MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING - Municipal Water ...

MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORKSHOP MEETINGOF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFMUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTYAugust 4, 2004At 8:30 a.m., President Barbre called to order the Regular Joint Workshop Meeting ofthe Board of Directors of Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) at theDistrict facilities located in Fountain Valley. Director Dick led the Pledge of Allegianceand Secretary Goldsby called the roll.MWDOC DIRECTORSErgun “Eric” Bakall*Brett R. BarbreWayne A. ClarkLarry Dick*Joan FinneganSusan HinmanEd Royce, Sr.MWDOC STAFFKevin Hunt, General ManagerKarl Seckel, Assistant ManagerJanet Morningstar, Legal CounselMaribeth Goldsby, Board SecretaryMatt Stone, Assoc. Gen. Mgr./PlanningDavid Cordero, Comm. Relations Prog Supvsr.Michelle Tuchman, Pub. Affairs Consultant*Also MWDOC Met RepresentativesOTHERS PRESENTWes BannisterJack FoleyMike HealeyDiana LeachRenae HincheyLo TanJohn KennedyRoy WolfeEddie RigdonRon GastelumAmy ChenMWDOC Met RepresentativeMWDOC Met RepresentativeMesa Consolidated Water DistrictMesa Consolidated Water DistrictLaguna Beach County Water DistrictOrange County Water DistrictOrange County Water DistrictMetropolitan Water District of So. Cal.Metropolitan Water District of So. Cal.Metropolitan Water District of So. Cal.San Diego County Water AuthorityPUBLIC PARTICIPATION/PUBLIC COMMENTSPresident Barbre announced members of the public wishing to comment on agendaitems could do so after the item has been discussed by the Board and requestedmembers of the public identify themselves when called on. Mr. Barbre asked whetherthere were any comments on other items (which would also be heard at this time).

Minutes August 4, 2004No comments were made.ITEMS RECEIVED TOO LATE TO BE AGENDIZEDDetermine need and take action to agendize item(s), which arose subsequent to theposting of the Agenda. (ROLL CALL VOTE: Adoption of this recommendation requiresa two-thirds vote of the Board members present or, if less than two-thirds of the Boardmembers are present, a unanimous vote.)No items were presented.RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO CONGRESSMAN ED ROYCE, JR. FORHIS EFFORTS TO SECURE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THE ORANGECOUNTY WATER RELIABILITY STUDYPresident Barbre stated that a Resolution of Appreciation to Congressman Ed Royce,Jr. for his efforts to secure Federal funding for the Orange County Water ReliabilityStudy was before the Board for consideration.Upon MOTION by Director Dick, seconded by Director Royce, and carried (7-0), theBoard adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1744, thanking Congressman Ed Royce, Jr. for hisefforts to secure Federal funding for the Orange County Water Reliability Study, by thefollowing roll call vote:AYES:NOES:ABSENT:ABSTAIN:Directors Bakall, Barbre, Clark, Dick, Finnegan, Hinman & RoyceNoneNoneNonePRESENTATION BY RON GASTELUM AND ROY WOLFE REGARDINGDIAMOND VALLEY LAKE RECREATION ACTIVITIESMr. Ron Gastelum, Chief Executive Officer of Metropolitan Water District of SouthernCalifornia (MET) provided an update to the Board regarding MET’s efforts in dealingwith perchlorate contamination. He commented on the remediation efforts at the LasVegas Wash, perchlorate litigation that has emerged in the San Gabriel Valley, and theState of California’s new public health goal (6 parts per billion). He noted thatperchlorate has not been detected at Diamond Valley Lake, that MET formed aPerchlorate Task Force to review and study solutions and treatment for perchlorate, andthat MET will be seeking Proposition 50 funding opportunities in this regard (andencouraged all of MET’s member agencies to develop proposals). He also reported oncontamination levels in Orange County and suggested that MWDOC and MET staffswork together to review the facts relative to perchlorate contamination in thegroundwater basin.In response to the information received, the Board discussed public health goals,projected costs for clean-up, treatment processes, and any possible outreach efforts onhealth risks associated with perchlorate (for the “at-risk” population).2

Minutes August 4, 2004the issues before proceeding with a JPA. He also pointed out that if the Tri-Tunnelconcept adds cost to the CPAP, he would not recommend moving forward (with Tri-Tunnel concept). Mr. Hunt commented that he would confer with MET staff regardingthe technical issues and subsequently provide a briefing to the MWDOC Board on theissues. Discussion ensued regarding the tunnel, it’s location, and the delivery point forwater.Mr. Gastelum also reported on Pipeline 6, advising that he issued a staffrecommendation to move forward with Pipeline 6, at least to the county-line. Headvised that San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) issued a study whichindicated that Pipeline 6 would be needed eventually (possibly as far out at 2025); andthat additional studies are underway (or expected within the next couple of years) as aresult of recent seawater desalination development in the Carlsbad area, (to reevaluatewhen Pipeline 6 will likely be needed. He stated that in accordance with METphilosophy (water reliability planning to avoid emergency planning) MET staff believesthat Pipeline 6 will be needed and is, therefore, necessary. He stated that there is acurrent dispute on whether MET is obligated to construct Pipeline 6 beyond the countyline;he advised that the MET Board has not yet determined its position on this issue.Dispute resolution discussions are underway between MET and SDCWA regarding thisissue.President Barbre commented on the vulnerability of South Orange County reliability andthe need for alternative supplies to South Orange County. He suggested a multi-usepipeline “looping” between South Orange County and North San Diego County (throughCamp Pendleton) would be beneficial to both areas.Director Bakall expressed concern with proceeding with Pipeline 6 at this point, notingthat such construction would rule-out discussions for a coastal connection betweenSouth Orange County and North San Diego County. He further commented thatpursuant to the SDCWA study which states that SDCWA will pursue desalination, andforecasts Pipeline 6 may not be needed until 2025, he believed there were morepressing projects which will be required before 2025 such as the Central PoolAugmentation Project (which studies indicate will be needed by 2016) and a possiblecoastal connection. He also encouraged MET to purchase the balance of capacity inthe South County Pipeline.Mr. Gastelum indicated that MET would be holding a Board workshop to address thisissue sometime in the fall.Director Finnegan commented that it was MWDOC’s highest priority for adequate watersupplies to South Orange County.The Board thanked Mr. Gastelum for his presentation and received and filed theinformation as presented.DISCUSSION REGARDING MET LOCAL RESOURCES PROGRAM (LRP)SECTION 7 LANGUAGE4

Minutes August 4, 2004General Manager Hunt updated the Board on the current negotiations regarding MET’sLRP Section 7 language, noting discussions were proceeding positively. It was notedthat the Board previously authorized the General Manager to execute the LocalResources Program Agreement between Metropolitan, OCWD, and MWDOC, for theGroundwater Replenishment System Seawater Barrier Project, contingent upon thedevelopment of acceptable wording for Section 7.RECESS/RECONVENEAt 10:10 a.m. President Barbre announced that the Board would adjourn for a fiveminuterecess. The Board reconvened at 10:20 a.m.METROPOLITAN BOARD AND COMMITTEE AGENDA DISCUSSION ITEMSSummary Regarding July Met Board MeetingAssociate General Manager Stone stated the summary of actions taken at the July METBoard meeting was included in the packet for the Board's information.The Board received and filed the information.Review items of significance for the August Met Board and CommitteeAgendasMr. Stone stated the August MET Board agenda was not yet available for review (due tothe date change of the MET Board meeting). He advised that an Assessed ValuationReport would be issued in late August.The Board received and filed the information as discussed.MET Director Key ObjectivesMr. Stone advised that the MET Director Key Objectives matrix was included in theBoard packet for the Board’s information.Responding to an inquiry by Director Hinman, Mr. Stone advised that MET formed aPerchlorate Task Force to coordinate and share information on the clean-up ofperchlorate, and monitor and develop regulatory requirements. The Board requestedreports of the Task Force activities.The Board received and filed the information.DesalinationGeneral Manager Hunt reported on the recent discussions on desalination activities,noting that he and staff participated in several meetings reviewing the possibilities forsecuring the three desalination locations (San Onofre, Dana Point, and Huntington5

Minutes August 4, 2004Beach). It was noted that staff is pursuing a proposal for Proposition 50 funding at theDana Point site. He noted that discussions for all three sites are progressing.DIRECTORS’ REPORTSPresident Barbre announced that MET would be holding a Diamond Valley LakeRecreation Subcommittee meeting on August 10, noting that the MWDOC Boardscheduled a Special Public Affairs/MET Oversight (PAMO) Committee meeting that day.Following discussion, the Board recommended the Special PAMO Committee meetingcommence at 7:30 a.m.CLOSED SESSIONAt 10:33 a.m., Legal Counsel Morningstar announced that the Board would adjourn toclosed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) for a conference withlegal counsel regarding anticipated litigation (one case).RECONVENEThe Board reconvened at 11:00 a.m. and Legal Counsel Morningstar announced thatno reportable action was taken.ADJOURNMENTThere being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at11:02 a.m.APPROVED:___________________________Maribeth Goldsby, Secretary_____________________________Brett R. Barbre, President6