bernardino for the disposal of leachate from the Heap’s Peak landfill, to offset lower property tax allocations, funding for capital improvement projects, to fund deferred repair and replacement of aging infrastructure and for the development of additional local groundwater. Manager Gross stated the District recently completed an outside financial assessment that validated concerns regarding inadequate District reserves and he stated the proposed increases will minimize the use of designated reserves to fund expenses and will build reserves to target levels as outlined in the District Cash Reserve Policy. In reference to the District’s Cash Reserve Policy that was adopted last year, Manager Gross stated the goal is to reach the fund balance targets with a four-month reserve for water and wastewater operating expenses and a six-month reserve for fire and ambulance operating expenses. Manager Gross noted the current total District operating reserve balance has an approximate $1.2 million dollar shortfall based on the Cash Reserve Policy. Manager Gross also mentioned the importance of retaining highly skilled and qualified professional staff and he noted the District will be preparing for succession planning with approximately 40% of full time staff expected to retire within the next five (5) years.

6


In reference to the District Fiscal Year 2014/2015 Budget, Manager Gross said the goal was to hold the expenses to no more than a 3% increase with the District achieving the goal with an overall 0.7% budget increase. Manager Gross then reported on the Ambulance Division that is operating in the negative with no anticipated revenue increase expected. The Running Springs Fire Department relies solely on property taxes for revenue and Manager Gross reported on the issue of financially sustaining the Fire Department after operating in the negative for the previous five years. Manager Gross explained that the District consists of four Divisions being Water, Wastewater and Ambulance which are enterprise funds and the Fire Department that is the governmental activities all governed by the Board of Directors. The annual $65 Fire Suppression fee was adopted by Ordinance No. 9 on March 11, 1980 and if adjusted for inflation, the fee would be $158 in year 2014. The Board of Directors has directed staff to proceed with obtaining the necessary information to place a measure on the ballot for the voters to consider increasing the Fire Availability Fee to $158 per year in 2015 with an annual inflationary increase as suggested in the District’s 2010 Financial Master Plan that requires a ballot measure with a 2/3 voter approval. Mr. Luczyksi had questions regarding voter privileges and it was recommended that questions from the visitors are related to the topics being discussed. With the Fire Availability Fee increase, the Fire Department would begin to see a positive net income beginning in Fiscal Year 2014/2015 and the District would be able to maintain local control of the Department. It was noted that the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) Fire Prevention Fee imposed on mountain residents is not related to the Running Springs Fire Department. Chief Grabow also confirmed that a Cal Fire engine is stationed at the Running Springs Fire Department providing service to the Running Springs community and he said his department does not receive any revenue for the service. Manager Gross then reported on the proposed rate adjustments for Fiscal Year 2014/2015 to Fiscal Year 2018/2019 and he noted the proposed increase for Fiscal Year 2014/2015 of $7.73 per month for water service and $5.86 per month for sewer service and a 5% per year increase for Fiscal Years 2015/2016 to Fiscal Year 2018/2019 for water and 7% per year for Fiscal Years 2015/2016 to Fiscal Year 2018/2019 for sewer service. Discussion continued regarding the proposed rate increases that include monthly loan repayments to complete the Ayers Acres groundwater well projects and to fund improvement projects for Sewer Lift Stations infrastructure that is approximately forty (40) years old and in need of repair. The proposed loan repayments that are included in the rate increases will be the responsibility of the customers and discussion also included optional one-time loan payment options with Director Brittain explaining the necessity of upgrading the District’s aging infrastructure and the potential liability in the event of a failure. Manager Gross reiterated that the Board and District staff has reviewed all rate and fee increase options for the last six months and the five-year plan is the result of their extensive collaboration and research. In regards to the County of San Bernardino (County) leachate contract, Manager Gross confirmed that the District has received over $1,000,000 (one million dollars) in revenue over the last ten years from the County for leachate disposal. Visitor Moseley added that

7


the County leachate contract was never permanent with Manager Gross stating it is non-operating revenue. Manager Gross also provided the Board and visitors with the Mountain Area Water Rates Comparison chart for Fiscal Year 2013/2014 noting that Running Springs Water District falls in the middle of the chart. Manager Gross stated that the combined projected water and sewer rate impacts for an average use customer would be approximately $13.59 per month and the total residential water/sewer bill for an average use customer would be approximately $111.42 per month. President Ayers pointed out that the Running Springs Water District rates in the comparison chart include the proposed Fiscal Year 2014/2015 increase but the comparison chart does not include the anticipated rate increases for the other Mountain Districts. Manager Gross then reported on infrastructure repair and replacement projects and said the majority of the projects were identified in the 2010 Water and Sewer Master Plan and have been deferred. He also summarized the Construction in Progress Plans and Energy Efficiency Measures for each Division before conclusion of his presentation.

C. Written Public Comment: Supervisor Eaton confirmed there were five (5) written

Protest Letters received.

D. Oral Public Comment: President Ayers opened the forum to comments from the public with visitor Anne Fernandez stating that she understands the need for rates increases, but would like to see the initial increase at a lower percentage. Visitor Mike Scullin asked about operating expenses at the Wastewater Treatment Plant with Manager Gross saying he expects to hold the operating expenses to no more than 3%. Manager Gross continued by saying the District is currently researching energy efficient plans and he confirmed the current Wastewater Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) loan will be paid off in 2017 with the Board deciding then if the loan repayment fee of $3.00 per month per customer will roll into the monthly fixed sewer charge or be eliminated. Mr. Scullin also asked if the District has considered the future CalPERS Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requirements for unfunded liability with Manager Gross responding that the District has factored in everything known to date. Discussion turned to the Residential Sewer Usage Charge fee and loan payment options for future improvement projects with visitor Frisbee suggesting that the District consider allowing customers to pay a lump sum per improved parcel instead of obtaining a loan for future capital projects. Manager Gross commented again on the District Fire Department saying the Board of Directors could lose local control if the County of San Bernardino or Cal Fire ran the Running Springs Fire Department and concerns were expressed regarding loss of the local fire and ambulance service in our community. President Ayers added that the District cannot continue to work with forty (40) year old equipment and Manager Gross reported on the new Wastewater Treatment Plant Screw Press and said that with the new equipment, the District can expect to save approximately $60,000 per year. Manager Gross continued by stating that the District eliminated two (2) Superintendent positions and are constantly looking at ways to save money. Ms. Fernandez asked if the proposed rates and fees five-year plan is final with President Ayers responding that the plan can be changed at anytime, however the District has studied this information for a

8


long period of time and may have made a mistake by not increasing rates sooner. Discussion continued and Vice-President Brittain invited everyone in the community to attend the District Board Meetings that are held on the third Wednesday of each month, to obtain a better understanding of the District. Discussion turned to water conservation with Vice-President Brittain stating we are currently in a drought and he commented on District wells that produce about 50% of the water provided to our customers with 50% of District water purchased from the Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency (CLAWA). Discussion continued that included concerns regarding escalating costs to maintain the District in addition to the drought situation across the state and country.

E. Board Discussion/Comments: No further comments were made

F. Close Public Hearing: President Ayers closed the Public Hearing at 7:49 P.M.

4. Public Hearing and Consideration of Adopting Resolution No. 13-14, Establishing

Water and Wastewater Connection Fees and Capacity Charges A. Open Public Hearing: President Ayers opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 P.M.

B. Staff Presentation: Manager Gross stated this Public Hearing was in regards to the

Water and Wastewater Connection Fees and Capacity Charges for new connections.

C. Written Public Comments: No written comments were received.

D. Oral Public Comments: Discussion included the proposed increase in the Water and Wastewater Service Connection Fee based on the 1.2% Consumer Price Index (CPI) and restricted growth in the Running Springs District due to limited vacant property available for development and property owners that are hesitant to rebuild after recent mountain fires.

E. Board Discussion/Comments: Director Brittain reported and commented on the

connection fees and charges stating the infrastructure must be maintained, repaired and replaced at all costs.

F. Close Public Hearing: President Ayers closed the Public Hearing at 7:58 P.M.

5. Action Items A. Consider Adopting Resolution No. 13-14, Establishing Water and Wastewater

Rates, Fees and Charges for District Services, Connection Fees and Capacity Charges and Adopting the Fiscal Year 2014/2015 District Budget

Manager Gross recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No. 13-14 regarding charges for the 2014/2015 Fiscal Year and District Budget. President Ayers suggested a

9


change to the paragraph related to photocopying service by eliminating the word “outside” regarding charges for governmental agencies. Upon motion by Director Terry, second by Vice-President Brittain and carried by a 4 to 0 vote, RESOLUTION NO. 13-14, ESTABLISHING WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR DISTRICT SERVICES, CONNECTION FEES AND CAPACITY CHARGES AND ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2014/2015 DISTRICT BUDGET, was adopted. (Resolution No. 13-14 on file in the District office)

B. Consider Authorizing Staff to Proceed with the Nob Hill Hydro Tank Replacement

Project Supervisor Bobroff reported on the Nob Hill Hydro Tank that was installed in 1964 and provides pressure to customers within close proximity of the tank. Supervisor Bobroff stated the tank has exceeded its life expectancy with inspections indicating small leaks beyond repair. The District purchased an emergency replacement tank in 2004 that has been in storage for ten years and he recommended that it now be installed with the project expected to take four to five weeks to complete. Documentation was provided detailing the estimated cost of $6,300 to install the new tank, utilizing funds from the Water Facility Capacity Charge Reserve Fund, which has a balance of $60,287. Upon motion by Director Bennett, second by Director Terry and carried by a 4 to 0 vote, Authorization to Proceed with the Nob Hill Hydro Tank Replacement Project, utilizing funds from the Water Facility Capacity Charge Reserve Fund, was approved.

C. Consider Authorizing Purchase of Pumps for Sewer Lift Station No. 7 Manager Gross reported on Sewer Lift Station No. 7 that is currently operating on one backup pump installed from the Collections Building and the other pump that is close to failure and stated it is staff’s recommendation to purchase two replacement shredder pumps in the total amount of $9,500 from Evans Hydro. Upon motion by Vice-President Brittain, second by President Ayers and carried by a 4 to 0 vote, Authorizing the Purchase of Pumps for Sewer Lift Station No. 7, utilizing funds from the Wastewater Capital Improvement Reserve Fund, was approved.

D. Consider Appointing an Ad Hoc Committee to Examine the Renegotiation of the

1977 Wastewater Transportation, Treatment and Disposal Agreements with Arrowbear and CSA-79

This item was tabled to the July 16, 2014 Board Meeting.

Recess

The Board took a break at 8:14 P.M. and reconvened at 8:20 P.M.

10


6. Approval of Consent Items The following consent items were listed for approval:

A. Approval of Meeting Minutes for May 21, 2014 Regular Board Meeting

B. Ratify May 2014 Expenditures and Cash Summary C. Consider Approval and Adoption of Resolution No. 14-14, Establishing

Appropriations Limits for Fiscal Year 2014/2015 Upon motion by President Ayers, second by Director Terry and carried by a 4 to 0 vote, the consent items were approved.

7. Information Items A. Consumer Confidence Report for 2013

The Board acknowledged District staff for preparation of the CCR reports. 8. General Managers Report

Manager Gross asked the Board to take note of the pre-audit letter from Van Lant and Fankhanel, LLP, Certified Public Accounts. Manager Gross also stated that Fire Chief Tony Grabow has announced his retirement from the District Fire Department on September 1, 2014.

9. Report From Engineer

No Report Available

10. Report From Legal Counsel No further information to report from Legal Counsel

11. Board Member Meetings President Ayers reported on the June Special Districts Meeting saying the program regarding the current water supply issue was excellent. President Ayers also said the District will get through this year with the state supplied water and if there is no moisture this winter, the District will receive further directive from Sacramento.

12. Board Member Comments

11


President Ayers thanked Manager Gross for his presentation regarding the Public Hearing.

13. Meeting Adjournment The meeting was adjourned by President Ayers at 8:27 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, _____________________________________ ____________________________________ President, Board of Directors Secretary of the Board of Directors Running Springs Water District Running Springs Water District

12

3. B.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Tony Grabow, Fire Chief Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 15-14, FINDING THAT

CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE DISTRICT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING NOTIFICATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION Consider adoption of Resolution No. 15-14, finding that certain properties located in the District constitute a public nuisance and ordering notification to property owners and setting a public hearing. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION This is the next step for the current year in the Running Springs Fire Department’s annual hazard abatement program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On June 20, 2012 the Running Springs Water District (District) Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 38, amending Ordinance No. 37 and establishing procedures and fees for providing notice to abate weeds and fire hazard waste upon real property. Ordinance No. 36 was adopted on March 16, 2011, adopting procedures for abatement of hazardous weed and/or waste. Running Springs Fire Department staff has inspected the properties listed in Exhibit A of Resolution 15-14 and found that those properties at the time of inspection materially hamper or interfere with the prevention or suppression of fire upon the property or adjacent properties or endanger the public safety by creating a fire hazard and therefore constitute a public nuisance. The proposed resolution would: (1) declare that the properties listed in Exhibit A constitute a public nuisance; (2) direct the Fire Chief or his authorized representative to provide notice to the owners of the properties of a public hearing to be conducted on

13

3. B.

August 20, 2014 at 9:00am and; (3) that the Board of Directors shall hear and consider all objections or protests to the proposed removal of weeds and/or waste. FISCAL INFORMATION N/A ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Resolution 15-14

14

RESOLUTION NO. 15-14

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT FINDING THAT CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE DISTRICT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING NOTIFICATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING

WHEREAS, pursuant to Water Code section 31120, Running Springs Water District may

exercise any of the powers, functions, and duties which are vested in, or imposed upon, a fire protection district pursuant to the Fire Protection District Law of 1987; and

WHEREAS, Running Springs Water District is authorized, pursuant to Water Code section

31120 and Health and Safety Code section 13879, to abate hazardous weeds and waste pursuant to the procedures set forth in Health and Safety Code section 14875 et. seq.; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the procedures set forth in Health and Safety Code section 14875

et. seq. and Ordinance Nos. 36, 37 and 38, the Board of Directors of the Running Springs Water District may declare weeds growing upon streets, sidewalks, or private property a public nuisance that may be abated pursuant to the provisions therein; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Inspector of the Running Springs Water District or his or her authorized representative inspected the properties described in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and found that those properties materially hamper or interfere with the prevention or suppression of fire upon the property or adjacent properties or endanger the public safety by creating a fire hazard, and therefore constitute a public nuisance; and

WHEREAS, the Fire Inspector or his or her authorized representative has asked the Board of Directors to find and determine that said weeds and/or waste matter constitute a public nuisance and the Board desires to declare, by resolution, that said weeds constitute a public nuisance pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 14875 et seq. and Ordinance Nos. 36, 37 and 38; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to authorize the Fire Inspector or his or her

authorized representative to provide notice to the owners of the properties described in Exhibit “A” of a public hearing to be conducted on August 20, 2014 at 9:00 am, pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 14890 et seq. and Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of Ordinance Nos. 36, 37 and 38; and

WHEREAS, at the public hearing, the Board of Directors intends to hear any or all objections or protests, if any, to the proposed removal of weeds;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Running Springs Water District as follows:

Section 1. All of the recitals set forth above are true.

Section 2. The Board of Directors has determined and hereby declares that the

15

properties described in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, located within the Running Springs Water District’s boundaries contain weeds and/or waste that constitute a public nuisance pursuant to the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 14875 et seq.

Section 3. The Board of Directors directs the Fire Inspector or his authorized

representative to provide notice to the owners of the properties described in Exhibit “A” of a public hearing to be conducted on August 20, 2014 at 9:00 am at which time the Board of Directors shall consider all objections or protests to the proposed removal of weeds. Notice shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 14890 et seq. and Sections 2.5 and 2.6 of Ordinance Nos. 36, 37 and 38.

Section 4. The Board of Directors further directs that at the time of the public hearing,

the Board of Directors shall hear and consider all objections or protests, if any, to the proposed removal of weeds and/or waste, and may continue the hearing from time to time. Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the Board of Directors shall allow or overrule any or all objections, whereupon the Board of Directors shall acquire jurisdiction to proceed and perform the work of removing the public nuisance, and the decision of the Board of Directors shall be final, except as provided in Health and Safety Code sections 14920 and 14921.

ADOPTED this 16th day of July, 2014.

Ayes: Noes: Abstentions: Absent:

________________________________ President of the Board of Directors

ATTEST: ______________________________ Board Secretary

16

EXHIBIT “A” LIST OF PROPERTIES

BOOK 295

Ref. No. PARCEL NUMBER STREET ADDRESS 1 0295-053-45 31648 Hilltop Blvd. 2 0295-214-19 32144 Cove Cr. 3 0295-282-08 2541 Catalina

BOOK 328 Ref. No. PARCEL NUMBER STREET ADDRESS

4 0328-232-26 31095 All View

17

3. C.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 16-14, AMENDING

AND ADOPTING LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 16-14, amending and adopting local guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION The Running Springs Water District (District) must revise its local guidelines for implementing CEQA to make them consistent with the State of California’s revised provisions and updated interpretations of CEQA. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), as contained in Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq., is California's most comprehensive environmental law. It requires all public agencies within the state to evaluate the environmental effects of their actions. CEQA also aims to prevent significant environmental effects from occurring as a result of agency actions by requiring agencies to avoid or reduce, when feasible, the significant environmental impacts of their decisions. To this end, CEQA requires all public agencies to adopt specific objectives, criteria and procedures for evaluating public and private projects that are undertaken or approved by such agencies. The Running Springs Water District has prepared a proposed updated set of Local CEQA Guidelines for 2014 in compliance with CEQA's requirements. These Guidelines reflect recent changes in the Public Resources Code, the State CEQA Guidelines and relevant court opinions. Notably, sections of the State CEQA Guidelines were revised in response to Assembly Bills 417, and Senate Bills 743 and 788. The legislation also amended several sections of the CEQA statutes, adding to the Public Resources Code, sections 21080.20, 21099, 21155.4 and 21168.6.6, and amending Public Resources Code sections

18

RGross

Typewritten Text

3. C.

21080, 21080.5, 21080.20.5, 21080.37, and 21084. These Local CEQA Guidelines also provide instructions and forms for preparing all environmental documents required under CEQA. FISCAL INFORMATION No fiscal impact is anticipated from amending the Local CEQA Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 16-14 Attachment 2 – BB&K Memo Summary of Changes to Local CEQA Guidelines Attachment 3 – 2014 Local Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (Provided under

separate cover and available for public inspection at the District office)

19

RESOLUTION NO. 16-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT AMENDING AND ADOPTING LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (PUB. RESOURCES CODE §§ 21000 ET SEQ.)

WHEREAS, the California Legislature has amended the California Environmental Quality Act

(“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.), the Natural Resources Agency has amended

portions of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, §§ 15000 et seq.), and the California

courts have interpreted specific provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and

WHEREAS, Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code requires all public agencies to adopt

objectives, criteria and procedures for the evaluation of public and private projects undertaken or

approved by such public agencies, and the preparation, if required, of environmental impact reports

and negative declarations in connection with that evaluation; and

WHEREAS, the Running Springs Water District (“District”) must revise its local guidelines

for implementing CEQA to make them consistent with the current provisions and interpretations of

CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Running Springs Water District hereby resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. The District hereby adopts the “Local Guidelines for Implementing the

California Environmental Quality Act (2014 Revision),” a copy of which is on file at the offices of the

District and is available for inspection by the public.

SECTION 2. All prior actions of the District enacting earlier guidelines are hereby repealed.

ADOPTED this 16th day of July, 2014. Ayes: Noes: Abstentions: Absent:

__________________________________ President of the Board of Directors Running Springs Water District

ATTEST: _______________________________ Secretary Running Springs Water District

20

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

- 1 -93939.00005\8688349.1

Memorandum

TO: Public Agency Clients (District)

FROM: Best Best & Krieger LLP

DATE: March 26, 2014

RE: 2014 Summary of Changes to Local CEQA Guidelines

Important changes in the law have been incorporated into the 2014 Update to your LocalGuidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (“Local Guidelines”).For easy reproduction and access to these Local Guidelines, as well as the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) forms your District will need, and other important legalalerts, please access BBK’s CEQA client portal at www.bbklaw.net/CEQA. For technicalsupport please contact Gar House at [email protected].

Public agencies are required to adopt implementing procedures for administering theirresponsibilities under CEQA. These procedures include provisions governing how the Districtwill process environmental documents and provide for adequate comment, time periods forreview, and lists of permits that are ministerial actions and projects that are consideredcategorically exempt. District procedures should be updated within 120 days after the StateCEQA Guidelines are revised.

This memorandum summarizes the substantive amendments to your Local Guidelinesmade in response to regulations, legislation and legal cases that changed or impacted certainaspects of CEQA between January 2013 and February 2014. Your Local Guidelines and thismemorandum are designed to assist in assessing the environmental implications of a project priorto its approval, as mandated by CEQA. We still recommend, however, that you consult with anattorney when you have specific questions on major, controversial or unusual projects oractivities.

Revisions to Local CEQA Guidelines.

1. SECTION 3.08 EMERGENCY PROJECTS

Pursuant to SB 788, Public Resources Code section 21080, which describes the type ofemergency projects, has been amended to add a definition for “highway.” This definition hasbeen incorporated into Section 3.08 and added to Section 10.25 of the Local Guidelines.

2. SECTION 3.18 EXEMPTIONS FOR INFILL PROJECTS IN TRANSIT PRIORITY

AREAS

This section was added in response to SB 743, which adds sections 21099 and 21155.4 tothe Public Resources Code. The newly added Public Resources Code section 21099 exempts aresidential, mixed use residential, or employment center project located within a transit priorityarea from the requirements of CEQA if certain criteria are met. A definition for “transit priorityarea” is provided in Section 10.72 of the Local Guidelines.

21

http://www.bbklaw.net/CEQA

mailto:[email protected]

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

- 2 -93939.00005\8688349.1

These projects are exempt if they are consistent with the policies of an applicable specificplan, and also with a general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policiesspecified for the project are in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternativeplanning strategy adopted by a metropolitan planning organization.

Further environmental review shall be required only if the events specified in PublicResources Code section 21166 are present.

3. SECTION 3.19 OTHER SPECIFIC EXEMPTIONS

This section was amended in response to AB 417, which amends sections 21080.20 and21080.20.5 of the Public Resources Code. This amendment pertains to an exemption for abicycle transportation plan for an urban area. For a bicycle transportation plan to be exempt, thelead agency must hold noticed public hearings in areas affected by the bicycle transportation planto hear and respond to public comment. Publication of the notice must comply with GovernmentCode section 6061 and occur in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by theproposed project. The lead agency must also prepare an assessment of any traffic and safetyimpacts of the project and include measures in the bicycle transportation plan to mitigatepotential vehicular traffic, and bicycle and pedestrian safety impacts.

4. SECTION 7.05 ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

This section has been amended in response to SB 743 and provides for a prevailing rate atper diem wages for the type of work and geographic areas for all construction workers employedin the execution of an Environmental Leadership Project.

Additionally, the certified administrative record for such projects must be made availablein an electronic format. Within 10 days of the Governor certifying an Environmental LeadershipDevelopment Project, the lead agency shall, at the applicant’s expense, issue a public notice. SeePublic Resources Code section 21187 for the language to be used in the public notice.

5. SECTION 7.25 PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT EIR

This section of the Local Guidelines was amended to include a public hearing for theadoption of a bicycle transportation plan, as explained in Local Guidelines Section 3.19, and forcertain other actions involving the replacement or deletion of mitigation measures under StateCEQA Guidelines section 15074.1.

6. SECTION 10 DEFINITIONS

A. Section 10.25 “Highway”

The definition of “Highway” for the purpose of emergency projects has been addedpursuant to SB 788.

B. Section 10.27. “Infill Site”

The definition of “Infill Site” has been amended pursuant to SB 743 to include sites

22

- 3 -93939.00005\8688349.1

where at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site “adjoins, or is separated only by animproved public right-of-way from, parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses.”

C. Section 10.72. “Transit Priority Area”

The definition of a “Transit Priority Area” has been added to the Local Guidelines inresponse to SB 743 regarding the exemption from CEQA of certain infill projects in transitpriority areas. See Section 3.18 of the Local Guidelines.

Other Changes.

Department of Fish and Wildlife. Effective January 1, 2014, the Department of Fishand Wildlife has increased its fees. For a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated NegativeDeclaration, the new filing fee is $2,181.25. For an Environmental Impact Report, the new filingfee is $3,029.75. For an environmental document pursuant to a Certified Regulatory Program,the new filing fee is $1,030.25.

Conclusion.

As always, CEQA remains complicated and, at times, challenging to apply. The onlyconstant in this area of law is how quickly the rules change. Should you have questions aboutany of the provisions discussed above, or about the environmental review of any of your city’sprojects, please contact a BB&K attorney for assistance.

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

23

3. D.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER RECEIVING AND FILING THE FISCAL YEAR

ENDING 2014 ANNUAL BOARD AND EMPLOYEE EXPENSE REPORT

RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the Fiscal Year 2013/2014 Annual Board and Employee Expense Report. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION Per Government Code Section 53065.5, the District is legally required to annually disclose any reimbursements paid in the preceding fiscal year that are at least one hundred dollars for each individual charge for services or product received. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Per Government Code Section 53065.5 each special district, as defined by subdivision (a) of Section 56036, shall, at least annually, disclose any reimbursement paid by the district within the immediately preceding fiscal year of at least one hundred dollars ($100) for each individual charge for services or product received. “Individual charge” includes, but is not limited to, one meal, lodging for one day, transportation or a registration fee paid to any employee or member of the governing body of the district. The disclosure requirement shall be fulfilled by including the reimbursement information in a document published or printed at least annually by a date determined by that district and shall be made available for public inspection. ATTACHMENTS Fiscal Year Ending 2014 Annual Board and Employee Expense Report

24

Employee Date Misc. Lodging Parking Meals Mileage Medical Boots Uniform TotalAberg, Rob 9/6/2013 110.00 110.00

Aberg, Rob 11/13/2013 184.99 184.99

Aberg, Rob 2/26/2014 117.73 117.73

Aberg, Rob 3/26/2014 125.00 125.00

Aberg, Rob 4/28/2014 194.72 194.72

Aberg, Rob 5/23/2014 140.00 140.00

Aberg, Rob 6/2/2014 446.79

Aberg, Rob 6/6/2014 6625.00 6625.00

Aberg, Rob 6/11/2014 35.00 485.00

Aberg, Rob 6/11/2014 200.00

Borrie, Joe 4/4/2014 103.38 103.38

Borrie, Joe 6/3/2014 150.47 150.47

Corley, George 9/6/2013 368.71 368.71

Corley, George 9/16/2013 649.00 649.00

Corley, George 10/17/2013 359.54 359.54

Corley, George 11/5/2013 341.53 341.53

Corley, George 1/13/2014 932.83 932.83

Corley, George 2/21/2014 363.05 363.05

Corley, George 3/13/2014 363.05 363.05

Corley, George 5/1/2014 804.05 804.05

Corley, George 6/10/2014 363.05 363.05

Davis, Matt 7/31/2013 208.52 208.52

Davis, Matt 6/13/2014 127.19 127.19

Eaton, Joan 7/5/2013 25.76 85.00 110.76

Eaton, Joan 7/25/2013 119.92 119.92

Eaton, Joan 8/14/2013 121.00 121.00

Eaton, Joan 10/29/2013 114.92 114.92

Eaton, Joan 1/6/2014 114.92 114.92

Eaton, Joan 1/21/2014 150.92 150.92

Eaton, Joan 1/30/2014 105.00 105.00

Eaton, Joan 2/26/2014 100.00 100.00

Eaton, Joan 4/4/2014 1333.82 1333.82

Eaton, Joan 4/30/2014 139.54 139.54

Eaton, Joan 5/13/2014 123.18 123.18

Ellsberry, Rick 7/5/2013 252.15 252.15

Ellsberry, Rick 7/25/2013 802.50 802.50

Ellsberry, Rick 9/11/2013 1743.54 1743.54

Ellsberry, Rick 10/3/2013 221.69 221.69

Ellsberry, Rick 10/29/2013 202.87 202.87

Ellsberry, Rick 11/22/2013 748.50 748.50

Ellsberry, Rick 11/26/2013 168.92 168.92

Ellsberry, Rick 12/20/2013 748.50 748.50

Ellsberry, Rick 4/4/2014 931.81 931.81

Grabow, Tony 8/6/2013 558.78 558.78

Grabow, Tony 9/23/2013 1126.56 1126.56

Grabow, Tony 11/4/2013 708.15 708.15

Grabow, Tony 12/6/2013 704.64 704.64

Grabow, Tony 12/20/2013 677.35 677.35

Grabow, Tony 1/21/2014 1014.80 1014.80

Grabow, Tony 2/26/2014 823.69 823.69

Grabow, Tony 3/21/2014 824.07 824.07

Grabow, Tony 3/26/2014 500.00 500.00

Grabow, Tony 4/25/2014 1040.50 1040.50

Grabow, Tony 5/23/2014 955.75 955.75

Grabow, Tony 6/5/2014 1675.31

Grabow, Tony 6/18/2014 638.92

Granzow, Zach 3/18/2014 419.00 419.00

Gross, Ryan 8/6/2013 140.00

Gross, Ryan 9/16/2013 439.68 439.68

Gross, Ryan 12/9/2013 80.00 41.78 186.45 308.23

Gross, Ryan 12/20/2013 152.00 152.00

Gross, Ryan 2/26/2013 15.75 10.00 82.88 108.63

Gross, Ryan 6/23/2014 113.68 113.68

Jenkins, Kent 7/5/2014 1740.99 1740.99

Jenkins, Kent 9/6/2013 193.65 193.65

Jenkins, Kent 10/10/2013 369.31 369.31

Jenkins, Kent 11/12/2013 138.99 138.99

Jenkins, Kent 1/6/2014 575.00 575.00

Jenkins, Kent 1/21/2014 355.02 355.02

Jenkins, Kent 3/18/2014 489.14 489.14

Jenkins, Kent 4/2/2014 173.37 173.37

Jenkins, Kent 4/9/2014 266.29 266.29

Jenkins, Kent 5/20/2014 231.00 231.00

Jenkins, Kent 6/16/2014 137.37 137.37

Jenkins, Kent 6/18/2014 116.54 116.54

Jenkins, Kent 6/26/2014 674.79 674.79

Loest, Dave 8/6/2013 260.00

Loest, Dave 12/3/2013 388.98 388.98

Running Springs Water District

Employee Expenses Reimbursed by the District

Expenses Incurred on Behalf of the District

Fiscal Year: July 1, 2013 ‐ June 30, 2014

Registration

FeesDescriptionMedical Reimbursement

Medical Reimbursement



140.00

260.00












Uniform Reimbursement







Conference Reimbursement


Conference Reimbursement

Medical Cert Reimbursement

Boot Reimbursement

446.79









Employee

Development





Seminar/Medical Reimbur










Mileage

Mileage




CSMFO Annual Conference


License Reimbursement

Training Reimbursement


ACWA Fall Conference





450.00

200.00






ACC License Fee Reimb









25

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

Employee Date Misc. Lodging Parking Meals Mileage Medical Boots Uniform TotalMayfield, Linda 7/5/2013 292.00 292.00

Mayfield, Linda 7/10/2013 250.00 250.00

Mayfield, Linda 11/19/2013 205.07 205.07

Mayfield, Linda 2/19/2014 576.00 576.00

Mayfield, Linda 4/21/2014 478.48 478.48

Mayfield, Linda 5/20/2014 250.00 250.00

Mayfield, Linda 5/20/2014 464.48 464.48

Miller, Trevor 7/5/2013 300.00 300.00

Miller, Trevor 8/9/2013 300.00 300.00

Miller, Trevor 9/16/2013 300.00 300.00

Miller, Trevor 10/10/2013 300.00 300.00

Miller, Trevor 11/19/2013 500.00 500.00

Miller, Trevor 2/21/2014 426.00 426.00

Miller, Trevor 4/21/2014 329.00 329.00

Miller, Trevor 6/17/2014 255.00 255.00

Nicassio, Toni 7/31/2013 6.15 23.50 112.00 141.65

Nicassio, Toni 12/12/2013 385.00 385.00

Nikas, Nick 3/21/2014 168.00

Nikas, Nick 5/13/2014 105.60 105.60

Nikas, Nick 6/11/2014 121.29 121.29

Papadakis, John 7/25/2013 242.96 242.96

Papadakis, John 2/26/2014 250.00 250.00

Scotti, Mike 7/19/2013 649.91 649.91

Scotti, Mike 8/23/2013 659.86 659.86

Scotti, Mike 9/6/2013 48.87 308.87

Scotti, Mike 9/11/2013 489.60 489.60

Scotti, Mike 10/8/2013 106.27 106.27

Scotti, Mike 10/10/2013 526.00 526.00

Scotti, Mike 11/12/2013 686.16 686.16

Scotti, Mike 12/3/2013 536.00 536.00

Scotti, Mike 1/21/2014 613.38 613.38

Scotti, Mike 2/11/2014 301.54 301.54

Scotti, Mike 2/21/2014 526.00 526.00

Scotti, Mike 5/28/2014 263.58 263.58

Scotti, Mike 5/28/2014 129.28 129.28

Strebel, Cindy 6/30/2014 500.00 500.00

Teter, Rich 6/17/2014 120.57

Viero, Richard 9/6/2013 483.20 483.20

Viero, Richard 9/11/2013 100.00 100.00

Viero, Richard 11/5/2013 512.30 512.30

Viero, Richard 1/28/2014 135.00 135.00

Viero, Richard 3/18/2014 387.88 387.88

Viero, Richard 4/16/2014 119.86 119.86

Willemse, Dixi 8/6/2013 184.49 184.49

Willemse, Dixi 8/13/2013 242.14 242.14

Willemse, Dixi 9/11/2013 126.63 18.00 108.57 200.85 454.05

Willemse, Dixi 10/8/2013 376.00 376.00

Willemse, Dixi 12/6/2013 723.17 723.17

Willemse, Dixi 1/6/2014 407.09 407.09

Willemse, Dixi 1/13/2014 301.00 301.00

Willemse, Dixi 2/19/2014 115.00 115.00

Willemse, Dixi 3/21/2014 374.44 374.44

Willemse, Dixi 4/2/2014 735.00 735.00

Willemse, Dixi 4/9/2014 301.00 301.00

Willemse, Dixi 4/15/2014 188.23 188.23

Willemse, Dixi 4/17/2014 1085.00 1085.00

Willemse, Dixi 6/26/2014 163.96 163.96

Winter, Dave 6/18/2014 161.29 161.29

$934.75 $126.63 $108.00 $82.93 $692.84 $54,658.54 $517.36 $2,720.05 $59,331.09



168.00

260.00



Expenses Incurred on Behalf of the District

Boot Reimbursement





Employee Registration

Description Development Fees


Boot Reimbursement




Boot Reimbursement


$1,924.79 $0.00Grand Total













Seminar / Medical Reimb






Gym Membership






Cert Renew/Medical Reimb



Seminar/Medical Reimb


Course Reimbursement











Gym Membership


Fiscal Year: July 1, 2013 ‐ June 30, 2014

Running Springs Water District

Employee Expenses Reimbursed by the District

26

4. A.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPOINTING AD HOC COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE

THE RENEGOTIATION OF THE 1977 WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL AGREEMENTS WITH ARROWBEAR AND CSA-79

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION Consider Appointing an Ad Hoc Committee to Examine the Renegotiation of the 1977 Wastewater Transportation, Treatment and Disposal Agreements with Arrowbear and CSA-79. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION Refer to attached letter. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The 1977 Wastewater Transportation, Treatment and Disposal Agreements with Arrowbear and CSA-79 expire on January 20, 2017 and May 9, 2017 respectively. The term of both agreements is forty (40) years commencing on the date the agreements were executed. Neither Arrowbear nor CSA-79 exercised their option to renew the agreements for an additional forty years prior to January 20, 2014 and May 9, 2014 respectively. Since these agreements are close to 40 years old they cannot be renewed on the same terms, but the District may be agreeable to extending the agreements upon terms that better fit today’s circumstances and that is what the Ad Hoc committee would be tasked with intiating. FISCAL INFORMATION None at this time. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Letter dated June 3, 2014 from CSA-79

27

28

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

4. B.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PROCEED WITH

ADVERTISING FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR THE AYERS ACRES GROUNDWATER WELL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION Consider authorizing staff to proceed with advertising for construction bids for the Ayers Acres Groundwater Well Infrastructure Project. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION The construction contract bid documents are complete and advertising for construction bids is the next phase in project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The construction bid documents (plans & specifications) for the project are complete and ready to advertise for bids. The CEQA environmental review was also completed in 2011 (Resolution 14-11). Drilling of the well was conducted in 2012 to a total depth of approximately 750 feet below ground surface (ft bgs). Lithologic logs at this location indicate a large fracture from 155 to 160 ft bgs and the well was constructed with perforations from 60 to 480 ft bgs. Pump testing of the groundwater well was conducted in the spring of 2013 and shows the well can sustain pumping rates as high has 180 gpm for up to 72 hours of continuous pumping. During the pump testing the well produced 180 gallons per minute (gpm) for a period of three days and 130 gpm for one additional day. The well subsequently recovered to its original static groundwater level. The maximum drawdown, at the end of the test, was 55 ft. Upon completion of pumping, the groundwater level recovered to within 2 ft of pre-pumping conditions in 27 days. The District’s hydro geologist evaluated this pump testing data and concluded that the fracture system that the well is drawing from is fairly extensive with some sizable storage capacity. The well also recovered fairly well although taking a bit of time which may be a result of limited recharge to the fracture system although the pump test was conducted in a year of below normal precipitation.

29

FISCAL INFORMATION The construction cost estimate for the project is $500,000 but experience has shown that with local contractor’s expertise in construction in the area the actual bids may be lower. This infrastructure will also be available to be utilized for transporting any future groundwater developed in the area into the District’s water distribution system. On May 21, 2014, the Board of Directors authorized staff to proceed with obtaining a 10 year 3.5% interest rate loan from the Municipal Finance Corporation in the amount of $400,000 which has been factored into the rate adjustments for fiscal year 2014/2015 and the loan payment is equivalent to approximately $1.88 per customer per month. The Board also authorized utilizing the balance of the Water Capacity Charge Reserve Fund (approximately $60,000) and a portion or $50,000 the Water Capital Improvement Reserve Fund for the project. The annualized cost per acre foot assuming the well will consistently produce 100 gpm is approximately $550 per acre foot. When compared to the cost of imported water from the Crestline Lake Arrowhead Water Agency (CLAWA) the payback period for the project is approximately 12 years. ATTACHMENTS Construction Contract Bid Documents to be made available at the July 16, 2014 Board meeting.

30

4. C.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF SURPLUS

PROPERTY FROM COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION Consider approving the purchase of surplus property from the County of San Bernardino and authorize the General Manager to execute the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement and Escrow Instructions. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION The Running Springs Water District has completed its due diligence and recommends proceeding with the acquisition of this property. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The County approached the District in April 2013 notifying us of the contemplated sale of surplus property adjacent to the Districts Sidewinder Canyon property. Since that time the District has been working with legal counsel to obtain and review the preliminary title reports and the draft purchase and sales agreement. The Phase 1 Environmental Assessment (ESA) is also complete has been reviewed by staff and legal counsel and no significant environmental issues were identified. The preliminary title reports and underlying documents have also been reviewed by staff and legal counsel and nothing out of the ordinary was identified. FISCAL INFORMATION The current estimated costs to acquire the property are as follows: Land $ 1 County Administrative Costs $4,850 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment $3,000 Preliminary Title Reports $1,000 Title Insurance (assuming $1,000,000 liability) $1,100 Total $9,951

31

If approved the property acquisition costs would be funded from the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Reserve Funds. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Purchase and Sales Agreement Attachment 2 – Preliminary Title Report (Copy available at the Board meeting) Attachment 3 – Phase 1 ESA (Copy available at the Board meeting)

32

1

PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS

This PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS (this “Agreement”) is dated as of ________________, 2014 (the “Execution Date”) and is entered into by and between the County of San Bernardino, a body corporate and politic of the State of California (“SELLER”) and the Running Springs Water District (“BUYER”).

RECITALS

A. The SELLER is the owner of the fee simple interest in that certain property

(APNs 0328-421-01 and 0328-091-89), one parcel consisting of approximately 3.29 acres and the other parcel consisting of approximately 6.49 acres located adjacent to the Buyer’s property, north of U.S. Highway 18 in the unincorporated area of Running Springs, as described and shown in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Seller’s Property”).

B. BUYER desires to acquire Seller’s Property because it will provide access to

Buyer’s adjacent property that contains existing sewer easements maintained by Buyer and will also provide access to existing and potential future groundwater production sites.

C. SELLER has determined that the Property is no longer necessary for the uses

and purposes of the County of San Bernardino, and is authorized to sell the Property to BUYER in accordance with California Government Code Section 25526.5.

D. SELLER and BUYER agree that the purchase price will be $1.00 (One Dollar) for the Property plus BUYER agrees to pay SELLER’s administrative costs estimated to not exceed $4,850 (Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars) and BUYER agrees to purchase the Property “AS-IS”, except as specifically provided for in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, the mutual

covenants and obligations contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the SELLER and BUYER hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. Purchase and Sale of Property. Subject to all of the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement and for the consideration set forth below, SELLER hereby agrees to sell, grant and convey to BUYER and BUYER hereby agrees to acquire all of the right, title and interest of Seller in and to the Property. The Property will be conveyed to BUYER when the Purchase Price is paid in full in accordance with this Agreement. Section 3. Consideration. The total consideration to be paid by BUYER for the acquisition of the Property shall be One and 00/100 Dollar ($1.00) (the “Purchase Price”).

33

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

2

Section 4. BUYER’s Option of Opening of Escrow.

(a) All expenses incurred in the transfer of title, including but not limited to escrow, title policy (if requested by BUYER), documentary stamps and recording fees are to be paid by BUYER.

(b) If the sale of the Property takes place through an Escrow Company (the “Escrow”), such Escrow shall be administered by Golden State Escrow Company, Kelly Saxton, Escrow Officer, 1421-1 East Cooley Drive, Colton, CA 92324 (“Escrow Holder”). The Escrow for the Property shall be deemed open (“Opening of Escrow”) upon the receipt by the Escrow Holder of a copy of this Agreement executed by SELLER and BUYER. SELLER and BUYER shall open escrow within seven (7) days after approval of this Agreement by the SELLER’s Board of Supervisors.

(c) If this Agreement or Escrow is terminated by SELLER for any reason except the BUYER’s default, SELLER shall be solely responsible to the Escrow Holder for payment of all customary and reasonable escrow cancellation charges to the Escrow Holder without further or separate instruction to the Escrow Holder, and the parties shall each be relieved and discharged from all further responsibility or liability under this Agreement. If this Agreement or Escrow is terminated due to BUYER’s default, then BUYER shall be solely responsible for the payment of the escrow cancellation costs of the Escrow Holder without further or separate instruction, and the parties shall each be relieved and discharged from all further responsibility or liability under this Agreement. Section 5. Close of Escrow. As used herein, “Close of Escrow” means and refers to the date on which the conditions set forth in this Agreement for the close of Escrow for the transfer of the Property have been satisfied, and the Deeds are recorded by the Escrow Holder. The Property shall be transferred to BUYER at the Close of Escrow, provided that within the periods of time set forth in this Agreement: (i) BUYER has not terminated this Agreement, (ii) BUYER has accepted the Deeds, and (iii) all other conditions of the Close of Escrow set forth in this Agreement have been met and BUYER has paid, or caused to be paid to the Escrow Holder all applicable escrow costs relating to such closing. The Close of Escrow shall occur on a date designated by BUYER (on advance notice to SELLER) no later than ___________2014. Section 6. Escrow Instructions. SELLER and BUYER each agree to execute and deliver to the Escrow Holder the customary supplemental written escrow instructions (consistent with the terms of this Agreement) of the Escrow Holder. In the event of a conflict between the additional terms of such customary supplemental escrow instructions of the Escrow Holder and the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall supersede and be controlling. Upon any termination of this Agreement or cancellation of the Escrow, except as results from the default of SELLER, BUYER shall be solely responsible for the payment of the escrow cancellation costs of the Escrow Holder. Section 7. Conveyance of Title.

(a) On or before the Close of Escrow, SELLER shall deliver to the Escrow Holder the Grant Deed, in form attached hereto as Exhibit “B” (the “Deed”) duly executed and acknowledged by SELLER. On or before the close of escrow BUYER shall deliver to escrow holder a deed acceptance executed by an authorized officer of BUYER. The

34

RGross

Typewritten Text

3

Escrow Holder shall be instructed to record the Deed in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, if and when the Escrow Holder holds the funds for the SELLER as set forth herein.

(b) Within five (5) days following the Opening of Escrow, BUYER may order a

current preliminary report from a title company of BUYER’s choice (the “Title Company”) covering the Property, together with full and legible copies of all supporting documents (collectively, “Preliminary Report”), and may further order a survey of the Property from a licensed surveyor sufficient to obtain an ALTA title insurance policy (“Survey”). The Title Company shall issue an ALTA Owner’s policy (“Title Policy”) at the Close of Escrow insuring fee title in BUYER, subject only to the following matters:

(1) a lien for real property taxes, bond, or assessments not then delinquent; (2) matters of the Property’s title not disapproved by BUYER in writing; (3) all matters that affect title to the Property that would be revealed by an

accurate and complete survey of the Property as of the end of the Inspection Period; (4) dedication of all streets abutting the Property; (5) customary utility rights-of-way and easements that do not materially

interfere with the existing use of the Property; (6) zoning and other governmental restrictions; (7) matters common to any general area or subdivision in which the Property

is located; (8) matters affecting the condition of the Property’s title created by or with

the consent of the BUYER or BUYER’s officers, employees or agents. (9) such other title exceptions, if any, resulting from documents being

recorded or delivered through Escrow. Section 8. Inspections and Review.

(a) BUYER acknowledges and agrees that the Property is being conveyed in an "AS IS," “WHERE IS” condition and "WITH ALL FAULTS" as of the date of this Agreement and the date of Close of Escrow. Except as expressly set forth in this Agreement, no representations or warranties have been made or are made and no responsibility has been or is assumed by SELLER or by any officer, person, firm, agent or representative acting or purporting to act on behalf of SELLER as to the condition or repair of the Property or the value, expense of operation, or income potential thereof, or as to any other fact or condition which has or might affect the Property or the condition, repair, value, expense of operation or income potential of the Property or any portion thereof. BUYER further acknowledges and agrees that it has relied solely upon its own investigations of the Property and its own review of such information and documentation as it has deemed appropriate and is satisfied with the opportunity afforded for investigation. BUYER is not relying upon any statement or representation by SELLER or by any officer, person, firm, agent or representative acting or purporting to act on behalf of SELLER unless such statement or representation is specifically embodied in this Agreement or the Exhibits attached hereto. Except as expressly set forth herein, SELLER makes no representations or warranties as to whether the Property contains

35

4

any Hazardous Materials or pertaining to the extent, location or nature of the same. Further, to the extent that SELLER has provided to BUYER information from any inspection, engineering or environmental reports concerning any Hazardous Materials, SELLER makes no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy, completeness, methodology of preparation or otherwise concerning the contents of such reports.

(b) BUYER, on behalf of itself and its successors, waives and releases SELLER and its successors and assigns from any and all costs or expenses whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and costs), whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, arising from or relating to any of the following matters and conditions relating to the Property which exist as of the date of the Close of Escrow, the physical condition of the Property or any above ground or underground improvements thereon, the condition of the soils, the suitability of the soils for the improvement of any proposed project, or any law or regulation applicable thereto.

(c) BUYER expressly waives any rights or benefits available to it with respect to the foregoing release under any provision of applicable law which generally provides that a general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time the release is agreed to, which, if known to such creditor, would materially affect a settlement. By execution of this Agreement, BUYER acknowledges that it fully understands the foregoing, and with this understanding, nonetheless elects to and does assume all risk for claims known or unknown, described in this Section 8 without limiting the generality of the foregoing: The undersigned acknowledges that it has been advised by legal counsel and is familiar with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1542, which provides as follows:

“A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, MUST HAVE MATERIALLY, AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.” The undersigned, being aware of this Code section, hereby expressly waives any rights it may have thereunder, as well as under any other statutes or Common law principles of similar effect. Initials of BUYER: ________

(d) The provisions of this Section 8 shall survive the Close of Escrow, and

shall be binding upon BUYER.

(e) SELLER shall assist and cooperate with BUYER in endeavoring to remove title exceptions unacceptable to BUYER, but SELLER shall have no obligation to cause such objections to be removed or to expend any sums in such endeavor, except that SELLER shall remove all monetary liens and encumbrances created by or as a result of SELLER’s activities.

(f) SELLER covenants not to further encumber and not to place any further

liens or encumbrances on the Property, including, but not limited to, covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, liens, options to purchase, rights of first offer options to lease, leases, tenancies, or other possessory interests.

36

5

SELLER also covenants not to authorize others to take any action that adversely affects the physical condition of the Property or its soils to any material extent. Section 9. Closing Costs, Possession.

(a) BUYER shall pay the premium for any requested title policy, any ALTA extended coverage title policy, cost of the Survey and all requested ALTA survey policy endorsements, the cost of recording the Deed and any documentary or other transfer taxes payable on account of the conveyance of the Property to BUYER.

(b) BUYER shall pay 100% of the Escrow Holder’s charges and fees which

may be charged by the Escrow Holder in connection with the Close of Escrow. (c) BUYER shall be entitled to possession of the Property immediately upon

the Close of Escrow, if applicable, or when compliance with Sections 3 and 7 hereof have been fully complied with, whichever occurs first. Section 10. Representations and Warranties.

(a) SELLER hereby makes the following representations, covenants and warranties:

(1) Power and Authority. SELLER has the legal power, right and authority to enter into this Agreement and to execute the instruments and documents referenced herein, and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby.

(2) Requisite Action. SELLER has taken all requisite action and obtained all

requisite consents in connection with entering into this Agreement and the instruments and documents referenced herein and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and no consent of any other party is required.

(3) Enforceability of Agreement. The persons executing this Agreement and

any instrument or document referenced herein for or on behalf of SELLER have been duly authorized to so act on behalf of SELLER and this Agreement and any such instrument or document is valid and legally binding on SELLER and enforceable against SELLER in accordance with their respective terms.

(4) No Litigation. There is no pending or, to the best of SELLER’s

knowledge, threatened claims, action, allegations or lawsuit of any kind, whether for personal injury, property damage, property taxes, or otherwise, that could affect the Property.

(5) No Violation. Neither the execution of this Agreement or the other

instruments and documents referenced herein nor the performance by SELLER of its obligations hereunder and thereunder shall result in a breach or constitute a default under any agreement, document, instrument or other obligation to which SELLER is a party or by which SELLER may be bound or under law, statute, ordinance, rule, governmental regulation, state constitution, or any writ, injunction, order or decree of any court or governmental body applicable to SELLER.

(6) Operation and Condition Pending Closing. Between the date of this

Agreement and the Close of Escrow hereunder, SELLER will continue to manage,

37

6

operate and maintain the Property in the same manner as existed prior to the execution of this Agreement.

(7) Contracts. There are no contracts or agreements to which SELLER is a

party relating to the operation, maintenance, development, improvement or ownership of the Property which will survive the Close of Escrow. All representations and warranties contained in this Section 10(a) are true and correct on the date hereof and on the date of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow.

(b) Warranties and Representations by BUYER. BUYER hereby makes the following representations, covenants and warranties and acknowledges that the execution of this Agreement by SELLER has been made in material reliance by SELLER on such covenants, representations and warranties:

(1) BUYER has the legal right, power and authority to enter into this Agreement and the instruments and documents referenced herein and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby. The persons executing this Agreement and such other instruments as may be referenced herein on behalf of BUYER hereby represent and warrant that such persons have the power, right and authority to bind BUYER.

(2) BUYER has taken all requisite action and obtained all requisite consents

in connection with entering into this Agreement and the instruments and documents referenced herein and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and no consent of any other party is required.

(3) This Agreement is, and all instruments and documents to be executed by

BUYER pursuant to this Agreement shall be, duly executed by and are or shall be valid and legally binding upon BUYER and enforceable against BUYER in accordance with their respective terms.

(4) Neither the execution of this Agreement nor the consummation of the

transaction contemplated hereby shall result in a breach of or constitute a default under any other agreement, document, instrument or other obligation to which BUYER is a party or by which BUYER may be bound, or under law, statute, ordinance, rule governmental regulation or any writ, injunction, order or decree of any court or governmental body applicable to BUYER.

All representations and warranties contained in this Section 10(b) are true and correct on the date hereof and on the date of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow. Section 11. Conflict of Interest. No member, official or employee of either party having any conflict of interest, direct or indirect, related to this Agreement and the use and development of the Property shall participate in any decision relating to the Agreement. The parties represent and warrant that they do not have knowledge of any such conflict of interest. Section 12 Nonliability of Officials and Employees. No officer, official or employee of either party shall be personally liable to the other party, or any successor in interest of such other party, in the event of any default or breach or

38

7

for any amount which may become due hereunder, or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement.

Section 13. Indemnification. BUYER agrees to indemnify and hold SELLER and its officers, employees and agents harmless from and against all damages, judgments, costs, expenses and attorney’s fees arising from or related to any act or omission of BUYER in performing its investigations of the Property. SELLER shall give BUYER written notice of the occurrence of a claim, litigation or other matters for which SELLER seeks indemnity under this Section as promptly as practicable following SELLER’S knowledge of the occurrence of such matter and SELLER shall reasonably cooperate with BUYER in the defense of any such claim or matter and shall not take any action that would adversely affect BUYER’s defense of such matter. Section 14. Miscellaneous.

(a) This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and together shall constitute one and the same agreement, with one counterpart being delivered to each party hereto.

(b) All periods of time referred to in this Agreement shall include all

Saturdays, Sundays and state or national holidays, provided that if the date or last date to perform any act or give any notice with respect to this Agreement shall fall on a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or state or national holiday, such act or notice may be timely performed or given on the next succeeding day which is not a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or state or national holiday.

(c) The unenforceability, invalidity, or illegality of any provision of this

Agreement shall not render the other provisions hereof unenforceable, invalid or illegal. Section 15. Entire Agreement.

(a) This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire understanding and Agreement of the parties.

(b) This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned

herein or incidental hereto with respect to the Property. (c) The headings to the paragraphs of this Agreement are for convenience of

reference only, do not form a part of this Agreement and shall not in any way affect its interpretation. Section 16. Legislative Bodies’ Approval. This agreement is subject to, and will have no force or effect until and unless first approved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino and the Board of Directors of the Running Springs Water District.

39

8

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the dates set forth below. BUYER: RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT By: ____________________________ Date: _____________________ Ryan Gross, General Manager Attest: ________________________ Date: ______________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ SELLER: COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO By: __________________________________ Date: ____________________ Janice Rutherford, Chair, Board of Supervisors Laura H. Welch, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Approved as to Legal Form: Jean-Rene Basle, County Counsel County of San Bernardino, California By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Deputy Robert F. Messinger, Deputy Date: __________________________ Date: ________________________

40

9

EXHIBIT “A”

41

10

42

11

43

12

44

13

45

14

46

15

47

16

48

17

49

18

EXHIBIT “B”

50

4. D.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER VOTING TO ELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE

CALFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION Consider voting to elect a representative to the California Special Districts Association (CSDA) Board of Directors. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION See Attachment 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION See Attachment 1. FISCAL INFORMATION N/A ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – CSDA 2014 Board Elections Mail Ballot Information

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

4. E.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Randy Bobroff, Water Division Supervisor Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER AWARDING CONTRACT FOR ABOVE GROUND

FUEL TANK UPGRADES TO COMPLY WITH SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT REGULATIONS

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION It is recommended that the Board of Directors: 1. Award a construction contract for the Fuel Tank Improvement Project to AW

Associates Inc. for their bid of $5,635.65; 2. Authorize the General Manager to execute the contract, and; 3. Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders for the Project during

the course of construction as required not to exceed 15% of the original construction contract amount.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION To comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) Executive Order #VR402-A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Phase I SCAQMD requirement is a specialized valve system that when installed it would not allow fuel delivery drivers to overfill our tank exceeding the 90% maximum capacity. FISCAL INFORMATION This is a budgeted item and will be split between account numbers 12245, 50340, 60630 and 63920. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – AW Proposal

58

EstimateDate

10/22/2013

Estimate #

13-217

Name / Address

Running Springs Water DistrictRandy Bobroff31242 Hilltop BlvdRunning Springs, CA 92382

Ship To


PO #:

Terms Rep

KLW

Date Signed:

Phone: 909-867-2766Email: [email protected]

Signature_____________________________________ Total

Subtotal

Sales Tax (8.0%)

AW Associates, Inc.

Fuel System Testing & Compliance

Contractor's License #935423 - A, Haz

PO Box 2903

Corona, CA 92878-2903

Phone: 951-372-9319 Fax: 951-346-3133

Description Qty Rate Total

Listed below is the scope of work and price for PHASE I upgrade per C.A.R.B. ExecutiveOrder # VR402-A. This upgrade is due on or before July 1, 2014. Please review thisinformation and let me know if you have any questions or concerns. To accept our quote andsecure a date to complete the project please sign the quote / or issue a PO.

Scope of Work:1) Submit plans, permit application, and fees to obtain permit from SCAQMD for Phase Iupgrades. (May take up to 8 weeks to get approval).2) Remove existing Non-EVR tank equipment (can be removed by techs and left on site percustomers direction).3) Install Morrison approved PHASE I EVR (Equipment listed below).4) Ensure equipment works properly (non compliance operability test).5) Once a passing Pre-Test is achieved, notify AQMD and perform 10-Day Performance Test.6) Leave area in clean and workman like manner.

PERMITS:Permits 1 1,391.92 1,391.92Plans / Drawings / Permit Filling 1 250.00 250.00 PERMITS / SUB-TOTAL $1,641.92

PARTS / EQUIPMENTMorrison 5 Gallon AST Spill Container - no drain - FEMALE THREAD 1 308.05 308.05TMorrison 2" Overfill valve with 2" dry break fill adaptor 1 1,191.05 1,191.05TMorrison 2" x 6' Drop tube 1 36.04 36.04TMorrison 2" Dust Cap 1 48.00 48.00TMorrison Tank Stick Adaptor and Cap 1 70.43 70.43TMorrison 2" x 12' Drop Tube 1 56.26 56.26TMorrison Vapor Adaptor 4" x 4" 1 126.28 126.28TMorrison Vapor Cap 1 39.79 39.79TMorrison 6" Emergency vent - FEMALE THREAD - 16 oz. (primary) 1 155.33 155.33T

Page 1 59

EstimateDate

10/22/2013

Estimate #

13-217

Name / Address


Ship To


PO #:

Terms Rep

KLW

Date Signed:

Phone: 909-867-2766Email: [email protected]

Signature_____________________________________ Total

Subtotal

Sales Tax (8.0%)

AW Associates, Inc.

Fuel System Testing & Compliance

Contractor's License #935423 - A, Haz

PO Box 2903

Corona, CA 92878-2903

Phone: 951-372-9319 Fax: 951-346-3133

Description Qty Rate Total

Miscellaneous Fittings 1 200.00 200.00 PARTS - EQUIPMENT / SUB-TOTAL $2,393.73 0.00 0.00

OPTION: FUELING COMPANY COUPLERNOTE: With the new Morrison Phase I equipment the fuel provider will need a specific fuelcoupler for the delivery truck to drop fuel. Get with your provider to find out if they have thisspecific coupler or not. Cost for Coupler: $1,250.00

LABOR: 0.00 0.00Labor - 2 Techs - 8 Hrs Ea. 16 75.00 1,200.00

CARB Rule 461 TestingTest to be performed within 10 days of new equipment being installed per new permitconditions. Testing will become anniversary date for 2014 and beyond.

1 400.00 400.00

Payment Schedule:$1,641.92 Will be due upon signature of contract for permit acquisition$2,393.73 Will be due upon acquisition of parts - delivered on site$1,200.00 Will be due upon completion of repairs and passing pre-test$400.00 Will be due upon completion of final inspection and submittal of close out package

Page 2

$5,635.65

$5,473.15

$162.50

60

4. F.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Tony Grabow, Fire Chief Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE FIRE CHIEF TO EXECUTE A

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR JOINT USE WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION (CALFIRE)

RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION It is recommended that the Board of Directors consider authorizing the Fire Chief to execute a Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use with Cal Fire. A copy of the agreement is attached. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION The existing agreement expires on July 20, 2014 and staff recommends continuing with this cooperative agreement for five additional years. BACKGROUND INFORMATION In July 2012 the District entered into a cooperative agreement with Cal Fire for the purpose of co-locating an engine with the Running Springs Fire Department. Running Springs Fire Department has hosted Cal Fire engines in the past. The additional staffing has proved to be advantageous for our Department and the Community. With this cooperative agreement there is no additional cost to the District for co-locating a Cal Fire engine and staff at Station 51. Benefits include additional staff, equipment, and expanded training opportunities. In September 2013 the agreement was amended to include an Assistance by Hire provision which allows the Running Springs Fire Department to be compensated by Cal Fire in the event Running Springs Fire Department resources are needed and available. Running Springs Fire Department would be compensated at the rates established by the California Fire Assistance Agreement (CFAA) in the event resources were requested and available to assist Cal Fire. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Draft Agreement

61

62

RGross

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

63

64

4. G.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 21, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Michael T. Riddell, Legal Counsel Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADJUSTMENT TO LEGAL SERVICES BILLING

RATES RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION It is recommended that the Board of Directors consider a rate adjustment for legal services. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION Refer to attached letter. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Refer to attached letter. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – BB&K Letter Dated May 8, 2014

65

66

The State Water Board to Consider Proposed

Emergency Water Conservation Regulations

On January 17 Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued a drought emergency proclamation following three dry or critically dry years in California. Extreme drought now covers nearly 80 percent of the state and these conditions will likely continue into the foreseeable future.

More than, 400,000 acres of farmland are expected to be fallowed, thousands of people may be out of work, communities risk running out of drinking water and fish and wildlife species are in jeopardy. Many communities are down to 50 gallons a day or less per person for basic sanitation needs. With our inability to predict the effect of the next rainy season, water saved today can improve a region’s water security and add flexibility to systems that may need to withstand another year or more with precipitation below average.

There are many ways to boost local water supplies such as recycling treated wastewater and reusing some household or industrial water onsite. However, conservation is the easiest, most efficient and most cost effective way to quickly reduce water demand and extend supplies into the next year, providing flexibility for all California communities. In a survey conducted by the State Water Board in June, while many communities have significantly reduced their water demand over time, it is clear that more can be done.

Conservation Actions Needed

Because of these dire conditions and the need to conserve more, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is proposing that individuals and water agencies take necessary steps to conserve water supplies both for this year and into 2015, and is recommending that individuals and water agencies do even more voluntarily to manage our precious water resources.

Most Californians use more water outdoors than indoors. In some areas, 50 percent or more of our daily water use is for lawns and outdoor landscaping. Some urban communities have been investing in conservation, particularly indoors, for years, but reducing the amount of water used outdoors can make the biggest difference of all. The proposed emergency conservation regulations are primarily directed at reducing outdoor urban water use.

67

http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA

http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA

RGross

Typewritten Text

5. A.

RGross

Typewritten Text

These emergency conservation measures target both individual water use, by identifying the practices from which every Californian should abstain during this drought emergency, as well as the steps that local water suppliers should be taking to reduce water demand in their service areas. These restrictions set a minimum level of effort in this time of emergency and everyone should do more voluntarily. As the drought wears on, the State Water Board may revisit these regulations and consider other measures.

Temporary Water Restrictions

All Californians will be affected by the ongoing drought conditions in one form or another, especially if these conditions persist or worsen in 2015. To promote water conservation statewide, the emergency regulations would prohibit each of the following, except in case of health or safety needs or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a state or federal agency:

The direct application of water to any hard surface for washing. Watering of outdoor landscapes that cause runoff to adjacent property, non-irrigated areas,

private and public walkways, roadways, parking lots or structures. Using a hose to wash an automobile, unless the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle. Using potable water in a fountain or decorative water feature, unless the water is

recirculated.

Violations of prohibited activities are considered infractions and are punishable by fines of $500 for each day in which the violation occurs. Any employee of a public agency charged with enforcing laws may write and issue a ticket to the violator.

Action by Urban Water Suppliers Required

To reduce water demand, the regulations would require urban water suppliers to implement their Water Shortage Contingency Plans at a level that triggers mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use. Almost all urban water suppliers (those with more than 3,000 water connections) have these plans; about 40 of these larger agencies do not.

If an urban water supplier does not have a Water Shortage Contingency Plan or its Plan does not meet the requirements of the water code, the supplier must, within 30 days, require customers to limit outdoor irrigation to no more than two days per week or implement another mandatory conservation measure to achieve a comparable reduction in water consumption by the people it serves relative to the amount consumed in 2013.

Water suppliers serving fewer than 3,000 connections must also, within 30 days, require customers to limit outdoor irrigation to no more than two days per week or implement another mandatory conservation measure to achieve a comparable reduction in water consumption by the people it serves relative to the amount consumed in 2013.

68

Urban water suppliers that violate mandatory actions could be subject to cease and desist orders for violating emergency regulations with fines up to $10,000 per day per violation. Or, the matter could be referred to the Attorney General’s office for further action.

Keeping Track of Urban Water Use

Each urban water supplier will keep track of its water use and compare it to the same period last year. Reports that include the amount of potable water the supplier produced in the preceding month and an estimate of gallons of water per person per day used by its customers will be submitted to the State Water Board by the 15th of each month.

Looking Forward

The State Water Board is providing the following tips to water suppliers to educate their customers about the new requirements:

Retail water suppliers should provide notice of the regulations in English and Spanish in one or more of the following ways: newspaper advertisements, bill inserts, website homepage, social media, notices in public libraries;

Wholesale suppliers should include reference to the regulations in all of their customer communications;

All water suppliers should provide signage where recycled or reclaimed water is being used for activities that the emergency regulations prohibit with the use of potable water, such as operation of fountains and other water features;

All water suppliers should train personnel on the regulations; and All water suppliers should set conservation targets, measure their service area’s progress

and make this information available to their customers. In addition to letting customers know about the new requirements, water suppliers should also:

Have an easy way for customers to report leaks and water waste via phone or electronic submittal (website form, or email); and

Request that police and fire departments and other local government personnel report leaks and water waste they encounter during their routine duties/patrols

If drought conditions continue, additional actions by the State Water Board and local water suppliers will likely be necessary to further increase conservation. All water suppliers are encouraged to be prepared and plan for a possible dry 2015 now.

Next Steps

The proposed emergency regulations will be considered by the State Water Board at its July 15th meeting. Written comments are due by 12 noon on July 14, 2014. If adopted and subsequently approved by the Office of Administrative Law, they would go into effect on or about August 1st.

69

N-1

NOTICE OF PROPOSED EMERGENCY RULEMAKING July 8, 2014

Prohibition of Activities and Mandatory Actions During Drought Emergency

Required Notice of Proposed Emergency Action Government Code section 11346.1, subdivision (a)(2) requires that, at least five working days prior to submission of a proposed emergency regulation to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), the adopting agency must provide a notice of the proposed emergency action to every person who has filed a request for notice of regulatory action with the agency. After the submission of the proposed emergency action to OAL, OAL shall allow interested persons five calendar days to submit comments on the proposed emergency regulations as set forth in Government Code section 11349.6. This document and the accompanying information provide the required notice. Proposed Emergency Action On January 17, 2014, Governor Brown declared a drought state of emergency. On April 25, 2014 the Governor signed an Executive Order calling on the State to redouble state drought actions. Among other things, the Executive Order provides that: “The Water Board shall direct urban water suppliers that are not already implementing drought response plans to limit outdoor irrigation and other wasteful water practices such as those identified in this Executive Order. The Water Board will request by June 15 an update from urban water agencies on their actions to reduce water usage and the effectiveness of these efforts. The Water Board is directed to adopt emergency regulations as it deems necessary, pursuant to Water Code section 1058.5, to implement this directive.” On May 23, 2014 the State Water Board issued a survey to more than 400 urban water suppliers inquiring on the implementation of their urban water conservation actions and the effectiveness of those actions. The State Water Board’s June 17, 2014 meeting included an informational update on the survey results and a description of urban water conservation efforts being carried out by certain urban water suppliers. Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Board the authority to adopt emergency regulations in certain drought years in order to: “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports.” On July 15, 2014, the State Water Board will consider a proposed resolution adopting emergency regulations adding new sections to Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations. The proposed emergency regulations include a prohibition on certain classes of water use, an order for all urban water suppliers to implement mandatory conservation measures, and an order for water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to provide monthly data on water production.

70

N-2

Proposed Text of Emergency Regulations See the attached proposed text of the emergency regulations. Finding of Emergency (Gov. Code, § 11346.1, subd. (b)) The State Water Board finds that an emergency exists due to severe drought conditions, as identified in the Governor’s drought emergency proclamations. Immediate action is needed to effectively increase water conservation so that remaining supplies are maintained to address the present drought emergency. The State Water Board’s May 2014 Drought Survey results demonstrated that urban water conservation efforts could be augmented to minimize the potential risks of threatened severe supply shortages. In addition, the current extent of voluntary conservation goals established by many urban water suppliers will not provide for timely and effective attainment of the State’s conservation needs, which include the maintenance of remaining supplies. Without adequate reserves, water suppliers will be unable to address the drought emergency. The emergency regulation improves the State Water Board’s and local agencies’ abilities to quickly and effectively implement and enforce mandatory water conservation measures during the current drought to help preserve the State’s supplies during the drought emergency. The State Water Board is unable to address the situation through non-emergency regulations because the standard rulemaking process cannot timely address the current severe drought emergency that is the focus of these regulations. Furthermore, the Governor’s April 25, 2014 Executive Order orders the State Water Board to adopt emergency regulations pursuant to Water Code section 1058.5 to address the issues that are the focus of these regulations. Authority and Reference (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(2)) Water Code sections 1058 and 1058.5 provide authority for the emergency regulations. The revised emergency regulations implement, interpret, or make specific Water Code sections 102, 104, 105, 350, 10617, and 10632. Informative Digest (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(3)) At present, there is no statewide prohibition on individual activities to promote conservation. There is also no law or regulation requiring urban water suppliers to affirmatively adopt drought shortage contingency plans, implement specific stages of their drought shortage contingency plans, or report the amount of water they produce to the state. There is also no law or regulation requiring distributors of public water supplies who are not urban water suppliers to adopt water shortage contingency plans, limit outdoor irrigation by their customers, or implement other mandatory conservation measures. The proposed regulation constitutes the first statewide directive to individuals and to urban water suppliers to undertake specific actions to respond to the drought emergency; consequently, the proposed regulation is consistent and compatible with existing regulations on this subject. The proposed regulation neither differs from nor conflicts with an existing comparable federal statute or regulation. The proposed regulation is intended to safeguard urban water supplies in the event of another dry year. It is both reasonable and prudent to maintain urban water supplies to the maximum extent feasible to provide local agencies with the necessary flexibility to meet the health and safety needs of Californians during the drought emergency. California has been subject to multi-year droughts in the past and there is no guarantee that precipitation this winter will lift the State out of the current drought conditions. Moreover, climate change science indicates that the Southwestern United States are becoming drier, increasing the likelihood of prolonged droughts. In addition, drought conditions have already forced the State Water Board to curtail surface water diversions, and many groundwater basins around the state are already in overdraft conditions that will likely worsen due to groundwater pumping this summer. Many water supply systems face a present or threatened risk of inadequate supply. Should drought conditions

71

N-3

persist into 2015, more water supply systems will be at risk of depleting supplies, presenting a great risk to the health and safety of the people supplied by those systems. Maintaining urban water supplies through enhanced conservation will reduce the risks to health and safety and reduce negative impacts to the State’s economy. Each of the specific prohibitions on water uses is necessary to promote water conservation to maintain an adequate supply during the drought emergency, which cannot be done if water is being used in an excessive or wasteful manner. These prohibitions affect practices that use excessive amounts of water or where more efficient and less wasteful alternatives are available. These practices are particularly unreasonable during a drought due to the need to conserve limited water supplies to meet health and safety needs. Consequently, the proposed regulation will further protection of the environment. Additional benefits will be realized should the Board adopt the proposed regulations. These benefits include the following:

Reduced water bills for customers that reduce water use (some of these savings will generate additional economic activity, such as investments in drought-tolerant landscaping);

Increased water quality in receiving waters due to lower runoff volumes; Increased drought awareness and shared sense of responsibility among urban water

users; More effective tracking of total urban water use; and Reduced potential for severe economic disruption if 2015 is another dry year.

The proposed emergency adoption of section X sets forth the State Water Resources Control Board’s findings of drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.1 directs individuals statewide to refrain from engaging in certain activities to promote conservation to meet the drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to report information to the Board and to take actions to promote conservation and directs all other water suppliers to take actions to promote conservation. Proposed Section X sets forth the Board’s findings of drought emergency, noting the Governor’s adoption of two emergency proclamations pertaining to drought conditions, the persistence of drought conditions, the dry nature of the preceding two years, and the likelihood that drought conditions will continue. Proposed Section X.1 prohibits several activities, except where necessary to address an immediate health and safety need or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a state or federal agency, to promote conservation. The section prohibits the application of water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes visible runoff, the use of a hose to wash an automobile except where the hose is equipped with a shut-off nozzle, the application of water to hardscapes, and the use of potable water in non-recirculating ornamental fountains. Proposed Section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to implement the stage of their water shortage contingency plans that impose mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation, requires those urban water suppliers without adequate drought shortage contingency plans to adopt them or other measures to promote conservation within thirty days, and report monthly water production information to the Board. The section also directs distributors of public water supplies that are not urban water suppliers to either limit outdoor irrigation or implement another mandatory conservation measure or measures to achieve conservation.

72

N-4

Other Matters Prescribed by Statute (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(4)) The proposed emergency regulation would be adopted in response to conditions which exist, or are threatened, in a critically dry year immediately preceded by two or more consecutive below normal, dry, or critically dry years or during a period for which the Governor has issued a proclamation of a state of emergency under the California Emergency Services Act (Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 8550) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code) based on drought conditions. Local Mandate (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(5)) The State Water Resources Control Board has determined that adoption of proposed sections X and X.1 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts. The sections are generally applicable law. The State Water Resources Control Board has further determined that adoption of proposed section X.2 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts, because the local agencies affected by the section have the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the mandate program or increased level of service. (See Gov. Code, § 17556.) Estimate of Cost or Savings (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subd. (a)(6)) Increased urban water conservation will result in reduced water use, which in turn will result in reduced water sales and lost revenue for urban water suppliers. This loss in revenue will be a function of the amount of water conserved (and therefore not sold) and the unit price that water would have sold for. In addition to lost revenue from reduced water sales, urban water suppliers will also incur costs associated with water production reporting as required by the proposed emergency regulations. The State Water Board estimates that local agencies that are urban water suppliers could collectively realize as much as $438,185,664 in lost revenue as a result of implementing the proposed regulations. Additionally, the reporting costs to local government are estimated to be $1,029,600. The total costs to local government are therefore estimated to be $439,215,264, which is the sum of estimated lost revenues and the estimated reporting costs. Implementation of the proposed emergency regulations will result in additional workload for the State Water Board and possibly for the Department of Water Resources, however, this work will be accomplished through redirection of resources within existing agency budgets. Significant costs or saving for State agencies are therefore not anticipated. The above summary information is explained in greater detail in the State Water Board’s Emergency Regulations Digest, which is attached.

73

Emergency Regulations Digest (Gov. Code , § 11346.1, subd. (b))

Prohibition of Activities and Mandatory Actions During Drought Emergency

FINDING OF EMERGENCY

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) finds that an emergency exists due to severe drought conditions and that adoption of the proposed emergency regulation is necessary to address the emergency. California is currently in the third year of a significant drought resulting in severe impacts to California’s water supplies and its ability to meet all of the demands for water in the State. On January 17, 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. declared a drought state of emergency. On April 25, 2014 the Governor signed an Executive Order stating, among things, “…that severe drought conditions

continue to present urgent challenges: water shortages in communities across the state, greatly

increased wildfire activity, diminished water for agricultural production, degraded habitat for

many fish and wildlife species, threat of saltwater contamination of large fresh water supplies

conveyed through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta, and additional water scarcity if

drought conditions continue into 2015.” Immediate action is needed to ensure water suppliers and all Californians are taking sufficient actions to conserve water and preserve the State’s water supply. Due to these concerns, the April 25, 2014 Executive Order, directs the State Water Board to adopt emergency regulations as it deems necessary, pursuant to Water Code section 1058.5, to ensure that urban water suppliers implement drought response plans to limit outdoor irrigation and other wasteful water practices.

Authority for Emergency Regulations

Water Code section 1058.5 grants the State Water Board the authority to adopt emergency regulations in years when the Governor has issued a proclamation of emergency based upon drought conditions or when in response to drought conditions that exist, or are threatened, in a critically dry year immediately preceded by two or more consecutive below normal, dry, or critically dry years. The Board may adopt regulations under such circumstances to: “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion, of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right, or in furtherance of any of the foregoing, to require reporting of diversion or use or the preparation of monitoring reports.”

Emergency regulations adopted under Water Code section 1058.5 may remain in effect for up to 270 days. Per Water Code section 1058.5, subdivision (b), any findings of emergency the Board makes in connection with the adoption of an emergency regulation under the section are not subject to review by the Office of Administrative Law.

Government Code section 11346.1, subdivision (a)(2) requires that, at least five working days prior to submission of the proposed emergency action to the Office of Administrative Law, the adopting agency provide a notice of the proposed emergency action to every person who has filed a request for notice of regulatory action with the agency. After submission of the proposed emergency regulations to the Office of Administrative Law, the Office of Administrative Law shall allow interested persons five calendar days to submit comments on the proposed emergency regulations as set forth in Government Code Section 11349.6.

74


2

The information contained within this finding of emergency provides the information necessary to support the State Water Board’s emergency rulemaking under Water Code section 1058.5 and also meets the emergency regulation criteria of Government Code section 11346.1 and the applicable requirements of section 11346.5.

Evidence of Emergency

The U.S. Drought Monitor currently classifies the entire state of California as experiencing severe to exceptional drought conditions. In most years, California receives about half of its precipitation in the months of December, January and February, with much of that precipitation falling as snow in the Sierra. A handful of large winter storms can make the difference between a wet year and a dry one. In normal years, the snowpack stores water during the winter months and releases it through melting in the spring and summer to replenish rivers and reservoirs and recharge aquifers. However, relatively dry weather conditions this year have reduced the amount of snowpack in California’s mountains. Each of this season’s first four snow surveys – conducted in early January, late January, late February and early April – found a statewide snowpack water equivalent far below average for the dates of the surveys. The 2014 statewide snowpack began melting and running into the state’s watercourses in early April. After reaching a peak of 10.1 inches, the snowpack had almost completely melted away by late May,.

Rainfall also has been far below normal during this water year as recorded by weather stations throughout the state. Despite a few storms that brought rain in February and March, electronic readings indicate that precipitation at eight Northern California stations was only about 60 percent of normal for late April. The electronic readings for San Joaquin stations show even drier conditions there – less than 50 percent of normal precipitation from October 1 to late May. As of May 31, statewide precipitation was 55 percent of average to date; runoff was 35 percent of average to date; and snow water equivalent was three percent of average for the date (one percent of the April 1 average).

Due to these drought conditions and dry conditions for the past several years, storage in California’s reservoirs is also at below average levels, at 65 percent of average for the state at the end of May. Current storage levels in key reservoirs reflect this trend. Shasta Lake, California’s and the Central Valley Project’s (CVP) largest reservoir, is at 45 percent of its 4.5 million acre-feet (MAF) capacity (54 percent of its historical average for this date). Lake Oroville, the State Water Project’s (SWP) principal reservoir, is at 47 percent of its 3.5 MAF capacity (57 percent of its historical average for the date). Trinity Reservoir is at 47 percent of its 2.4 MAF capacity (54 percent of historical average). San Luis Reservoir, a critical south-of-Delta reservoir for both the SWP and CVP, is at 38 percent of its 2 MAF capacity (52 percent of average for this date). Folsom Reservoir is at 53 percent of its 1 MAF capacity (64 percent of average for this date). New Melones Reservoir is at 32 percent of its 2.4 MAF capacity (50 percent of average for this date). New Don Pedro Reservoir is at 52 percent of its 2 MAF capacity (67 percent of average for this date) and Lake McClure is at 29 percent of its 1 MAF (42 percent of average for this date).

75


3

Local, state and federal water agencies across California have limited supplies due to the drought. In response, those agencies have taken various actions, including reducing or eliminating contract water deliveries and implementing mandatory and voluntary conservation efforts. A total of 46 Emergency Proclamations addressing the drought are known to have been issued by city, county, special districts, and tribal governments. The State’s two major water supply projects, the CVP and SWP, have also announced severe reductions in contract deliveries. The United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has announced that its regular CVP agricultural contractors will receive no deliveries in 2014 and its municipal and industrial contractors will receive 50 percent of their historic use. The Department of Water Resources (DWR) has announced that its deliveries to its regular SWP contractors will be reduced to five percent for both municipal and agricultural contractors. Senior SWP contractors have also received less than their full contract amounts. In addition to water supply reductions and conservation efforts, many water users have requested and received approvals for changes to regulatory requirements, including water right requirements, to extend limited supplies. Many water users have also pursued water transfers and purchases from willing sellers to make up for reduced supplies.

Need for the Regulation Immediate action is needed to effectively increase water conservation so that remaining supplies are maintained to address the ongoing drought emergency. The State Water Board’s May 2014 Drought Survey results demonstrated that urban water conservation efforts could be augmented to minimize the potential risks of threatened severe supply shortages. In addition, current voluntary conservation goals established by many urban water suppliers will not provide for timely and effective attainment of the State’s conservation needs, which include the maintenance of remaining supplies. Without adequate reserves, water suppliers will be unable to address the drought emergency. The emergency regulation improves the State Water Board’s and local agencies’ abilities to quickly and effectively implement and enforce mandatory water conservation measures during the current drought emergency to help preserve the State’s supplies throughout a continuing drought that could last through 2015 or beyond.

Description and Effect of Proposed Regulation

The proposed regulation consists of three requirements: a prohibition on certain types of water use, an order for all urban water suppliers to implement mandatory conservation measures, and an order for water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to provide monthly data on water production. These requirements are intended to preserve urban water supplies. It is both reasonable and prudent to preserve urban water supplies to the maximum extent feasible to provide local agencies with the necessary flexibility to meet the health and safety needs of Californians during the drought emergency. California has been subject to multi-year droughts in the past and there is no guarantee that precipitation this winter will lift the State out of the current drought conditions. Moreover, climate change science indicates that the Southwestern United States are becoming drier, increasing the likelihood of prolonged droughts. In addition, drought conditions have already forced the State Water Board to curtail surface water diversions, and many groundwater basins around the state are already in overdraft conditions

76


4

that will likely worsen due to groundwater pumping this summer. Many water supply systems face a present or threatened risk of inadequate supply. Should drought conditions persist into 2015, more water supply systems will be at risk of depleting supplies, presenting a great risk to the health and safety of the people supplied by those systems. Maintaining urban water supplies through enhanced conservation will reduce the risks to health and safety and reduce negative impacts to the State’s economy.

Each of the specific prohibitions on water uses is necessary to promote water conservation to maintain an adequate supply during the drought emergency, which cannot be done if water is being used in an excessive or wasteful manner. These prohibitions affect practices that use excessive amounts of water or where more efficient and less wasteful alternatives are available. These practices are particularly unreasonable during a drought due to the need to conserve limited water supplies to meet health and safety needs. Exceptions to meet immediate health and safety concerns or to comply with state or federal permit requirements are available, however.

A prohibition on runoff of outdoor irrigation water is necessary to promote water conservation to address the drought emergency. Irrigating residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational landscapes to the point of visible runoff is an excessive use of water and more efficient alternatives are available. This practice depletes water supplies, whose maintenance is critical during a drought for health, safety, and, in some cases, operational flexibility. Runoff enters the storm drain system or evaporates, and does not provide for domestic use, sanitation, or fire protection, which are the primary needs that public water supply distributors must meet during drought periods. (Wat. Code, § 354.)

A prohibition on vehicle washing with a running hose (a hose that is not equipped with a shut-off nozzle) promotes water conservation to address the drought emergency through the use of more efficient and effective washing techniques and options. Washing cars at commercial car wash establishments—which are widely distributed throughout the state--or manual washing with a small amount of water in a bucket or with a hose equipped with a shut-off nozzle are efficient and reasonable techniques for those with a need to wash a vehicles.

A prohibition on watering of hardscapes, such as driveways, sidewalks, and asphalt, promotes water conservation to address the drought emergency through the use of more efficient and effective cleaning methods for hardscapes. For example, many hardscapes can be cleaned with a broom, thus conserving water for other uses during a time of extreme scarcity.

A prohibition on the use of potable water without recirculation pumps for fountains and other decorative water fixtures promotes water conservation to address the drought emergency through saving water that would evaporate, leak, or not be reused. In addition, ornamental water fixtures do not provide for domestic use, sanitation, or fire protection, and therefore do not promote a use of paramount importance during the drought emergency.

The proposed regulation to require urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to implement their Water Shortage Contingency Plans (WSCPs) at a level that includes mandatory use restrictions, and water suppliers without WSCPs and water suppliers

77


5

which have fewer than 3,000 service connections to implement mandatory restrictions, is necessary to promote conservation to address the drought emergency because mandatory restrictions have proven to be effective at reducing water use. Data collected from the State Water Board’s May 2014 Urban Water Conservation Survey indicates that 53 of the 268 urban water suppliers who responded to the survey (representing approximately 10 million retail customers) have already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into streets and gutters. Requiring mandatory use restrictions for the rest of the water suppliers (representing approximately 28 million retail customers) will ensure that water use restrictions are applied equitably and to the greatest effect statewide.

One of the options for mandatory use restrictions is limiting outdoor irrigation to no more than two days per week. This limit is necessary to promote conservation to address the drought emergency because outdoor irrigation accounts for 44 percent of urban water use (see Table 1 below), outdoor irrigation is generally more discretionary than other types of use, and because studies have shown that urban landscapes are often over-watered. Two days per week of outdoor irrigation increases conservation and reduces the likelihood of over-irrigation and visible runoff.

The proposed regulation to require urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to provide the Board with monthly potable water production figures along with a calculation of gallons per capita per day (GPCD) is necessary so that the Board can track the effectiveness of the proposed regulations and urban water conservation actions. Such monitoring reports will promote the conservation necessary to address the drought emergency.

Estimate of Water Savings from Proposed Regulation

According to the Department of Water Resource’s Public Review Draft Water Plan Update 2013, total urban water use between 1998 and 2005 was 8.8million acre-feet. The breakdown of the urban use by customer class is provided in the Table 1.

Table 1: Urban Water Use by Sector in Million Acre-Feet (MAF)

Sector Volume (MAF)

Residential landscape 3

Large landscape 0.9

Indoor residential 2.7

Commercial, institutional, and industrial 1.7

Other 0.5

Total 8.8

Source: DWR Public Review Draft Water Plan Update 2013

Outdoor irrigation represents 44 percent of the total urban water use (3 MAF for residential landscape and 0.9 MAF for large landscapes). The proposed regulation prohibiting visible runoff affects the 44 percent of statewide urban use dedicated to outdoor irrigation. The

78


6

proposed regulation to require implementation of WSCPs at a mandatory level by urban water suppliers would, in some cases, entail restrictions on use by other customer classes, including residential indoor use in instances where mandatory restrictions include rationing of residential use. However, a review of the State Water Board’s May 2014 Urban Water Conservation Survey results and a select group of WSCPs indicates that water suppliers with significant supply shortages have already implemented mandatory restrictions and are therefore already in compliance with the proposed regulation, while those that will need to invoke their WSCPs at a mandatory level to comply do not include restrictions on water use by the non-residential classes at the first level of mandatory restrictions. Thus, the Board estimates that the proposed regulations will have a minimal impact on the 56 percent of water used for purposes other than outdoor irrigation.

Many California Urban water suppliers are already implementing water conservation measures commensurate with those required by the proposed regulations and therefore conservation savings attained by their customers are not attributable to the proposed regulations. As described above, 53 of the 268 urban water suppliers who responded to the survey indicated that they had already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into streets and gutters. Therefore, these 53 urban water suppliers are already implementing conservation measures that are commensurate with the requirements of the proposed emergency regulation. These 53 urban water suppliers represent approximately 10 million retail customers, which accounts for about 38 percent of the survey response by retail population. The Board estimates that all 268 of the survey respondents collectively are representative of the urban water conservation actions being taken statewide. Based upon these assumptions, 62 percent of urban water use would be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations while 38 percent of urban water use would not be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations (i.e, they are already implementing the required conservation measures).

Various studies have analyzed the response of urban populations to mandatory use restrictions imposed during drought conditions. Multiple studies conclude that mandatory use restrictions are more effective than voluntary conservation measures because areas that have imposed mandatory use restrictions have achieved greater use reductions than areas that imposed only voluntary measures, controlling for other variables. The amount of conservation achievable through mandatory restrictions varies. Conservation savings of up to 29 percent have been observed. For example, a study conducted on the effects of water demand management policies of eight California water agencies during the period from 1989-1996, which included 3 years of drought (1989-1991), found that rationing and use restrictions were correlated with use reductions of 19 percent and 29 percent, respectively. The study’s authors concluded:

In general, relatively moderate (5-15%) reductions in aggregate demand can be achieved through modest price increases and “voluntary” alternative [Demand-Side Management] policy instruments, such as public information campaigns. However, to achieve larger reductions in demand (greater than 15%), policymakers will likely need to consider either relatively large price increases, more stringent mandatory policy instruments (such as use restrictions), or a package of policy instruments. (Dixon & Moore, 1996).

79


7

A recent study from UCLA on use reductions in Los Angeles during the 2007-2009 drought reached similar conclusions:

Our results indicate that mandatory restrictions are most effective at reducing water consumption for [Single-Family Residential] households. The greatest impact of measures resulted from the combination of mandatory watering restrictions and the price increase, which led to a water reduction of 23% in July/August 2009, while voluntary restrictions led to only a 6% reduction in water use. (Mini, 2013).

In addition, a study of Virginia’s severe 2002 drought found that mandatory use restrictions coupled with an aggressive information and enforcement campaign led to a 22 percent reduction in use. (Halich & Stephenson, 2006). Thus, given the severity of the current drought and the level of resources already devoted to attaining the state’s conservation goals, the Board anticipates the proposed regulations can result in up to a 20 percent reduction in outdoor water use, totaling 0.48 million acre-feet, as calculated below.

Total urban water use for outdoor irrigation: 3.9 MAF Urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations: 3.9*0.62 = 2.4 MAF Estimated conservation savings from adoption of the proposed regulations: 2.4*0.2 = 0.48 MAF

Additional Benefits to Proposed Regulations

Staff has determined that additional benefits will be realized should the Board adopt the proposed regulations. These benefits include the following:

Reduced water bills for customers that reduce water use (some of these savings will generate additional economic activity, such as investments in drought-tolerant landscaping)

Increased water quality in receiving waters due to lower runoff volumes Increased drought awareness and shared sense of responsibility among urban water

users More effective tracking of total urban water use Reduced potential for severe economic disruption if 2015 is another dry year

These benefits will offset some of the fiscal impacts to water suppliers when benefits and costs are viewed from a statewide perspective. Therefore, these benefits provide additional justification for adopting the proposed regulations.

References:

2014 National Climate Assessment, US Global Change Research Program, Washington, D.C., accessed from: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report, on June 29, 2014.

Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk, California Natural Resources Agency, Sacramento CA, accessed from: http://resources.ca.gov/climate_adaptation/docs/Safeguarding_California_Public_Draft_Dec-10.pdf, on June 29, 2014.

80

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report

http://resources.ca.gov/climate_adaptation/docs/Safeguarding_California_Public_Draft_Dec-10.pdf

http://resources.ca.gov/climate_adaptation/docs/Safeguarding_California_Public_Draft_Dec-10.pdf


8

El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Diagnostic Discussion, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center, Washington, D.C.,accessed from: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/index.shtml, on June 29, 2014.

State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014, Sacramento, CA, accessed from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/workshops_results.shtml

Consideration of a Proposed Resolution Regarding Drought-Related Emergency Regulations for Curtailment of Diversions to Protect Senior Water Rights, State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights, Sacramento, CA, accessed from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_info/agendas/2014/jul/070114agnd_revised.pdf, on June 29, 2014.

Report to the Governor’s Drought Task Force – Groundwater Basins with Potential Water Shortages and Gaps in Groundwater Monitoring, Department of Water Resources, Sacramento, CA, April 30, 2014, accessed from: http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/Drought_Response-Groundwater_Basins_April30_Final_BC.pdf, on June 29, 2014.

Urban Non-point Source Fact Sheet, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., accessed from: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/urban_facts.cfm, on June 29, 2014.

California Water Code, Sections 354, 10608, 10630-10634.

California Governor Brown State of Emergency Declaration dated January 17, 2014: http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18368 California Governor Brown Executive Order for State Drought Actions dated April 25, 2014: http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18496

Dixon, Lloyd S., Moore, Nancy Y., and Pint, Ellen M., Drought Management Policies and Economic Effects in Urban Areas of California, 1987-1992, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica CA, 1996.

Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Estimation of Residential Outdoor Water Use in Los Angeles, California, Landscape and Urban Planning 127 (2014) 124–135.

Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Patterns and Controlling Factors of Residential Use in Los Angeles, California, Water Policy Uncorrected Proof (2014) 1–16.

Mini, Caroline, 2013: Residential water use and landscape vegetation dynamics in Los Angeles, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA

81

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/index.shtml

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/workshops_results.shtml


http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_info/agendas/2014/jul/070114agnd_revised.pdf

http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/Drought_Response-Groundwater_Basins_April30_Final_BC.pdf

http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/Drought_Response-Groundwater_Basins_April30_Final_BC.pdf

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/urban_facts.cfm

http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18368

http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18496


9

Renwick, Mary E., and Green, Richard D., Do Residential Water Demand Side Management Policies Measure Up? An Analysis of Eight California Water Agencies, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 40,37-55 (2000).

Olmstead, Sheila M., and Stavins, Robert N., Managing Water Demand: Price vs. Non-Price Conservation Measures, A Pioneer Institute White Paper, No. 39 (2007).

Halich, Greg, and Stephenson, Kurt, The Effectiveness of Drought Management Programs in Reducing Residential Water-Use in Virginia, Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Blacksburg, VA, April 21, 2006.

California Department of Water resources, Public Review Draft (PRD) of California Water Plan

Update 2013 (Update 2013) accessed from: http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu2013/prd/index.cfm, on June 29, 2014.

Informative Digest

Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations

At present, there is no statewide prohibition on individual activities to promote conservation. There is also no law or regulation requiring urban water suppliers to affirmatively adopt drought shortage contingency plans, implement specific stages of their drought shortage contingency plans, or report the amount of water they produce to the state. There is also no law or regulation requiring distributors of public water supplies who are not urban water suppliers to adopt water shortage contingency plans, limit outdoor irrigation by their customers, or implement other mandatory conservation measures. The proposed regulation constitutes the first statewide directive to individuals and to urban water suppliers to undertake specific actions to respond to the drought emergency; consequently, the proposed regulation is consistent and compatible with existing regulations on this subject. The proposed regulation neither differs from nor conflicts with an existing comparable federal statute or regulation.

Description and Effect of Proposed Regulations

The proposed emergency adoption of section X sets forth the State Water Resources Control Board’s findings of drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.1 directs individuals statewide to refrain from engaging in certain activities to promote conservation to meet the drought emergency. The proposed emergency adoption of section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to report information to the Board and to take actions to promote conservation and directs all other water suppliers to take actions to promote conservation.

82

http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu2013/prd/index.cfm


10

Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X

Proposed Section X sets forth the Board’s findings of drought emergency, noting the Governor’s adoption of two emergency proclamations pertaining to drought conditions, the persistence of drought conditions, the dry nature of the preceding two years, and the likelihood that drought conditions will continue.

Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X.1

Proposed Section X.1 prohibits several activities, except where necessary to address an immediate health and safety need or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a state or federal agency, to promote conservation. The section prohibits the application of water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes visible runoff, the use of a hose to wash an automobile except where the hose is equipped with a shut-off nozzle, the application of water to hardscapes, and the use of potable water in non-recirculating ornamental fountains.

Proposed Emergency Regulation Section X.2

Proposed Section X.2 directs urban water suppliers to implement the stage of their water shortage contingency plans that impose mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation, requires those urban water suppliers without adequate drought shortage contingency plans to adopt them or other measures to promote conservation within thirty days, and report monthly water production information to the Board. The section also directs distributors of public water supplies that are not urban water suppliers to either limit outdoor irrigation, or implement another mandatory conservation measure or measures to achieve conservation.

Authority and Reference Citations

For Section X

Authority: Wat. Code, § 1058.5.

References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.

For Section X.1


References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105.

For Section X.2


References: Wat. Code, §§ 102, 104, 105; 350; 10617; 10632.

83


11

Mandate on Local Agencies or School Districts

The State Water Resources Control Board has determined that adoption of sections X and X.1 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts. The sections are generally applicable law.

The State Water Resources Control Board has further determined that adoption of section X.2 does not impose a new mandate on local agencies or school districts, because the local agencies affected by the section have the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the mandate program or increased level of service. (See Gov. Code, § 17556.)

Suspension of California Environmental Quality Act

On April 24, 2014, the Governor issued an executive order addressing the drought emergency, which, among other things, suspended the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as applied to the State Water Resources Control Board’s adoption of emergency regulations to “prevent the waste, unreasonable use, unreasonable method of use, or unreasonable method of diversion of water, to promote water recycling or water conservation, and to require curtailment of diversions when water is not available under the diverter’s priority of right.” The proposed emergency regulation falls under this suspension.

Public Agency and Government Fiscal Impact Analysis

Summary

Increased urban water conservation will result in reduced water use by the customer, which in turn will result in reduced water sales and lost revenue for urban water suppliers. This loss in revenue will be a function of the amount of water conserved (and therefore not sold) and the unit price that water would have sold for. California Urban Water Supplier water rates are primarily comprised of a fixed and a variable component. The variable portion of the rate is based on the volume of water used by the customer and generally the fixed portion does not change with use. The variable portion of the rate therefore represents the unit cost of lost revenue.

In addition to lost revenue from reduced water sales, urban water suppliers will also incur costs associated with water production reporting as required by the proposed emergency regulations.

Implementation of the proposed emergency regulations will result in additional workload for the State Water Board and possibly for the Department of Water Resources, however, this work will be accomplished through redirection of resources within existing agency budgets. Significant costs or saving for State agencies are therefore not anticipated.

84


12

Fiscal Impacts to Public Water Supply Agencies

Fiscal impacts to urban water agencies are assumed to result primarily from changes in water sale revenues. These are calculated below by developing a statewide average variable rate for water and multiplying it by the estimate of water sales reduction resulting from the proposed regulation.

Determination of Average Water Rates

Data was compiled from a 2013 Water Rate Survey prepared by published by Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. and the California-Nevada Section of the American Water Works Association to develop a statewide average estimate for the variable portion of urban water rates. The 2013 Rate Survey included information on the average fixed and variable water rates for 46 California Counties based on survey responses from 216 urban water suppliers statewide. The average rate (variable portion only) for each represented county was weighted by county population to determine a statewide average rate of $ 1,086.77 per acre foot of water sold.

Estimate of Water Savings from the Proposed Emergency Regulation

According to the Department of Water Resources’ Public Review Draft Water Plan Update 2013, total urban water use between 1998 and 2005 was 8.8 million acre-feet (MAF). Outdoor irrigation represents 44 percent of the total urban water use (3 MAF for residential landscape and 0.9 MAF for large landscapes). The proposed regulation prohibiting visible runoff therefore affects the 44 percent of statewide urban use dedicated to outdoor irrigation. The proposed regulation to require implementation of WSCPs at a mandatory level by urban water suppliers would, in some cases, entail restrictions on use by other customer classes, including residential indoor use in instances where mandatory restrictions include rationing of residential use. However, a review of the State Water Board’s May 2014 survey results and a select group of WSCPs indicates that water suppliers with significant supply shortages have already implemented mandatory restrictions and are therefore already in compliance with the proposed regulation, while those that will need to invoke their WSCPs at a mandatory level to comply do not include restrictions on water use by the non-residential classes at the first level of mandatory restrictions. Thus, the Board estimates that the proposed regulations will have a minimal impact on the 56 percent of water used for purposes other than outdoor irrigation.

Many California Urban water suppliers are already implementing water conservation measures commensurate with those required by the proposed regulations and therefore conservation savings attained by their customers are not attributable to the proposed regulations. Fifty-three of the 268 urban water suppliers who responded to the State Water Board’s survey indicated that they had already formally invoked their drought shortage contingency plans and have implemented both mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use and prohibitions on runoff into streets and gutters. These 53 urban water suppliers represent approximately 10 million retail customers, which accounts for about 38 percent of the survey response by retail population. The Board assumes that these 53 urban water suppliers are already implementing conservation measures that are commensurate with the requirements of the proposed emergency regulation. The Board also assumes that all 268 of the survey respondents collectively are representative

85


13

of the urban water conservation actions being taken statewide. Based upon these assumptions, 62 percent of urban water use would be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations while 38 percent of urban water use would not be affected by adoption of the proposed regulations.

Various studies have analyzed the response of urban populations to mandatory use restrictions imposed during drought conditions. Multiple studies conclude that mandatory use restrictions are more effective than voluntary conservation measures because areas that have imposed mandatory use restrictions have achieved greater use reductions than areas that imposed only voluntary measures, controlling for other variables. The amount of conservation achievable through mandatory restrictions varies. Conservation savings of up to 29 percent have been observed. For example, a study conducted on the effects of water demand management policies of eight California water agencies during the period from 1989-1996, which included 3 years of drought (1989-1991), found that rationing and use restrictions were correlated with use reductions of 19 percent and 29 percent, respectively. The study’s authors concluded:

In general, relatively moderate (5-15%) reductions in aggregate demand can be achieved through modest price increases and “voluntary” alternative [Demand-Side Management] policy instruments, such as public information campaigns. However, to achieve larger reductions in demand (greater than 15%), policymakers will likely need to consider either relatively large price increases, more stringent mandatory policy instruments (such as use restrictions), or a package of policy instruments. (Dixon & Moore, 1996).

A recent study from UCLA on use reductions in Los Angeles during the 2007-2009 drought reached similar conclusions:

Our results indicate that mandatory restrictions are most effective at reducing water consumption for [Single-Family Residential] households. The greatest impact of measures resulted from the combination of mandatory watering restrictions and the price increase, which led to a water reduction of 23% in July/August 2009, while voluntary restrictions led to only a 6% reduction in water use. (Mini, 2013).

In addition, a study of Virginia’s severe 2002 drought found that mandatory use restrictions coupled with an aggressive information and enforcement campaign led to a 22 percent reduction in use. (Halich & Stephenson, 2006).

In many cases, mandatory use restrictions are instituted jointly with price increases. Although the proposed regulations do not mandate price increases, we anticipate that many water suppliers will implement rate design changes as part of implementing their WSCP and in order to ameliorate the impacts of reduced revenues as sales decrease due to conservation.

Thus, given the severity of the current drought and the level of resources already devoted to attaining the state’s conservation goals, the Board anticipates the proposed regulations can result in up to a 20 percent reduction in outdoor water use, totaling 0.48 million acre-feet, as calculated below.

Total urban water use for outdoor irrigation: 3.9 MAF Urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations: 3.9*0.62 = 2.4 MAF Estimated conservation savings from adoption of the proposed regulations: 2.4*0.2 = 0.48 MAF

86


14

Reduction in Public Water Supplier Water Sales Volume

As described above, urban water use for outdoor irrigation affected by the proposed regulations is estimated to be up to 2.4 MAF per year. Urban Water suppliers in California, however, are comprised of both governmental agencies and investor owned utilities that are regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Costs to investor owned utilities need not be considered for the purposes of estimating the costs of the proposed regulations on local agencies. The CPUC indicates that “there are 116 investor-owned water utilities under the CPUC’s jurisdiction providing water service to about 16 percent of California’s residents”. The estimated 2.4 MAF per year of water used for outdoor irrigation can therefore be reduced by 16 percent for the purpose of determining the amount of conservation and corresponding revenue impact to local government resulting from adoption of the proposed regulation. This brings the total volume of outdoor irrigation water use down to approximately 2.016 MAF per year. Since the proposed regulations are estimated to achieve in as much as a 20 percent reduction in water use it follows that the proposed regulations could result in a reduction in water sales by local government agencies of 403,200 acre-feet per year (i.e, 20% of 2.016 MAF).

Calculation of Decreased Public Water Supplier Sales Revenues

The estimated decreased sales revenues are a function of the average variable water rate and the amount of decreased sales volume. The estimate of decreased sales revenues due to the proposed regulations is $438,185,664, as calculated below.

Average statewide variable water rate: $1,086.77 per acre-foot Estimated conservation savings (local government portion) from proposed regulations: 403,200 acre-feet Total revenue impact: $1086.77*403,200 = $438,185,664 Note on calculation methodology

This methodology likely overstates the fiscal impact of decreased revenues for several reasons. First, it does not account for the savings in energy and chemical costs water suppliers will realize due to decreased water production. Second, it does not account for the avoided cost of supply augmentation that could be necessary if not for the conservation savings generated by the proposed regulations.

Reporting Costs The estimated cost of reporting as would be required by the proposed emergency regulations were determined by multiplying the total number of urban water supplies that would be required to submit monthly water production reports by the estimated average time to compile and submit water production information and by an average staff cost per hour. Based on information provided by the Department of Water Resources there are 440 urban water suppliers that are subject to Urban Water Management Planning Act requirement to prepare an Urban Water Management Plan and therefore subject to the proposed reporting requirements.

87


15

The maximum amount of time to prepare and submit the water production data is estimated to be 4 hours per urban water supplier per month. The estimated average total hourly staff costs of urban water supplier staff required to complete the certification form is $65 per hour or $260 per monthly report. If adopted, the term of the proposed emergency regulations would be 270 days or almost 9 months. Therefore, the total maximum reporting costs to urban water suppliers as a result of the proposed regulations is estimated at $1,029,600 (440 urban water suppliers multiplied by the $260 cost per monthly report multiplied by 9 months).

Total Implementation Cost The total estimated cost of implementing the proposed regulations is $439,215,264, which is the sum of estimated lost revenues to urban water suppliers and the estimated reporting costs as described above.

References:

California Department of Water resources, Public Review Draft (PRD) of California Water Plan

Update 2013 (Update 2013) accessed from: http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu2013/prd/index.cfm, on June 29, 2014. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Website, accessed from: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/water/, on July 1, 2014 Dixon, Lloyd S., Moore, Nancy Y., and Pint, Ellen M., Drought Management Policies and Economic Effects in Urban Areas of California, 1987-1992, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica CA, 1996. IMPLAN (http://www.implan.com) Halich, Greg, and Stephenson, Kurt, The Effectiveness of Drought Management Programs in Reducing Residential Water-Use in Virginia, Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Blacksburg, VA, April 21, 2006. Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Estimation of Residential Outdoor Water Use in Los Angeles, California, Landscape and Urban Planning 127 (2014) 124–135. Mini C., Hogue T.S., and Pincetl S., Patterns and Controlling Factors of Residential Use in Los Angeles, California, Water Policy Uncorrected Proof (2014) 1–16. Mini, Caroline, 2013: Residential water use and landscape vegetation dynamics in Los Angeles, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA

Olmstead, Sheila M., and Stavins, Robert N., Managing Water Demand: Price vs. Non-Price Conservation Measures, A Pioneer Institute White Paper, No. 39 (2007).

88

http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/cwpu2013/prd/index.cfm

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/water/

http://www.implan.com/


16

Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. and California-Nevada Section of the American Water Works Association. 2013 Water Rate Survey. Renwick, Mary E., and Green, Richard D., Do Residential Water Demand Side Management Policies Measure Up? An Analysis of Eight California Water Agencies, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 40,37-55 (2000). State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State with Annual Percent Change — January 1, 2013 and 2014. Sacramento, California, May 2014 State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014, accessed from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/workshops_results.shtml, on June 30, 2014 State Water Resources Control Board, June 20, 2014 - Statewide Drought Related Curtailment of Water Diversions Emergency Regulations Digest - with Appendix 10, accessed from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/emergency_regulations/sw_eregs_digest_062014.pdf, on June 30, 2014 State Water Resources Control Board Water Conservation Survey results as of June 19, 2014, Sacramento, CA, accessed from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/workshops_results.shtml

89



http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/emergency_regulations/sw_eregs_digest_062014.pdf

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/emergency_regulations/sw_eregs_digest_062014.pdf



90

91

6. A.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Randy Bobroff, Water Division Supervisor

Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: WATER DIVISION SUPERVISOR REPORT ACTIVITIES The Water Division Supervisor will report on activities and endeavors since the last Board meeting. MEETINGS ATTENDED The following is a listing of the key meetings and events that have taken place since reporting at the last Board Meeting. 1. June 18, Board Meeting 2. June 20, Meeting and site visit with Edison for Ayer’s Acres project 3. July 1, Meeting with Skyline Ponds for backflow conditions 4. July 9, Meeting with Keith D’Avignon (salt pumping systems) WATER DEPARTMENT MONTHLY OPERATIONS See attached: Department Operations System Maintenance Customer Service Personnel Report Accounting Report

92

6. A.

1. MONTHLY WATER QUALITY TESTING RESULTS103

Yes X No

On X OffYes X No

Yes X No

01010

310

REMARKS:

REMARKS:

5. CUSTOMER SERVICE CALLSA. Meters Turned Off Due To Leaks On Customer SideB. High / Low Pressure Flow Complaints

4. SYSTEM MAINTENANCE

C. Water Quality Complaints (Taste, Odor, Turbidity, etc.)

D. Estimated Gallon / Per Minute All Leaks

A. Number of Main Leaks RepairedB. Number of Service line Leaks RepairedC. Number of Meter / Valve Leaks Repaired

REMARKS:

B. Wells & Boosters Functioning Properly

REMARKS:

3. EQUIPMENT OPERATION (Tractors, Trucks, Compressor, Welder, etc.)Equipment & Generators Functioning Properly

A. Number of Samples Collected B. State Health Minimum Requirements Met

A. Telemetry System Computer

WATER DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS MONTH / YEAR MAY 2014

2. MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENT OPERATION

93

6. A.


ACCOUNTING REPORT

MONTH/YEAR JUNE 2014

WATER PRODUCTIONDISTRICT SOURCES: GALLONS PRODUCED % OF TOTAL PRODUCTION

Sidewinder Canyon 1,781,810 10.83%Luring Canyon 610,562 3.71%Weiss Canyon 337,819 2.05%Rimwood 575,735 3.50%Owl Rock 521,430 3.17%Luring Pines 501,436 3.05%Complex 313,322 1.90%Harris 825,313 5.01%

TOTAL DISTRICT SOURCES: 5,467,427 33.22%

PURCHASED SOURCES:CLAWA 9,863,650 59.93%APCWD 1,128,806 6.86%TOTAL PURCHASED SOURCES: 10,992,456 66.78%

TOTAL PRODUCTION: 16,459,883 100.12%

TANKS (Gains/Loss) PRODUCTION: (19,157) -0.12%

TOTAL ADJUSTED PRODUCTION: 16,440,726 100.00%

WATER CONSUMPTION CONSUMPTION IN GALLONS % OF TOTAL CONSUMPTION

Metered Sales to Customers 14,555,122 98.08%Metered Sales Thru Fire Hydrants 20,793 0.14%Metered Sales to Smiley Park 137,108 0.92%Metered District Consumption 11,392 0.08%Known Unmetered Estimated Consumption 115,900 0.78%

TOTAL CONSUMPTION: 14,840,315 100.00%

TOTAL ADJUSTED PRODUCTION 16,440,726 100.00%

UNACCOUNTABLE WATER 1,600,411 9.73%

94

WATER PRODUCTION

DISTRICT SOURCES:GALLONS

PRODUCED% OF

TOTALGALLONS

PER MINUTEACRE FEET

MILLION CUBIC FT

Sidewinder Canyon 22,936,518 15.02% 43.64 70.39 3.07Luring Canyon 5,865,788 3.84% 11.16 18.00 0.78Weiss Canyon 4,368,525 2.86% 8.31 13.41 0.58Rimwood 9,241,460 6.05% 17.58 28.36 1.24Owl Rock 6,785,314 4.44% 12.91 20.82 0.91Luring Pines 6,859,362 4.49% 13.05 21.05 0.92Complex 3,954,612 2.59% 7.52 12.14 0.53Harris 11,770,449 7.71% 22.39 36.12 1.57

TOTAL DISTRICT SOURCES: 71,782,028 47.02% 136.57 220.31 9.60

PURCHASED SOURCES:CLAWA 67,698,950 44.35% 128.80 207.77 9.05APCWD 12,744,346 8.35% 24.25 39.11 1.70

TOTAL PURCHASED SOURCES: 80,443,296 52.69% 153.05 246.89 10.75

TOTAL PRODUCTION: 152,225,324 99.71% 289.62 467.19 20.35

TANKS (Gain/Loss) PRODUCTION: 436,661 0.29% 0.83 1.34 0.06

TOTAL ADJUSTED PRODUCTION: 152,661,985 100.00% 290.45 468.53 20.41

WATER CONSUMPTION:

Metered Sales to Customers 141,258,760 99.05% 268.76 433.54 18.88Metered Sales Thru Fire Hydrants 121,432 0.09% 0.23 0.37 0.02Metered Sales to Smiley Park 517,387 0.36% 0.98 1.59 0.07Metered District Consumption 107,839 0.08% 0.21 0.33 0.01Known Unmetered Consumption 610,453 0.43% 1.16 1.87 0.08

TOTAL CONSUMPTION 142,615,871 93.42% 271.34 437.70 19.07

TOTAL ADJUSTED PRODUCTION 152,661,985 100.00% 290.45 468.53 20.41

UNACCOUNTABLE WATER 10,046,114 6.58% 19.11 30.83 1.34

Month/Year: July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2014

* 2013-14 Total production readings supplied by CLAWA, APCWD and District records.

RUNNING SPRINGS WATER DISTRICT2013-14 ANNUAL

WATER ACCOUNTING REPORT

95

6. B.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Trevor Miller, Wastewater Treatment Division Supervisor Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION SUPERVISOR

REPORT ACTIVITIES AND ENDEAVORS The Wastewater Treatment Division Supervisor will report on activities and endeavors since the last Board meeting. MEETINGS ATTENDED

1. Attended Ovivo MBR workshop May 8 & 9 2014 2. Attended June 18th regularly scheduled board meeting

MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENT AND EQUIPMENT OPERATION

Treatment plant staff is preparing for annual MBR takedown and service All other components of the treatment plant are functioning correctly

MONTHLY WATER QUALITY TESTING RESULTS May

Total Number of Samples: 13 Regional Board Waste Discharge Requirements Met: yes

June

Total Number of Samples: 13 Regional Board Waste Discharge Requirements Met: yes

GREEN ACRES IRRIGATION

0 Hours of runtime

96

6. B.

DAILY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FLOWS June 2014

Total Monthly Flow: 12,935,000 Gallons Average Daily Flow: 431,167 Gallons

May 2014

Flows Percentages

Arrowbear 1,710,655 13.17%

CSA-79 1,562,000 12.03%

Running Springs Water District 9,713,345 74.80% SPRAY IRRIGATION / EFFLUENT DISPOSAL DATA No spray irrigation for effluent disposal was used in the upper, middle or lower areas for this reporting period. EFFLUENT DISPOSAL PONDS DATA As of Memorandum date: Pond 1 - 36” of capacity, 2 thru 13, 48” of capacity.

97

6. C.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Isaiah Hall, Wastewater Collection Department Supervisor Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: WASTEWATER COLLECTION SUPERVISOR REPORT ACTIVITIES AND ENDEAVORS The Wastewater Collection Division Supervisor will report on activities and endeavors since the last Board meeting. MEETINGS ATTENDED The following is a listing of the key meetings and events that have taken place since reporting at the last Board Meeting.

1. June 26 Meeting with staff ( annual employee performance evaluations)

2. June 30 Meeting with Bernie of Sky line ponds ( possible sewer easement

encroachment issue)

3. July 1 Meeting with Ryan Gross ( performance evaluation)

4. July 2 Meeting with TESCO ( finishing up phase 2 )

5. July 3 Telemetry upgrade Phase 2 Complete

98

6. C.

COLLECTIONS SYSTEM MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES

Year CCTV Inspection & Cleaning

(LF)

Hot Spots &

FOG (LF)

MH Inspected & Sealed

MH Rehab/ Repair

s

Pipe Repairs/ Replacement

Smoke Testing

Slip Lining (LF)

2000 0 33 2001 0 9,379 12 1000’ 2002 0 9,379 59 2003 39,200 9,379 367 37 31 2004 26,600 9,379 225 20 32 2005 45,200 9,379 244 24 24 2006 28,500 9,379 7sealed

224 74 38 553’

2007 22,500 9,379 154 51 2 2008 32,300 9,379 225 75 1 126’ 2009 0 9,379 Wet well 1 sag 2010 8,200 9,379 4sealed

48 60 1 sag

5

2011 7,200 9,379 56 12 9 6’ 2012 22,500 9,379 5sealed

154 34 7 6’

2013 18,170 10,582 281 7 7 2014 7,404 70 7 Totals 250,200 128,920 1,959 394 256 1,691 * Total collection system footage is approximately 58 miles or 306,240 linear feet (LF). ** Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) goal is to inspect and clean the entire collection system every 10 to 12 years.

99

6. D.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Tony Grabow, Fire Chief Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY SUMMARY REPORT ACTIVITIES The Fire Chief will report on activities and endeavors since the last Board meeting. MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED The following is a listing of the key meetings and events that have taken place since reporting at the last Board Meeting.

1. May 21 Mountain Mutual Aid Meeting

2. May 27 COAD Meeting

3. May 28 CERT Meeting

4. May 28 Zone 3 Meeting

5. May 30 Association Pancake Breakfast

6. June 4 Company Training Station 50

7. June 4 & 5 Apparatus Pump Testing

8. June 9 Team Teaching with USFS at CHE

9. June 11 Blood Pressure Checks for Golden Oaks

10. June 13 Prevention Assembly at CHE

11. June 16 Station Tour for CHE Kindergarten Class

12. June 18 Company Training with Arrow Bear Fire at Station 50

13. June 25 CERT Meeting Station 50

14. June 26 County Chiefs Meeting

15. July 2 Company Training with Arrow Bear and Cal Fire

16. July 9 Blood Pressure Checks for Golden Oaks

100

6. D.

COMPARISON REPORT OF FIRE DEPARTMENT STATISTICS BETWEEN

FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 AND 2013/2014 THROUGH MAY 31, 2014

FY 12/13 FY 12/13 to 5/31 FY 13/14 to 5/31 Total Runs 837 702 698 Total Transport 420 383 366 Total Billed $904,048.94 $827,337.52 $811,247.32 Write-offs* $275,315.67 $240,642.60 $254,868.57 Collectible $628,733.27 $586,694.92 $556,378.75 Total Paid to Date $368,665.86 $345,271.67 $213,293.57 Collection (%) 63% 65% Collection (%) Fiscal 06/07 72% Fiscal 07/08 71% Fiscal 08/09 70% Fiscal 09/10 70% Fiscal 10/11 61%

Average Collection (%) 69% *Refer to Resolution No. 09-12 for Uncollectible Write-off Policy

MONTHLY COMPARISON STATISTICS FOR FISCAL YEAR 12/13 AND 2013/2014

FY12/13 FY 13/14 Difference July

Total Runs 67 85 18 Total Transport 43 46 3 Total Billed $94,385.45 $101,981.27 $7,595.82 Write-offs $21,187.47 $46,722.28 $25,534.81 Collectible $73,197.98 $55,258.99 -$17,938.99 Total Paid to Date $39,268.98 $33,963.82 -$5,305.16 August Total Runs 48 75 27 Total Transport 25 34 9 Total Billed $54,846.39 $75,211.09 $20,364.70 Write-offs $14,740.16 $26,869.01 $12,128.85 Collectible $40,106.23 $48,342.08 $8,235.85 Total Paid to Date $20,382.29 $20,819.44 $437.15

101

6. D.

September Total Runs 50 62 12 Total Transport 20 31 11 Total Billed $44,161.66 $67,855.32 $23,693.66 Write-offs $18,441.22 $28,613.56 $10,172.34 Collectible $25,720.44 $39,241.76 $13,521.32 Total Paid to Date $16,158.98 $19,828.10 $3,669.12

October Total Runs 53 47 -6 Total Transport 28 27 -1 Total Billed $58,523.20 $60,396.00 $1,872.80 Write-offs $23,734.28 $21,056.89 -$2,677.39 Collectible $34,788.92 $39,339.11 $4,550.19 Total Paid to Date $19,711.92 $13,332.64 -$6,379.28

November Total Runs 70 46 -24 Total Transport 34 26 -8 Total Billed $71,690.61 $55,925.17 -$15,765.44 Write-offs $30,900.57 $18,704.29 -$12,196.28 Collectible $40,790.04 $37,220.88 -$3,569.16 Total Paid to Date $25,692.14 $13,646.95 -$12,045.19 December Total Runs 107 69 -38 Total Transport 40 40 -0- Total Billed $86,770.97 $90,800.48 $4,029.51 Write-offs $34,247.55 $19,938.67 -$14,308.88 Collectible $52,523.42 $70,861.81 $18,338.39 Total Paid to Date $30,626.69 $37,880.33 $7,253.64 January Total Runs 107 75 -32 Total Transport 56 40 -16 Total Billed $122,523.00 $89,622.22 -$32,900.78 Write-offs $30,450.83 $39,860.37 $9,409.54 Collectible $92,072.17 $49,761.85 -$42,310.32 Total Paid to Date $59,041.19 $31,660.89 -$27,380.30 February

102

6. D.

Total Runs 94 69 -25 Total Transport 40 41 1 Total Billed $86,774.45 $91,166.93 $4,392.48 Write-offs $12,950.89 $34,657.51 -$21,706.62 Collectible $73,823.56 $56,509.42 -$17,314.14 Total Paid to Date $48,006.61 $16,887.24 -$31,119.37 March Total Runs 53 44 -9 Total Transport 25 18 -7 Total Billed $53,404.07 $39,208.03 -$14,196.04 Write-offs $17,011.04 $7,894.40 -$9,116.64 Collectible $36,393.03 $31,313.63 -$5,079.40 Total Paid to Date $25,684.29 $12,192.01 -$13,492.28 April Total Runs 53 56 3 Total Transport 37 32 -5 Total Billed $78,779.41 $70,087.15 -$8,692.26 Write-offs $22,497.19 $10,551.50 -$11,945.60 Collectible $56,282.22 $59,535.65 $3,253.43 Total Paid to Date $24,690.90 $13,082.15 -$11,608.75

May Total Runs 67 70 3 Total Transport 35 31 -4 Total Billed $75,478.31 $68,993.66 -$6,484.65 Write-offs $14,481.57 -$14,481.57 Collectible $60,996.74 $68,993.66 $7,996.92 Total Paid to Date $36,007.68 -$36,007.68

June Total Runs 68 Total Transport 37 Total Billed $76,711.42 Write-offs $34,673.07 Collectible $42,038.35 Total Paid to Date $23,394.19

103

6. D.

FIRE DEPARTMENT STATISTICS TO DATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/2014

Total Runs 698 Medical Aids 545 Total Transports 366 Investigations/Public Service 87 Fires 66

Total Billed $811,247.32 Total Medicare/Medical Write-Offs $254,868.57 Total Amount Collectible $556,378.75

Total Amount Collected Since July 1, 2013 $307,528.81 *Includes all prior years

FY 2013/2014 Monthly Detail July 2013


Total Billed $101,981.27 Total Medicare/Medi-Cal Write-Offs $46,722.28 Total Amount Collectible $55,258.99 Total Paid for Accounts $33,963.82

August 2013 Total Runs 75 Medical Aids 58 Total Transports 34 Investigations/Public Service 11 Fires 6


September 2013

104

6. D.



October 2013 Total Runs 47 Medical Aids 35 Total Transports 27 Investigations/Public Service 7 Fires 5


November 2013 Total Runs 46 Medical Aids 38 Total Transports 26 Investigations/Public Service 8 Fires


December 2013 Total Runs 69 Medical Aids 58 Total Transports 40

105

6. D.

Investigations/Public Service 6 Fires 5


January 2014 Total Runs 75 Medical Aids 58 Total Transports 40 Investigations/Public Service 8 Fires 9


February 2014 Total Runs 69 Medical Aids 56 Total Transports 41 Investigations/Public Service 8 Fires 5


March 2014 Total Runs 44 Medical Aids 34 Total Transports 18 Investigations/Public Service 4 Fires 6

106

6. D.


April 2014



May 2014 Total Runs 70 Medical Aids 51 Total Transports 31 Investigations/Public Service 10 Fires 9

Total Billed $68,993.66 Total Medicare/Medi-Cal Write-Offs Total Amount Collectible $68,993.66 Total Paid for Accounts

107

6. D.

FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY INSPECTION REPORT

Residential Inspections Hydrants Includes Weed Abatement Program and *Previous Months Inspections

Month No. Violations Number of

Inspections Found *Re-

InspectionsPlan Checks Inspection/Mainte

nance Flowed

July 0 0 159 0 0 0

August 0 331 4012 0 0 0 September 0 217 199 0 93 0

October 0 0 0 1 223 0 November 0 0 0 0 0 0 December 0 0 0 0 0 0 January 0 0 0 0 0 0 February 0 0 0 2 0 0 March 0 0 0 1 0 0 April 7 4 0 0 0 0 May 0 0 0 1 283 0 June 4755 1170 0 0 16 0

Totals to Date 4755 1718 4370 5 615 0 Commercial Fire Prevention Inspections Includes New Construction Inspections and *Previous Months Inspection

Number of No. Violations

Sprinkler Number of *No. Violations

Month Number of Buildings

Occupancies Found Acceptance Re-Inspections Corrected

July 0 0 0 0 0 0

August 0 0 0 0 0 0 September 0 0 0 0 0 0

October 0 0 0 0 0 0 November 76 109 31 0 20 20 December 0 0 0 0 0 0 January 0 0 0 0 0 0 February 0 0 0 1 0 0 March 0 0 0 0 0 0 April 0 0 0 0 0 0 May 0 0 0 0 0 0 June 0 0 0 1 0 0

Totals to Date 76 109 31 2 20 20

108

6. D.

FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY TRAINING REPORT Date and Subject Hrs C.E.s # Pers Total

Hrs CE Hrs

Total

Jul-13 512 512

7/3- CAFS/FOAM/PUMPING/PORTABLE MONITOR

3 17 51

7/17- MULTI DEPT WET DRILL 3 17 51

FF TRAINING 258

Target Safety 152

Aug-13 364 876

8/7- CPR/ KING AIRWAY/ PEDIATRIC AIRWAY Part 2

3 21 63

8/21- AUTO EXTRICATION CLASSROOM

3 15 45

FF TRAINING 202

Target Safety 54

Sep-13 399 1275

9/4- STRUTS/AIRBAGS & VEHICLE STABILIZATION

3 17 51

9/18- ROPE RESCUE 3 18 54

FF Training 189

Target Safety 105

Oct-13 470 1745

10/2- AUTO EXTRICATION 3 26 78

10/16- DRIVER 1A DRIVING COURSE 3 24 72

FF Training 196

Target Safety 124

Nov-13 350 2095

11/6- COLD WEATHER EMERGENCIES/SNOW CAT

3 18 54

11/20- FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 3 19 57

109

6. D.

FF Training 136

Target Safety 103

Dec-13 287 2382

12/4 WATER SYSTEMS & COMPANY INSPECTIONS

3 23 69

12/18 Community Christmas Party

FF Training 82

Target Safety 136

Jan-14 328 2710

1/8 BA Fit Test/BA Maze/2 in 2 out/RIC 3 17 51

1/15 CO Emergencies/ Abuse / SIDS 3 19 57

FF Training 113

Target Safety 107

Feb-14 325 3035

2/5 EMS Simulations 3 22 66

2/19 Fire Fighting (Tactics & Theory) 3 22 66

FF Training 86

Target Safety 107

Mar-14 295 3330

3/5 Salvage and Overhaul 3 22 66

3/19 Review Intro to Wildland/Shelters/Tools

3 18 54

FF Training 68

Target Safety 107

Apr-14 297 3627

4/2 Electrical Safety 3 17 51

4/16 Intro to Wildland 3 22 66

110

6. D.

FF Training 72

Target Safety 108

May-14 254 3881

5/7 Building Construction 3 21 63

5/21 Multi Company Structure Drill 3 12 36

FF Training 63

Target Safety 92

Jun-14 244 4125

6/4 Wildland Classroom 3 18 54

6/18 Wildland Practical (Sta 12) 3 19 57

FF Training 68

Target Safety 65

111

6. E.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Joan C. Eaton, Board Secretary/Administration Supervisor/Treasurer Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATION MONTHLY SUMMARY REPORT ACTIVITIES AND ENDEAVORS 2013/2014 FISCAL YEAR AUDIT Van Lant & Fankhanel, LLP, Certified Public Accountants have scheduled the District Preliminary Internal Control Review for July 24, 2014 and will return on September 17th, 18th and 19th to conclude the Audit for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2014. Sunny Kim, Financial Consultant has begun assisting the District regarding year end governmental and business-type activities in preparation of the 2013/2014 District Financial Statements. 2014/2015 AVAILABILITY BILLING The District mailed approximately eleven hundred (1100) Water and/or Sewer Availability billings on May 1, 2014 with a due date of July 1, 2014 for a total billing of $53,179. Approximately $38,300 has been received and the remaining unpaid fees will be placed on the 2014/2015 San Bernardino County Tax Roll for collections in addition to the annual Fire Suppression Charges. MOUNTAIN TOP DAY The District will participate in the Mountain Top Day Festival scheduled for Saturday, August 2, 2014 beginning at 9:00 A.M. on the Downtown Property. Informational, conservation and education materials will be distributed to the community by Whitney Mesna, District Representative. MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED The following is a listing of the key meetings and events that have taken place since reporting at the last Board Meeting.

June 2, 2014 - Attended Weekly Administration Team Meeting


June 10, 2014 - Attended Quarterly Safety Team Meeting

112

6. E.

June 11, 2014 - Met with Scott Pieratt, WSP Corporate Benefits and Insurance Services, Inc. and District Employees regarding District Health Benefits Renewal Plans


June 18, 2014 - Attended Regular Board Meeting and Public Hearing

June 19, 2014 - Met with Scott Pieratt, WSP Corporate Benefits and Insurance Services, Inc. regarding District Health Benefits Renewal Plans


June 25, 2014 - Met with Sunny Kim, Financial Consultant


July 2, 2014 - Met with Sunny Kim and Nancy O’Rafferty, Financial Consultants

July 7, 2014 - Attended Weekly Administration Team Meeting

July 14, 2014 - Attended Weekly Administration Team Meeting

113

6. F.


M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 16, 2014 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ryan Gross, General Manager SUBJECT: GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT The General Manager will report on activities and endeavors the District has been working on since the last Board meeting.

114