REGULAR BOARD MEETING

AGENDA PACKET

OCTOBER 15, 2018

POSTED: OCTOBER 12, 2018

Regular Board Meeting – October 15, 2018, 7:00 p.m.

Carmichael Water District Board Room

7837 Fair Oaks Boulevard Carmichael, CA 95608

AGENDA

The Board will discuss all items on its agenda, and may take action on any of those items, including information items

and continued items. The Board may also discuss other items that do not appear on its agenda, but will not act on those items unless action is urgent, and a resolution is passed by a two-thirds vote declaring the need for action arose

after posting of the agenda.

The Board of Directors welcomes and encourages participation in meetings. Public testimony may be given on any agenda item as it is called and limited to three minutes per speaker. Matters not on the posted agenda may be addressed under Public Comment. Please fill out a Speaker Card and turn it in at the staff table, either before or during the meeting. Public comment rules and procedures are on the back of the speaker card.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you have a disability and need a disability-related

modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the General Manager at 483-2452.

Requests must be made as early as possible, and at least one full business day before the start of the meeting.

CALL TO ORDER AND STATEMENT REGARDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: President Leidy

DISTRICT REPORTS:

1. General Manager’s Written Report

2. District Activity Written Report Presented by the Assistant General Manager

PUBLIC COMMENT:

3. Public Comment Any member of the public may address the Board on any item of interest to the public that is within the subject

matter jurisdiction of the Board.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial, to be acted on by the Board in one motion.

Should any Board member, staff member, or interested person request discussion on an item, the Board will consider

the item separate from the Consent Calendar.

4. Minutes for the Regular Board Meeting – September 17, 2018

5. Paid Expenditures Report – September 2018

ACTION CALENDAR:

6. In-House Committees

Management staff recommends that the Board of Directors:

1. Approves the title change of the Employee Relations Committee to Compensation Committee; and

2. Appoint Directors to serve on the identified In-House Committees for expired terms.

STAFF REPORTS:

7. Director’s Expense Reimbursement Summary for September

REGULAR BOARD MEETING AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 15, 2018 PAGE 2

GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE/INFORMATION:

8. Senator Jim Nielsen – Senate Bill 845 Letter dated September 21, 2018

9. News Articles

10. Director’s Written and/or Oral Reports

CALENDARS AND COMMITTEES:

11. Meetings Calendars:

a. 2018 Board Meeting Calendar

b. Meeting/Conference Calendar – November

c. Meeting/Conference Calendar – December

12. Board Representatives Committees Assignments

The next meeting of the Board of Directors will be a Regular Board Meeting held on: Monday, November 19, 2018 at 7:00 p.m.

General Manager’s Report by Steve Nugent

October 2018 Administration: Public Outreach: Updates to the website continue to take place to keep the public informed of the District’s activities to include: Water Conservation and Pipeline Projects, etc. Aerojet Activity: GET LA and GET LB are operating as designed and are meeting water quality requirements. Ongoing and Upcoming:

1. Regional Water Authority (RWA) Regional Water Reliability Plan – working 2. CWD/Sacramento County intertie – under discussion 3. Regional Water Transfer – ended 9/30/18 4. Collector #3 armoring project – completed 5. Voluntary Settlement Agreement – working 6. La Vista Tank Project – study underway. 7. Citrus Heights Irrigation District (CHID) RFP – released 8. Upgrade intertie with Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) – working 9. Hire New Staff Accountant – working (interviews completed) 10. Golden State Water Company (GSWC) water reliability activities – working 11. SSWD/CWD – Groundwater Wells discussion

Regional Water Transfer: CWD/Fair Oaks Water District (FOWD)/Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD)/CHID/San Juan Water District (SJWD)/RWA transfer ended on 9/30/18. Voluntary Settlement Agreement (VSA): The District is participating in this process. The goal is to reach agreement that would remove the need to go through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) process. The key ask from this region is the Water Forum Management Flow Standard. BDCP needs 50,000 acre-feet (AF) from the American River during all year types (normal, wet, or dry). Meetings continue with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) staff, and Board members. Staff from SWRCB is holding on to the unimpaired flow criteria methodology, it is our understanding that it will be released in December. Negotiations are continuing and the region is countering with our own proposal. I believe if a deal is not done by the end of November, then we will be going through the regulatory process. There seems to be a lot of pressure from the agencies to get this done before the next administration takes office. The major concern I have for CWD under the unimpaired flow criteria will be our ability to use our surface water rights during the summer. Under the SWRCB proposed methodology in June CWD will have access to surface water only 60% of the time, for July only 2% of the time and for August 0% of the time. Even with our use of GET water, the District would face major restrictions in the summer months. Upgrade intertie with SSWD: This fall the District will be upgrading an intertie between CWD and SSWD. The intertie is located in front of the Safeway parking lot. The upgrade will replace the flow meter and a power drop from SMUD to power meter. This intertie will be used for future water transfers and for emergency purposes.

AGENDA ITEM 1

Staffing: On 10/4 and 10/5, staff conducted interviews for the open accountant position. GSWC: Staff will be meeting with GSWC to discuss the potential of sharing water resources to help prepare both agencies for drought, whether they are actual or regulatory. SSWD: CWD and SSWD will be meeting in the next few weeks to discuss the potential of developing joint groundwater wells. Associations: Association California Water Agencies (ACWA): The Region 4 meeting had a successful turn out of approximately 40 people. I was on a panel for discussion of the Folsom and American River operations. Panel members included: Paul Heliker, Dan York, and Jim Peifer. The New Executive Director of ACWA is Dave Eggerton. RWA: No report Water Caucus: No Report Sacramento Groundwater Authority (SGA): No Report. Meetings (# meetings) with:

Tully and Young (3)

VSA Process (5)

Kennedy Jenks (3)

ACWA Region 4 Event (1)

Somach (2)

Interviews (7)

Auditor (1)

Forsgren (1)

SSWD(1)

1

District Activity Report September 2018

District Overview: In-house staff training: Training is continuing on an ongoing basis by the department managers and through online training. Departmental meetings are ongoing focused on training, compliance, safety, customer service and District updates. Individual manager and exempt employee meetings are continuing on a one-on-one basis to discuss and review budget, operations and activities. Meetings attended (16):

Supervisors/HR/IT (5)

Project Workgroups (2)

Selection Committee (2)

Staff (6)

Staff Meeting (1)

Information Technology: Infrastructure and Planning: Ongoing system improvements to ensure optimal performance. Routine: Troubleshoot issues; normal IT duties as scheduled or as needed.

Human Resources: Benefits/Payroll: Assisted employees with benefits related issues; Open Enrollment. Compliance: Completed required reporting and postings; created/updated policies, processes, documentation, etc. as needed. Personnel: Researched and handled personnel issues, questions, documentation; 3 positions open (2 positions – offered & accepted; 1 position – application review). Security/Building Maintenance: Assisted with District needs.

Public Information Activity

Public Outreach: Upcoming Events:

KIWANIS Mobile Recreation Program – October 2 & 3, 2018

Nature Fest – October 7, 2018

2019 Water Efficiency Calendar Contest

Website Updates:

Announcements, Board Documents, Employment, Homepage, Outreach Events, Request for Proposals, Resources & Tips.

The District’s website was accessed by 2,116 users 1,574 of which were new users.

Social Media: The District’s YouTube video content received 84 views in August. Water Use Reductions: Although the District is no longer reporting water use reduction data to the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB), staff will continue to calculate and inform the Board of water use reductions. Utilizing the SWRCB formula, staff calculated the following data for August 2015 to September 2018:

R-GPCD Monthly Reduction

Cumulative Reduction

249 10% 25%

Regional Water Meter Replacement Program: Citrus Heights Water District (CHWD), Fair Oak Water District (FOWD), Orange Vale Water Company (OVWC), Regional Water Authority (RWA), Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD), San Juan Water District (SJWD), City of Sacramento (COS) and Golden State Water Company (GSWC) are proceeding with a joint meter study, which will include meter performance

AGENDA ITEM 2

2

review, meter reading technology, meter testing and potentially bulk meter purchases. The District is participating in the process as a Level 1 participant which will allow the District to monitor the process, be involved in drafting an RFP, be involved in selection of consultants, and be a participant in the work group. At Level 1 there is no cost commitment to the District. FOWD, OVWC, RWA, SSWD, COS and GSWC have also been identified as Level 1 participants. If the District chooses later to increase commitment to Level 2 or 3 there would be a cost to buy into the program. On September 25, 2018 Chris Nelson participated as a panelist at a mandatory proposers meeting in support of the Study. Training: On September 28, 2018 Chris Nelson and Shelby Golden attended media training through the Regional Water Authority. The course focused on conducting effective on-camera news media interviews.

Outreach And Water Efficiency Activities Month FYTD

Presentations 0 4

Public Outreach Events 3 8

Water Waste 11 141

Water Waste Fines 0 0

Customer Assistance 14 114

Water Efficiency Surveys 7 97

Water Treatment and Production Activity Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Maintenance: Production Staff performed Clean-in-Place (CIP’s) on the primary membrane units in September. Training: The Production Department completed awareness training on Hearing Conservation and Disaster Preparedness. Staff utilized Target Solutions training through JPIA which provides continuing education units (CEU)’s. These CEU’s are used toward maintaining state certification. Compliance: The triennial on-site hazardous material inspection was performed by Sacramento County Environmental Management in September. This is a comprehensive inspection required every three years for all sites that store and use hazardous chemicals. Production Charts and Graphs:

CWD Monthly Water Production, Million Gallons (MG) 2011-2019

FY Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Totals

2018-19 387.57 361.56 314.04 1063.17

2017-18 399.61 383.76 323.74 270.59 140.87 129.07 113.92 117.16 115.88 148.80 258.57 335.23 2737.20

2016-17 357.82 353.35 299.41 193.38 123.16 115.61 113.74 96.26 116.84 123.76 268.14 332.52 2493.72

2015-16 287.66 283.68 259.99 213.09 128.89 107.92 100.49 97.72 107.12 148.87 219.44 308.84 2263.71

2014-15 373.21 338.74 294.65 240.50 153.63 116.73 120.74 110.98 168.88 175.83 214.05 255.44 2563.38

2013-14 470.97 434.57 349.04 306.94 212.49 160.96 158.30 109.17 132.71 164.82 283.33 358.07 3141.37

2012-13 474.75 465.78 391.92 287.92 150.24 123.99 123.20 128.54 186.95 233.28 370.15 411.86 3348.58

2011-12 448.20 454.95 402.18 237.81 162.12 158.97 158.05 136.99 140.45 153.99 321.46 418.58 3193.75

Avg. 399.97 384.55 329.73 250.03 153.06 130.46 126.92 113.83 138.40 164.19 276.45 345.79 2820.24

Daily 12.90 12.40 10.98 8.07 5.10 4.21 4.09 4.07 4.46 5.47 8.92 11.53

3

Production Up/ Down Month Up/ Down 8 Year Running

Average

Production from same month last year Down 3% Down 5%

System Monthly Production Average 10.5 MGD Peak Day – Sep 2nd 11.5 MGD

CWD Total Production Allocation Surface Water 50%

Groundwater 50%

C.W.D. Combined Surface & Groundwater Monthly Water Totals for FY 2018/2019

(Information is in million gallons) Active Wells

Location Jul-18 Aug-18 Sep-18 Oct-18 Nov-18 Dec-18 Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Totals

Barrett School 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Willow Park 52.741 51.737 49.608 154.09

Winding Way 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00

Garfield 55.954 54.478 43.260 153.69

La Vista 50.651 67.184 65.353 183.19

Ground Water 159.35 173.40 158.22 490.97

Surface Water * 367.89 327.35 290.94 986.18

GSWC Delivery 139.67 139.19 135.12 413.98

CWD Surface 228.22 188.16 155.82 572.20

CWD Monthly Total 387.57 361.56 314.04 1063.17

*Total production water from the Bajamont Water Treatment Plant (BWTP)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Jul-1

7

Aug-1

7

Sep-1

7

Oct-

17

No

v-1

7

De

c-1

7

Jan-1

8

Feb

-18

Ma

r-1

8

Apr-

18

Ma

y-1

8

Jun-1

8

Jul-1

8

Aug-1

8

Sep-1

8

X O

NE

TH

OU

SA

ND

PERIOD 7/1/2017- 9/30/2018

PRODUTION - 100 CUBIC FEET UNITS

0

100

200

300

400

500

Jul-1

7

Aug-1

7

Sep-1

7

Oct-

17

No

v-1

7

De

c-1

7

Jan-1

8

Fe

b-1

8

Ma

r-1

8

Apr-

18

Ma

y-1

8

Jun-1

8

Jul-1

8

Aug-1

8

Sep-1

8

X o

ne m

illi

on

CWD Combined Surface & Ground Water Usage

Surface Water Ground Water

4

Well Sites, Reservoirs & Distribution System: The WTP provided 50% of the water supply for CWD in September. CWD wells supplied the remaining 50%. La Vista Well, Willow Park Well and Garfield Well are currently in operation due to increased seasonal demand. GSWC Delivery: CWD delivered 135.12 MG to GSWC in September. There were no interruptions in water deliveries.

2018-19 CWD Remediated Groundwater Usage in Acre/Feet (AF)

Month

GET LA & LB Discharge

GET LA Irrigation Total Cumulative Total

July 129.19 30.23 159.42 159.42

August 134.10 21.00 155.10 314.52

September 139.19 23.91 163.10 477.62

Water Quality Activity Month FYTD

Backflow Assemblies Tested 60 169

Failed Tests 5 12

Water Quality

Taste and Odor 0 0

Color 1 4

Turbidity/Air 0 0

High Pressure 0 0

Low Pressure 0 0

There was one (1) water quality complaint in September for Color. The area where the complaint occurred was investigated and thoroughly flushed.

Billing Department Activity

Billing: Currently tracking at approximately 0.46% down from the same Billing Month last year.

Note: Billing chart represents cycle billings only and does not include collection or adjustment activities. Regular billings for July and August are split between two fiscal years reporting water sales for the period of June and July.

Billing

Month

Billing

Period Flat Rate

Service

Charge Usage

FY 17-18

Totals

FY 18-19

Totals

Previous FY $ 10,257,364

Aug-2017 June-July $ 36,776 $ 505,164 $ 558,962 $ 541,427 $ 559,475

Sep-2017 July-Aug $ 17,309 $ 532,400 $ 654,322 1,204,032

Oct-2017 Aug-Sept $ 38,208 $ 505,164 $ 593,278 1,136,650

Nov-2017 Sept-Oct -

Dec-2017 Oct-Nov -

Jan-2018 Nov-Dec -

Feb-2018 Dec-Jan -

Mar-2018 Jan-Feb -

Apr-2018 Feb-Mar -

May-2018 Mar-Apr -

Jun-2018 Apr-May -

Jul-2018 May-June -

Totals $ 92,293 $ 1,542,728 $ 1,806,562 $ 10,798,791 $ 2,900,156

5

Consumption * 1 Unit = 100 Cubic Feet = 748 Gallons:

Collections: Processed & Outstanding Activity

Distribution Department Activity

Gary, Susan, McClaren, and Arden Way Mainline Project: The sewer variance request was approved by SWRCB. The permit was signed and delivered. Sacramento Area Sewer District (SASD) has approved the District’s deviation at three separate sites. The mandatory pre-bid conference will be held on October 26, 2018 and the bid opening will take place on November 1, 2018. SSWD/CWD Intertie with 18 inch Mag Meter Replacement: The permit was submitted to Sacramento County for approval. Environmental Management Department: The following hazardous materials have been recycled and/or taken to the proper disposal site: fluorescent light bulbs, waste oil, paint and various assorted solvents and cleaners. The California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Annual Hazardous Materials Plan has been submitted and is under review. Sacramento County Projects: Sacramento County improvements require any permitted public utility to relocate its encroachment at the utility’s expense within the time specified per Section 1463 of the Streets and Highways Code.

Billing

Month

Usage

Period

Usage By

Unit *

Aug-2018 June-July 399,258

Sep-2018 July-Aug 467,373

Oct-2018 Aug-Sept 423,770

Nov-2018 Sept-Oct

Dec-2018 Oct-Nov

Jan-2019 Nov-Dec

Feb-2019 Dec-Jan

Mar-2019 Jan-Feb

Apr-2019 Feb-Mar

May-2019 Mar-Apr

Jun-2019 Apr-May

Jul-2019 May-June

Totals 1,290,401

Date

Past Due

Notices

48 Hours

Notices Shut Offs A/R $ Liens $ Liens #

Previous FY Avg. 951 126 17 108,809$ 4,948$ 12

Jul-2018 973 115 19 95,452$ 2,999$ 8

Aug-2018 921 143 18 100,975$ 3,410$ 9

Sep-2018 868 129 26 185,949$ 3,369$ 9

Oct-2018

Nov-2018

Dec-2018

Jan-2019

Feb-2019

Mar-2019

Apr-2019

May-2019

Jun-2019

6

Sacramento County now completes the entire design process of all projects and places them in a que with planning stages: A - preliminary; B – 60% design; and C – ready for construction. When funding comes available, the County projects are ready to go out to bid with little or no notice to the community or utilities. The Fair Oaks Blvd Widening Project Phase 3 is a good example of this process that moved the project start date ahead of its original scheduled time. After speaking with one of Sacramento County’s head engineers, the County may receive accelerated federal grant funding money that may move certain projects ahead of their projected and/or scheduled start dates. The District has established an annual budget for District required work for “Sacramento County Projects” in its Distribution PSM budget and will need to consider establishing a reserve fund for County accelerated District requirements. The following are scheduled Sacramento County projects.

Garfield Ave Bike Lane, Sidewalk, Street Light and Storm Drain Project: I have received the “C” plans for this project. By working directly with the County’s engineer I was able to lessen the overall impact to the District by meeting the County’s engineer on site and providing water main depths at three storm drain crossings. The County has revised the storm drain drop inlet elevations to cross over the existing water mains. Construction has been deferred until spring of 2018. The required “Letter of Liability” has been submitted to the County. Department staff has relocated three (3) service connections for this project. The remaining relocations will take place during the construction of the project. This project has been delayed until March 4, 2019 due to the low bid coming in at 43% over the project estimate.

Landis Ave Storm Drain Improvement Project: This project is in the “A” planning stage and facility relocations are unknown at this time. **On Hold**

Palm Dr. Drainage Improvement Project: This project is in the “B” planning stage and could move to construction at any time. **On Hold**

Fair Oaks Blvd. Beautification and Widening Project: Marconi Ave to Landis Ave. “B” plans for this project have been received and reviewed by staff. This project is anticipated to go to the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors in June 2018 and out to bid shortly after that. It may get pushed back a month depending on what happens with the Real Estate Acquisitions. This project has been delayed until spring 2019. **Pending**

Training and Personnel: Employees are receiving on-going training as part of the distribution department training program. Two new employees were hired in the distribution department. Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance: All department vehicles and equipment are being serviced and maintained to prolong their useful life.

PSM and O&M Activity

Capital Replacements (PSM) Month YTD Repairs/Maintenance (O&M) Month YTD

Meter Change Outs 1 9 R900i Meter Register Change

Outs 157 399

Meter Cut Ins 0 1 Service Lines 4 15

Meter Drop Ins 0 1 Main Lines 3 11

Service Lines 12 28 Fire Hydrant 1 1

Main Line Valves 1 1 Box and Lid Replace/Repair 10 22

Fire Hydrants 0 0 Customer Assist 83 288 Assist w/Private Repairs 21 69

Water Waste 1 10

Misc. Repairs 6 17

Regular Board Meeting – September 17, 2018, 7:00 p.m.

Carmichael Water District Board Room

7837 Fair Oaks Boulevard

Carmichael, CA 95608

MINUTES

The Board of Directors of the Carmichael Water District met in Regular Session this 17th day of September at

7:00 p.m. at the District Office located at 7837 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Carmichael.

ATTENDANCE:

Directors: Ron Greenwood, Roy Leidy, John Wallace

Absent: Mark Emmerson, Paul Selsky

Staff: Steve Nugent, Lynette Moreno, Chris Nelson

Guest: Zero (0) guests

Public: Two (2) members of the public

CALL TO ORDER: President Leidy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

DISTRICT REPORTS:

1. General Manager’s Written Report

Discussed with Board

2. District Activity Written Report Presented by the Assistant General Manager

Discussed with Board

PUBLIC COMMENT:

3. Public Comment

No Public Comment.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

4. Minutes for the Regular Board Meeting – August 20, 2018

5. Paid Expenditures Report – August 2018

M/S Greenwood / Wallace to approve the Consent Calendar Items 4-5.

Discussed with Board

Mark Emmerson Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Ron Greenwood Aye Nay Absent Abstain Roy Leidy Aye Nay Absent Abstain

John Wallace Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Paul Selsky Aye Nay Absent Abstain Board Totals: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Absent: 2 Abstain: 0 Passed Unanimously: Yes

ACTION CALENDAR:

6. La Vista Tank Selection Committee Recommendation

Management Staff recommends that the Board of Directors approves the selection of Kennedy/Jenks Consultants

as the Engineering Firm to complete the La Vista Tank Project Study.

M/S Greenwood / Wallace to approve as recommended.

Discussed with Board

Mark Emmerson Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Ron Greenwood Aye Nay Absent Abstain Roy Leidy Aye Nay Absent Abstain

John Wallace Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Paul Selsky Aye Nay Absent Abstain Board Totals: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Absent: 2 Abstain: 0 Passed Unanimously: Yes

AGENDA ITEM 4

REGULAR BOARD MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 17, 2018 PAGE 2

ACTION CALENDAR CONTINUED:

7. Resolution 09172018-1 A Resolution Adopting the American River Basin Integrated Regional Water

Management Plan

Management Staff recommends that the Board of Directors approves Resolution 09172018-1 A Resolution

Adopting the American River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.

M/S Wallace / Leidy to approve as recommended.

Discussed with Board

Mark Emmerson Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Ron Greenwood Aye Nay Absent Abstain Roy Leidy Aye Nay Absent Abstain

John Wallace Aye Nay Absent Abstain

Paul Selsky Aye Nay Absent Abstain Board Totals: Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Absent: 2 Abstain: 0 Passed Unanimously: Yes

STAFF REPORTS/INFORMATION:

8. Director’s Expense Reimbursement Summary for August

Discussed with Board

GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE/INFORMATION:

9. Public Policy Institute of California: Managing Drought in a Changing Climate

Discussed with Board

10. News Articles

Discussed with Board

11. Director’s Written and/or Oral Reports

Director Emmerson: Absent

Director Greenwood:

a. Regional Water Authority

Director Leidy: No Report

Director Wallace: No Report

Director Selsky: Absent

CALENDARS AND COMMITTEES:

12. Meetings Calendars:

a. 2018 Board Meeting Calendar

b. Meeting/Conference Calendar – October

c. Meeting/Conference Calendar – November

13. Board Representatives Committees Assignments

ADJOURNMENT: The regular meeting was adjourned at: 7:59 p.m.

The next meeting of the Board of Directors will be a Regular Board Meeting held on:

Monday, October 15, 2018 at 7:00 p.m.

Roy Leidy, President Steve Nugent, Secretary

AGENDA ITEM 5

MEMO

TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Management Staff

DATE: October 5, 2018

RE: In-House Committees

Carmichael Water District maintains a list of Committees that the Board of Directors (Directors)

is participating in for In-House activities. The current committees and representatives are as

follows:

Employee Relations Committee

Roy Leidy Term FY 2016-2018 Up for Renewal/Appointment

Paul Selsky Term FY 2017-2019

Finance Committee

Mark Emmerson Term FY 2016-2018 Up for Renewal/Appointment

Roy Leidy Term FY 2017-2019

Water Sales Committee

Paul Selsky Term FY 2014-2018 Up for Renewal/Appointment

Mark Emmerson Term FY 2016-2019

There are three (3) committee assignment terms that have expired. The purpose of staggered

terms is to alternate the rotation of committee representatives so that one member always has

some committee experience (overlap).

Modification Considerations

Management staff has reviewed the In-House Committees with legal counsel and provides the

following recommendations:

1. Employee Relations Committee

a. Change the title of the Employee Relations Committee to Compensation

Committee.

b. Renew Roy Leidy as committee member or appoint another director to the

committee for Term to FY 2018-2020.

2. Finance Committee

a. Renew Mark Emmerson as committee member or appoint another director to the

committee for Term to FY 2018-2020.

3. Water Sales Committee

a. Renew Paul Selsky as committee member or appoint another director to the

committee for Term to FY 2018-2021.

Recommendation:

Management staff recommends that the Board of Directors:

1. Approves the title change of the Employee Relations Committee to Compensation

Committee; and

2. Appoint Directors to serve on the identified In-House Committees for expired terms.

AGENDA ITEM 6

DESCRIPTION

ACWA FALL CONFERENCE

ACWA SPRING CONFERENCE

ACWA/JPIA

AWWA CA/NV FALL CONFERENCE

CALIFORNIA-OREGON TRANSMISSION PROJECT

CAP TO CAP MEETING/CONFERENCE

2x2 CWD/FOWD COMMITTEE

CWD - ADHOC NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE

CWD - EMPLOYEE RELATIONS COMMITTEE

CWD - FINANCE COMMITTEE

CWD - PLANNED SYSTEM MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE

CWD - REGULAR BOARD MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING

CWD - REGULAR BOARD MEETING 1 1 1 1 1

CWD - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING

CWD - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING

CWD - WATER SALES COMMITTEE

CWD - LA VISTA TANK SELECTION COMMITTEE 1

GROUNDWATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION

LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION

REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING

REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

SACRAMENTO GROUNDWATER AUTHORITY

WATER EDUCATION FOUNDATION

1 1 1 2 1

$152.00 $152.00 $152.00 $304.00 $152.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

* DECLINED PAYMENT FOR ONE (1) MEETING

A ABSENT

TOTAL COMPENSATION

TOTAL EXPENSES

TOTAL MEETINGS ATTENDED

8/13

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SUMMARY

SEPTEMBER 2018

LEIDY EMMERSON WALLACE GREENWOOD SELSKYDATE

DIRECTORS

8/20

AG

EN

DA

ITE

M 7

1 1 1 1 1

1 A 2 1 A 2 2

1

1

1

1

* DECLINED PAYMENT FOR ONE (1) MEETING

A ABSENT

2

$304.00

3

$456.00

3

$456.00

3

$456.00

6

$912.00

WATER EDUCATION FOUNDATION

LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION

RWA BOARD MEETING

RWA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

SGA BOARD MEETING

CWD - REGULAR BOARD MEETING

CWD - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING

CWD - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING

CWD - WATER SALES COMMITTEE

GROUNDWATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION

CWD - LA VISTA TANK SELECTION COMMITTEE

DESCRIPTION

TOTAL MEETINGS ATTENDED

TOTAL COMPENSATION

TOTAL EXPENSES

ACWA FALL CONFERENCE

ACWA SPRING CONFERENCE

ACWA/JPIA

AWWA CA/NV FALL CONFERENCE

CALIFORNIA-OREGON TRANSMISSION PROJECT

CAP TO CAP MEETING/CONFERENCE

2x2 CWD/FOWD COMMITTEE

CWD - ADHOC NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE

CWD - EMPLOYEE RELATIONS COMMITTEE

CWD - FINANCE COMMITTEE

CWD - PLANNED SYSTEM MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE

CWD - PUBLIC HEARING/REGULAR BOARD MEETING

LEIDY EMMERSON WALLACE GREENWOOD SELSKY

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SUMMARY

FY 2018 / 2019

YEAR TO DATE

DIRECTORS

AGENDA ITEM 8

U.S. states agree on plan to

manage overtaxed Colorado

River By Dan Elliott | The Associated Press

Published: 1 day ago

(AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File) In this May 31, 2018, file photo, the low level of the water line is shown

on the banks of the Colorado River in Hoover Dam, Ariz. Seven Southwestern U.S. states that depend on

the overtaxed Colorado River say they have reached tentative agreements on managing the waterway

amid an unprecedented drought. The plans announced Tuesday, Oct. 9 were a milestone for the river,

which supports 40 million people and 6,300 square miles (16,300 square kilometers) of farmland in the

U.S. and Mexico. The plans aren't designed to prevent a shortage, but they're intended to help manage

and minimize the problems.

Denver • Seven U.S. states in the Southwest that depend on the overtaxed Colorado River have reached

tentative agreements on how to manage the waterway amid an unprecedented drought, officials said

Tuesday. The announcement was a long-awaited step toward preserving the river, which supports 40

million people and 6,300 square miles of farmland in the U.S. and Mexico.

“We have, after many years of discussion and negotiation, a real milestone,” said James Eklund, a water

lawyer who represents Colorado in the interstate negotiations on the river.

A nearly two-decade drought has drained the river’s two largest reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell,

to alarmingly low levels. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which manages major reservoirs across the

West, says the chances of a shortfall in Lake Mead are 57 percent by 2020. The reservoir has never fallen

low enough to trigger a shortage before. If it happens, mandatory cutbacks would hit Arizona, Nevada

and Mexico first.

AGENDA ITEM 9

The drought contingency plans announced Tuesday are not designed to prevent a shortage in the river

system, but to manage and minimize the effects. The two major components of the plans cover the

Upper Basin, where most of the water originates as Rocky Mountain snowfall, and the Lower Basin,

which consumes more of the water because it has more people and more farms. Colorado, New Mexico,

Utah and Wyoming are in the Upper Basin. Arizona, California and Nevada are in the Lower Basin. The

Lower Basin plan is detailed and specific, but the Upper Basin plan outlines what steps the states would

take if things get worse, said Karen Kwon, Colorado’s assistant attorney general.

It will likely be next year before all seven states and the U.S. government approve the plans, Kwon said.

Mexico agreed last year to participate in drought planning.

Reaching the agreements was a complex and delicate task because the river is not controlled by a single

agency. Instead, it is governed by interstate compacts, international treaties and court rulings, known

collectively as the law of the river.

The country’s cheapest water is in the West’s driest cities

By charging more for nonessential gallons, cities could keep

water affordable for everyone.

Maya L. Kapoor NEWSOct. 5, 2018

If water were priced according to demand, many Westerners would be

smelly and thirsty. But water is a necessity, and demand-based pricing

would be unethical. Instead, many cities rely on block pricing for

residential use, charging different amounts for essential water and for

additional water. Done right, block pricing should encourage

conservation while still letting everyone meet their needs: The cost of

essential water, used for basics such as clothes washing, staying

hydrated, bathing or cooking, is low, while additional water — say,

for growing a lush lawn in the desert — costs more. But according to

new research, that’s not the reality across the West.

Economists and a public policy expert at the University of Minnesota

who looked into block pricing for water in the nation’s largest urban

areas, including 11 Western cities, discovered a pattern they conclude

is neither sustainable nor just: Many of the driest cities have the

cheapest water prices. What’s more, for households across the West,

the average price of water goes down as use goes up.

In many Western cities, using under 6,000 gallons of water a month

has a higher price tag for households than the next nonessential 6,000

to 12,000 gallons they might use.

Source: Ian H. Luby, Stephan Polasky, Deborah L. Swackhamer.

Infographic by Luna Anna Archey

The researchers used the Natural Resources Defense Council’s 2010

Water Sustainability Index rankings — which combine factors such as

climate change projections, drought vulnerability and future demand

— to predict water scarcity for the biggest cities in the nation’s 35

most populous metropolitan areas. They used approximately 6,000

gallons as a “generous” estimate of how much water a family of four

in one home needs each month for basics. (Across the nation,

Americans in this category actually use, on average, almost 9,000

gallons each month.)

Phoenix, a region facing extreme risk for water scarcity, charges $27

for the first 6,000 gallons per month, the lowest price for essential

residential water. Meanwhile, the most expensive water prices are in

some of the West’s wettest cities, including Seattle, which charges

about $150 for the same amount.

In Sacramento, California, the cost of nonessential water use, like for

lawn care, is less than a quarter the price of what is considered

essential water.

Cameron Davidson/Getty Images

As alarming as it may be for water to cost so little in a desert city with

an average rainfall of just

eight inches a year,

Phoenix’s water

management policy is

arguably more just,

because necessary water is

cheap, while additional

water is more expensive.

Phoenix charges 55

percent more for additional

water use, more than any

other Western city, and per capita water use has fallen in recent

decades even as the city has grown. Still, the West overall has

catching up to do: The greatest charge for additional water use

nationally is in Miami, where nonessential water costs 73 percent

more than essential water.

Indeed, in almost all of the Western cities studied, water costs less on

average when used more. For example, in Sacramento, a northern

California city with an extreme water scarcity risk, nonessential water

costs 75 percent less to use than essential water.

Regulations can create a hurdle for Western cities hoping to use block

pricing to make water access both sustainable and fair. In California,

for example, state law Proposition 218 outlaws water prices that are

higher than the cost of providing water. That rule effectively stops

block pricing from being a sustainability tool, because high prices on

nonessential water can’t be used to encourage conservation or to keep

the price of essential water low. Meanwhile, as Western cities struggle

to solve their water pricing dilemma, it’s only getting worse: Climate

change is making water shortages ever more likely in the West’s most

populous places, but with current policies, future water shortages will

be difficult to meet in a way that’s fair.

Western Water October 5, 2018 Gary Pitzer

IN WATER-STRESSED CALIFORNIA AND THE

SOUTHWEST, AN ACRE-FOOT OF WATER

GOES A LOT FURTHER THAN IT USED TO WESTERN WATER NOTEBOOK-AS HOUSEHOLDS GET STINGIER WITH

WATER, A COMMON GUIDE FOR DESCRIBING HOW MUCH THEY

NEED GETS A REFRESH

The Antioch/Oakley Regional Shoreline park displays a sign announcing

their water conservation efforts at the park in 2014. (Source: California

Department of Water Resources)

People in California and the Southwest are

getting stingier with water, a story that’s told by

the acre-foot.

For years, water use has generally been described in terms of acre-foot per a

certain number of households, keying off the image of an acre-foot as a

football field a foot deep in water. The long-time rule of thumb: One acre-foot

of water would supply the indoor and outdoor needs of two typical urban

households for a year.

The acre-foot yardstick has been a reliable standby for water agency officials

to explain water use to the public, said Bill McDonnell, water efficiency

manager with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, but “it

was not super science.”

Science or not, it’s a description that’s stuck. But that acre-foot, equal to about

325,000 gallons, is being stretched amid increased water conservation in an

urban landscape that has been buffeted by drought and squeezed for

mandatory reductions.

Tim Quinn, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies

and a former deputy general manager with MWD, said it may be time to

recalibrate the thinking on how much water is delivered to homes and

businesses.

California Conservation Corps work on transforming lawn areas into

drought tolerant landscaping at schools in Corona, Calif. (Source:

California Department of Water Resources)

“The old rule of thumb going back 30 years was

plan an acre-foot for each family in your service

area,” he said. “Half of that acre-foot will be

used on the homesite and the other half used in the economy of the

area/region. At a minimum, we should look hard at that and do some

recalibration because … per capita use has declined roughly by half. Right

there, it means your half-and-half calibration is wrong.”

On average, an acre-foot now meets the needs of three households each year

in MWD’s service area, which runs from Ventura County to San Diego County

and into western Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The agency notes

that average per capita water use in its service area dropped from 185 gallons

per day in 1990 to just below 130 gallons per day in 2016.

“Because the gallons used per person, per day have gone down and stayed

down, your acre-foot of water is going farther.”

~Bill McDonnell, water use efficiency manager, Metropolitan Water District

of Southern California.

And it’s not just use, but the demographics of California’s urban sector that

are changing. The number of people living under one roof has increased due

to skyrocketing housing prices and the sluggish pace of new-home building,

McDonnell said, adding that the average household in MWD’s service area

has a little more than three people.

The revised view of water is something that’s been on MWD’s radar screen for

the past couple of years. “Because the gallons used per person, per day have

gone down and stayed down, your acre-foot of water is going farther,” he said.

In the dense urban environment of San Francisco, with its minimal outdoor

irrigation, the daily per capita use is 50 gallons and an acre-foot annually

supplies six households of three people each, according to Will Reisman,

press secretary at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.

“Water use can vary significantly from home to home, so this is based on an

average,” he said, adding that the agency assumes a single-family average

occupancy of 3.02 people based on data collected from the Association of

Bay Area Governments.

Average residential water use varies widely throughout California, depending

on factors such as housing density, landscaping, water rates and when

development occurred. Based on a sampling of 18 water agencies across

California, the state estimated that in 2016, in the midst of the drought, an

acre-foot was enough water to supply 3.4 households.

Overall, there has been a downward trend in residential use that fluctuates

with normal or drought conditions, punctuated by high-profile announcements

such as Gov. Jerry Brown ordering the first statewide mandatory water

restrictions in 2015.

A couple in Roseville, east of Sacramento, took advantage of

Roseville's Cash-for-Grass rebate program that pays homeowners

to replace lawn with a landscape of drought tolerant plants, mulch,

ornamental rocks and dry streambed. (Source: California

Department of Water Resources)

Coming in the middle of a historic drought,

Brown’s order, among other things, caused

people to rethink their outdoor water use, including on the State Capitol

grounds where lush green patches of lawn faded to brown. The example

caught on, with people proclaiming, “Brown is the new green.”

“There are still a lot of improvements that can be done, but just driving around,

you can see people are OK with letting their yard go a little bit brown in the

summer,” said Peter Brostrom, California Department of Water Resources’

water efficiency program manager.

That downward trend is also due to mandates such as the 1993 law that

required all toilets sold or installed in California to use less than 1.6 gallons

per flush – gradually replacing older models that used as much as five gallons

per flush.

Meanwhile, the amount of water used by washing machines has come down

significantly, from as much as 40 gallons per load to 16 gallons per load by

the more efficient machines, Brostrom said.

On average, the urban sector used 10 percent of the state’s water supplies

between 1998 and 2010, according to DWR. In a state as large and diverse

as California, urban supplies stretch amazingly far. DWR last looked at

residential water use more than a decade ago and is preparing to revisit the

topic in 2019 to better understand the current state of water use efficiency.

“I think that will very much let us compare what our current uses are with what

they were in 2006 and 2007,” Brostrom said.

Gov. Jerry Brown upped the ante on water conservation this year by signing a

legislative package that establishes an indoor, per person water use goal of

55 gallons per day until 2025, ratcheting down to 50 gallons in 2030.

Calculating patterns in urban water use requires a bit of nuanced analysis,

said Henry McCann, research associate at the Public Policy Institute of

California’s Water Policy Center. People act differently during a drought when

they are reminded constantly to save water.

California Department of Water Resources employee Michael Miller

explains low-flow shower heads to a young fair-goer as part of an

indoor exhibit at the California State Fair in 2014. (Source: California

Department of Water Resources)

Just as behavioral changes drive water use,

so do the newest technologies that allow

people to be efficient.

“The hardware stuff is where it gets interesting,” McCann said. “Some

Californians may have made investments in long-term water use efficiency –

irrigation technology for the lawn and garden, turf replacement, water-efficient

washing machines, low-flow showerheads and sink fixtures – that allow them

to continue their business as usual but be using relatively less water in the

process.”

Demand reduction to avert a crisis

Cutbacks in urban water use are a way of life in the desert landscapes of

Nevada and Arizona, where the value of water is well-known as the Colorado

River Basin becomes drier.

Faced with a growing number of people and a limited and vulnerable supply of

water, officials in Southern Nevada recognized long ago that only a

comprehensive demand reduction strategy was going to avert crisis

conditions.

“When the sprinklers go on, that is the equivalent to 15 or 20 shower heads

going off at the same time. People … are often not aware of what their

landscape irrigation is doing because it’s on a timer. It goes off at 4 in the

morning.”

~Peter Brostrom, California Department of Water Resources’ water

efficiency program manager.

The most obvious target was outdoor use, a low-hanging fruit in a desert

environment. The answer came through building new homes with natural

landscaping, paying people to tear out turf from existing homes (more than

185 million square feet in about 20 years) and limiting when they can irrigate

(hewing 15 percent off seasonal water use).

The effort has paid off. According to the Southern Nevada Water Authority, an

acre-foot of water supports two average Las Vegas households for about 15

months (In 2005, it was about 12 months). Per capita water use has dropped

36 percent in 16 years even while 660,000 additional people decided to make

Las Vegas their home.

In Arizona, an acre-foot is enough for three households. The state’s

Department of Water Resources notes that despite a significant increase in

people, Arizona uses less water in 2018 compared to 60 years ago because

of drought preparedness, underground water storage, 100-year water supply

requirements for new developments, mandatory conservation programs and

use of recycled water.

A drive for more efficiency

While Arizona, California and Nevada are well-ensconced in a smart water

use ethos, those who track water use know an acre-foot can be stretched

even further.

“When the sprinklers go on, that is the equivalent to 15 or 20 showerheads

going off at the same time,” Brostrom said. “People think of a drought and

they think, ‘Well I have to take a shorter shower,’ but they are often not aware

of what their landscape irrigation is doing because it’s on a timer. It goes off at

4 in the morning, and they don’t see it.”

Surrounding the discussion about further improvements in urban water use

efficiency is the idea that eventually, the slack in the system will grow tighter,

a situation known as “demand hardening.”

McCann said people tightened their belts in response to the governor’s order

in 2015, partly through cutbacks in outdoor use. Future droughts will push

everyone to save more.

“The writing is on the wall,” McCann said. “There will be a drive for more

efficiency in indoor and outdoor urban water use and one of the potential

challenges in future droughts is if we have to cut back another 25 percent or

so, some of the savings may have to come from higher value uses like indoor

water use.”

And while Southern California has generally led the way in smart water use,

MWD’s McDonnell believes customers can get stingier with water.

“For every home that has an efficient toilet, an efficient washing machine, an

efficient showerhead and a landscape that’s using drip and capturing

rainwater, there are many more that don’t have it,” he said. “It’s not like there

is a miracle technology out there. It’s just a matter of having more people do

it.”

Aerojet Superfund cleanup to go on for many more years

A new report says it will still take many years to clean up contamination on Aerojet Rocketdyne property.

DENNIS MCCOY | SACRAMENTO BUSINESS JOURNAL

By Mark Anderson – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal Oct 1, 2018, 2:49pm PDT Updated Oct 1, 2018, 3:23pm

After 35 years of cleaning efforts, the final remediation plan for a badly polluted section of the Aerojet Superfund site still calls for treatment of 31,100 tons of soil, permanent fencing around some areas, and ongoing extraction of volatile and dangerous chemicals for many years to come.

The land is owned by Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc., and it was one of one of the first sites put into the national Superfund program, to clean up contaminated areas.

A new report details what may happen with some of the most contaminated of Aerojet's land in the future. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could conduct two years of public outreach on this plan before it makes a final decision, said Gamaliel Ortiz, spokesman with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control.

This section of land is east of aerospace company Aerojet’s (NYSE: AJRD) active campus and south of Highway 50 in Folsom, said Chris Fennessy, a senior engineering manager with Aerojet working on remediation.

North and west of this contaminated site, 5,000 more acres of Aerojet land is being sold for development by Aerojet’s land sales subsidiary, Easton Development Co. LLC. Much of that land had been a buffer zone from the company’s testing sites to the north and east of the active Aerojet campus. Easton has already sold more than 700 acres. None of Aerojet’s property designated as active Superfund land is being sold by Easton, Fennessy said.

The action plan now being considered is for a 75-acre parcel called Area 40 of the Aerojet Superfund site. Area 40 is within the Folsom Plan Area, the new section of Folsom south of Highway 50.

Superfund Area 40 is right about dead center of the Folsom Plan Area, said Pam Johns, community development director with the city of Folsom. The city has designated the land around Area 40 as passive open space, which means it will be left as undeveloped grassland. In the future, when the contamination is fully remediated, the land could be a park site, Johns said.

Area 40 is part of the Hillsborough development in Folsom’s master plan community, which stretches from Prairie City Road to the El Dorado County line. Work is in early stages to develop roads and other infrastructure on the east side of that part of Folsom.

Fennessy estimated it will take years before the development reaches Area 40.

Aerojet and the regulatory agencies estimate it will cost about $8.8 million to complete the cleanup of Area 40, with the worst soil either treated in place or transferred to a hazardous waste facility.

The federal Superfund program was created in 1980 to clean up hazardous polluted industrial sites. Aerojet’s campus was investigated in the late 1970s, identified as a harmful toxic site in 1982 and declared a Superfund site in 1983.

The main Aerojet campus spans Folsom, Rancho Cordova and unincorporated Sacramento County. The company once owned 12,000 acres there, where it made and tested intercontinental ballistic missile propulsion systems during the Cold War and rocket engines that took astronauts to the moon. At the

height of the space race in the 1960s, Aerojet employed more than 20,000 people in Rancho Cordova.

All of that testing and manufacturing, which started in 1951, left soil and groundwater on Aerojet and neighboring land contaminated with chemicals, including the propellant perchlorate, the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) and dioxin, a highly toxic byproduct of industrial manufacturing.

In 2016, Aerojet moved its corporate headquarters from Rancho Cordova to El Segundo in Southern California, and last year, Aerojet said rocket development and manufacturing jobs at its Rancho Cordova site would either be eliminated or moved to Huntsville, Alabama, leaving only about 300 administrative jobs in Rancho Cordova by the end of 2019.

While Aerojet will be moving most of its operations, the company's legacy will remain in local land and water for years. Aerojet is paying both for the cleanup and regulatory oversight by agencies including the U.S. EPA, the Central Valley Regional Water Control Board and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Ortiz said.

The U.S. EPA estimated in 2001 that it could take more than 200 years to clean up groundwater contaminated by toxic seepage into the soil. That was an improvement over a prior U.S. EPA report that estimated a cleanup of nearly 400 years.

The new action plan report on Area 40 of the Aerojet campus calls for 3,400 feet of permanent fencing to separate future open space from active treatment sites. This plan covers less than 75 acres on the active Aerojet site, Ortiz said.

The northernmost edge of the larger contaminated Aerojet site is a half mile south of the American River, but the river water has not been affected. The groundwater plume of contaminants, however, flows under the river to Carmichael on the river's north side. Aerojet has been treating groundwater with at least two water treatment plants on the north side of the river for more than a decade, according to the EPA, and it has been treating groundwater on the south side of the river for nearly 30 years, Fennessy said.

2018 Regular Board Meeting Schedule

January 22

February 26

March 19

April 16

May 21 (Public Hearing)

June 18 (Public Hearing)

July 16

August 20

September 17

October 15

November 19

December 17

Meetings will be held at 7:00 p.m. at the District’s meeting room located at:

7837 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Carmichael.

AGENDA ITEM 11

Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa

1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 1718 19 20 21 22 23 2425 26 27 28 29 30

November 2018

Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa

12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31

December 2018

November 2018

Nov 1 2 3

WEF San Joaquin River Restoration Tour (Sacramento)

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

9:00am RWA-Board Mtg

(@ RWA)

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Veterans Day (Holiday) Observed -Veterans Day

(Holiday)

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

7:00pm Board Meeting

(Board Room)

Thanksgiving Day (Holiday)

25 26 27 28 29 30

JPIA Fall Conference

Executive Committee

Meeting (San Diego)

ACWA Fall Conference & Expo (San Diego)

8:30am RWA-Exec

Comm Mtg @ RWA

SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY

Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa

12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31

December 2018

Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa

1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 1920 21 22 23 24 25 2627 28 29 30 31

January 2019

December 2018

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

9:00am SGA Board

Meeting (@

RWA/SGA office)

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

7:00pm Board Meeting

(Board Room)

23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Christmas Day (Holiday) 8:30am RWA-Exec

Comm Mtg @ RWA

30 31

SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY

BOARD REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS

Effective: January 2018

Updated: August 2018

CARMICHAEL WATER DISTRICT

STANDING COMMITTEES:

Employee Relations Committee

Roy Leidy (Term 2016-2018); Paul Selsky (Term 2017-2019)

Finance Committee

Mark Emmerson (Term 2016-2018); Roy Leidy (Term 2017-2019)

Water Sales Committee

Paul Selsky (Term 2014-2018); Mark Emmerson (Term 2016-2019)

ADHOC COMMITTEES:

FOWD/CWD 2x2 Committee

Mark Emmerson; Paul Selsky

OTHER MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEES (meetings/year)

ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES:

Joint Powers Insurance Authority (2) Mark Emmerson (Representative)

Region 4 Vice Chair (18) Mark Emmerson (Representative, Term 2018-2019)

Region 4 Energy Committee (4) Ron Greenwood (Representative, Term 2018-2019)

Region 4 Local Government Committee (2) Ron Greenwood (Representative, Term 2018-2019)

Region 4 Water Management Committee (3) Paul Selsky (Representative, Term 2018-2019)

CALIFORNIA-OREGON TRANSMISSION PROJECT (4)

Mark Emmerson (Representative)

GROUNDWATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION

Roy Leidy (Representative); Steve Nugent (Alternate)

REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY:

Board of Directors (12)

Ron Greenwood (Representative); Steve Nugent (Representative); Paul Selsky (Alternate)

Executive Committee (12) Ron Greenwood (Representative, Term 2018)

SACRAMENTO GROUNDWATER AUTHORITY (6) Roy Leidy (Representative, Term 2018-2022); Mark Emmerson (Alternate)

WATER FORUMS SUCCESSOR EFFORT (4)

Roy Leidy (Representative); Steve Nugent (Representative); Ron Greenwood (Alternate)

AGENDA ITEM 12