minutes

South Bay Irrigation District

JULY 19, 2004

The Board of Directors of South Bay Irrigation District held a regular meeting on Monday, July 19, 2004, at the Sweetwater Authority Administrative Office, 505 Garrett Avenue, Chula Vista, California. President Welsh called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Directors Present: Alkire, Doud, Pocklington, Reynolds, and Welsh.

Directors Absent: None.

Others Present: General Manager Dennis Bostad, Operations Manager Mark Rogers, Legal Counsel Peggy Strand, and Board Secretary Marisa Farpón.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG

Director Alkire conducted the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT (Government Code Section (54954.3)
There was no comment from the public.

PRESIDENT'S PRESENTATION
There was no presentation.

ACTION AGENDA

PRESENTATION BY RICK ALEXANDER, TRAC
Status of Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)

Mr. Alexander said he would talk about the evolving Joint Water Agency Natural Community Conservation Plan (JWANCCP) and the subarea plan that is being prepared for Sweetwater Authority. He would also give the board an opportunity to ask questions about the plan. He stated that any suggestions or comments that would provide direction for him as they are starting to enter into the negotiation phase with the wildlife agencies would be very helpful.

The JWANCCP is organized under the Natural Community Conservation Plan Federal to provide both the California NCCP and the Federal Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the three active partners, Sweetwater Authority, Helix Water District, and Padre Dam Municipal Water District. The overall purpose is two-fold. One is to take the property and the operations of the water districts and merge them into an overall conservation strategy, and the other purpose is to engage in a coordinated conservation strategy. The three agencies will be able to obtain long-term permits and assurances for not only the siting but for the operations and maintenance of water facilities, such as maintaining the level of the reservoirs, water transfers, etc. By sharing in this coordinated comprehensive environmental management approach with these other public agencies, the Authority is going to benefit directly by the ability to much more easily site facilities and conduct operations.

The plan is devised so that other partners can be added in the future. There have been discussions with Otay to put together a process in which they could become one of the partners. Vista and Fallbrook Irrigation Districts have also expressed interest in the last year. Answering Director Pocklington's question, Mr. Alexander said that having more partners could have two benefits. First, there would be a greater opportunity to provide the kind of environmental conservation that we are looking for to obtain the permits and, second, the cost of preparing the subregional plan would be shared.

Mr. Alexander talked about the benefits of the JWD plan. It protects large blocks of habitat. It establishes natural open space over a very long term. People who have observed the process very closely over the last thirty or forty years would tell you that CEQA has set aside a great amount of land and it has cost a lot of money to public agencies and private sectors to implement it. The land has not been set aside based on a comprehensive strategy or good biological science. There is not a scientific strategy to function as a single environmental unit and, consequently, the benefit to the plants and particularly the animals is unsure.

The plan improves the connectivity of habitats protected in the Comprehensive MSCP in our county and in the Southern California preserve system. It enhances coordination with other conservation and wildlife management programs, which is a benefit to the water districts. Through this conservation strategy, the agreement that is being prepared by Counsel Strand will take authorizations under the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts and a few other Federal Acts. This will enable the Authority and the other two districts, in exchange for their set-aside and comprehensive management of the lands, to incidentally take endangered species and their habitats so long as the districts are actively and correctly managing and implementing their conservation plans. Another benefit of the partnership is coverage for 100 or more plant or animal species. One interesting thing coming out of the NCCP Act is the acknowledgement by the Feds that they can provide key permitting for the taking of unlisted species. We can get a covered species list, quite large and comprehensive, which anticipates problems with species that we do not anticipate now. It also anticipates and defines a process to add coverage for species that might become listed for one reason or another in the future.

The predictability of the environmental process is assured through an implementing agreement. Some of this predictability is related to the process of future listings. Another key area of predictability from this perspective is fixed mitigation at fixed locations. If we decide to enter into this agreement, hopefully in February or March, one of the best things that will come out of it is that we will have a preagreement with both Fish and Wildlife and Fish and Game describing where mitigation should occur for project impacts or operations, as well as what mitigation ratios should be. Mitigation ratios enable us to continue to protect land for watershed protection and for water production.

The NCCP guarantees flexibility in the use of water agency lands. One of the key provisions for flexibility is that water agencies will be able not only to accommodate the impacts of endangered species, but to have flexibility over the long term as far as which lands are used and to put lands in or out of the agreement as they might become surplus and not be required for species protection. Another key flexibility aspect is that it will give the partnering agencies the ability in the future to potentially sell the land at a profit for mitigation banking for other types of public or private sector impacts.

The question about how much land Sweetwater Authority is setting aside was brought up. General Manager Bostad said that it is yet unknown and the concept of setting aside the amount of land that we need to accomplish what we want is being discussed. Counsel Strand said that the amount to be set aside will be determined by the conservation analysis that is currently being done.

Mr. Alexander added that another benefit is that Sweetwater Authority, through the agreement with Fish and Wildlife and Fish and Game, will have the ability to self-permit under the Endangered Species. This is going to be increasingly valuable as the workload from these public agencies, particularly Fish and Game, goes up and the budgets and staff go down.

Mr. Alexander displayed several maps for the board. One depicting the major habitats in the Sweetwater Reservoir property, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, etc., and the species points. The information in this map has been produced for different Environmental Impact Reports over the past years. Another map showed facility projects, operations, and management actions that would be covered by the permit structure, such as water transfers, upgrading the Perdue Plant, pipeline maintenance, etc.

Asked about the removal of sand, Mr. Alexander said it is described as a potential future project. The plan is divided into a couple of categories. The first category is the projects that we anticipate will be done. As the impacts of those plans are evaluated, the conservation actions necessary to compensate for them are built into the plan. The second category is the potential future projects that may or may not be undertaken in the future.

The first part has three steps to follow. Step 1 is identifying the value of the resources; Step 2 is determining what actions, projects and operations need to be covered through this process; and Step 3 is developing the documentation for this agreement. There is an umbrella document in the subregional plan that states what the water agencies are going to do and the approach they are going to take, and it leaves the door open for other agencies to join.

The second part is a subarea plan for each individual agency describing specifically the actions that they are going to take on their property to implement the subregional plan. There is an implementing agreement, which is what binds the parties equally to the agreement. The Fish and Wildlife and Fish and Game agencies are the other parties implementing the agreement. There is an environmental document, the EIREIS, which is required both as a Federal and as a State action, and there is the Management Strategy, which describes the specific actions that Helix or Sweetwater will take over a period of time to manage these lands consistent with that agreement.

Mr. Alexander said that they are on a schedule to get through this planning process. They have an agreement with the wildlife agencies about the basic approach to design the conservation strategy and have identified what the mandatory review requirements are for the environmental documents. The goal is to submit simultaneously all three of the take authorization packages to the Wildlife agencies by February, and we will get the Federal Registered Publication probably within the next 60-75 days.

Mr. Alexander said he would be happy to answer any questions the Board might have. In answer to a question from Director Welsh, Mr. Alexander said that there is no other part of the state that has anything already in place that would be comparable to this NCCP. When the NCCP act passed, it was in response to the listing of the California Gnat Catcher because of the Federal Endangered Species Act. He added that there are other major HCPS. When legislature approved the NCCP, they instructed Fish and Game to use any five southern California counties as a test. They ultimately want to expand this approach because this comprehensive planning for conservation is so much better economically and environmentally. There are major HCPS and NCCPS under preparation in Yolo County, Sacramento County, Merced County, and San Bernardino, and an NCCP is being put in place in San Luis Obispo for management of mega issues with deer and mountain lions. All of these other NCCPS are rapidly spreading statewide and they are taking the same approach as the City and County of San Diego.

Counsel Strand said that she and Mr. Alexander would not be doing this if it were not for the vision of our previous General Manager Reynolds and the continued support of current General Manager Bostad and the Board.

ITEMS TO BE ADDED, WITHDRAWN OR REORDERED TO THE AGENDA
(Government Code Section 54956.5)

There were none.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Director Pocklington made a motion, seconded by Director Doud, that the Board approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 21, 2004. The motion carried.

APPROVAL OF DEMANDS AND WARRANTS

Director Reynolds made a motion, seconded by Director Alkire, that warrant numbers 10133 through 10143 be approved. The motion carried.

DIRECTORS' ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

There were none.

NEW BUSINESS

· Upon a motion made by Director Pocklington, seconded by Director Doud, the following resolution:

RESOLUTION 557
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SOUTH BAY IRRIGATION DISTRICT ADOPTING AN ANNUAL STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY

was passed and adopted by the following vote to wit:

Ayes: Directors Alkire, Doud, Pocklington, Reynolds, and Welsh
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None

· California Special Districts Association (CSDA) Board of Directors - Call for Nominations: None of the Board members expressed interest in being nominated for election as a director of CSDA. This item is to be filed without action.

REPORT OF TREASURER

Ms. Avery said that interest rates are slowly going up and that there would be no changes in the investments.

REPORT OF LAFCO SPECIAL DISTRICTS REGULAR MEMBER

Director Pocklington reported on two major items discussed at the meeting last Monday. One was the annexation of 20 acres from the City of San Marcos. There is a company that wants to build a feed center for horses and other animals and accommodate 197 horses on about 16 acres of land, as well as 96 dogs to stay overnight. There were concerns about the groundwater being contaminated. After much discussion, they voted against it.

The second item discussed was the Tia Juana Valley County Water District. Director Pocklington talked about how the district was created in 1946 to protect the groundwater. In 1958 they had surplus funds and they stopped collecting. In 1989 they made a unanimous decision to give the county $1.7 million in land and cash and they were to use it for recreation and so forth. They did not complete the job and in 1990 a new board was elected that reversed that decision. In 1992 they decided to charge $25 per parcel, but this was not approved by the people. In 1993 they increased it to $50 per parcel to the tune of $200,000 per year. The district has now gone through two grand juries that have agreed that the district is not needed and it is an extra layer of government. The Commission is unanimous in that whatever the district does should probably be done by the City of San Diego.

Operations Manager Rogers gave a brief history about the beginning of the Tia Juana Valley County Water District. He said that around 1936, California Water and Tel started drilling wells in the valley, taking water out of the shallow acquifer and exporting that water into the City of Coronado through a 16-inch line in the Silver Strand. The property owners filed suit against California Water and Tel and that was the beginning of the Tia Juana Valley County Water District. Now, the City of San Diego serves part of the area and California American Water Company serves the other part, and all customers in that area get water service. His opinion is that they want to develop water sources and sell it but the problem is that they do not have the infrastructure or the money to develop the resources. They have drilled a couple of wells and have found good water, but there is not enough of it to make a profit.

REPORT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY REPRESENTATIVE

Director Pocklington reported that James Turner had retired and that it was a surprise to everyone. He also reported that Paul Christiansen is retiring from the Rainbow Board. Barry Martin has been appointed to represent the City of Oceanside and chances are he will probably be on the Board only until the first of the year. He also noted the reappointments of Jesse Dixon from Padre Dam until July 7, 2010, and Keith Lewinger from Fallbrook until July 14, 2010. He added that Jim Turner is also an MWD director and they have to find a replacement. Director Pocklington stated his interest to be considered for the position.

DIRECTORS' COMMENTS

Director Doud wished Director Pocklington good luck.

Director Pocklington noted a correction to the minutes of last meeting. Regarding his wedding anniversary, the minutes said 45 years, but it has been 43 years of marriage for him.

Director Reynolds also wished Director Pocklington good luck.

Director Alkire too wished him good luck.

Director Reynolds asked if the Board could give Director Pocklington a letter or resolution of support.

CLOSED SESSION

There was none.

ADJOURNMENT

With no further business before the Board, President Welsh adjourned the meeting at 5:01 p.m., to the hour of 3:30 p.m., on August 16, 2004.