SLVWD Board Meeting Summary
October 20, 2022
Mark Dolson
Highlights:
Felton Heights Replacement Tank
Authorization to Shop for Replacement Vehicles
Next Board meeting is at 6:30 PM on November 3rd.
Preliminaries
The report from the just-concluded closed session was that the Board voted 3-1 (with Director Fultz opposed) to explore possible eminent domain for a spot to place a 120,000-gallon replacement tank for Felton Heights at the end of Lost Acres Drive.
It was announced that President Mahood would miss this meeting with an excused absence. In her absence, the meeting was run by Vice President Ackemann.
There were no public comments on non-agendized topics.
There was no President’s Report.
Unfinished Business
Remote Meeting Authorization Under AB361
The Board unanimously approved a recurring monthly resolution enabling meetings to continue being conducted remotely. However, District Counsel Gina Nicholls alerted the Board to two recent developments. First, Governor Newsom has announced that California’s State of Emergency will terminate at the end of February 2023. This will remove the current grounds for remote meetings. Second, a new Brown Act bill takes effect in January 2023. This will create a new framework for participation in remote meetings. This topic will be agendized and addressed in a future Board meeting.
New Business
Felton Heights Replacement Tank Project – Environmental Services Contract
District Manager Rick Rogers introduced this agenda item by delivering a minimal summary of the far more detailed 5-page review that he provided in the Board packet. The latter report explains that the District entered into an agreement in early 2013 with 21 homeowners in the Felton Heights neighborhood according to which the District would replace an existing 10,000-gallon water tank with a 60,000-gallon water tank for a ten-year monthly charge of about $30 per parcel. None of this money has yet been collected because the project has faced ongoing challenges, most notably concerning the precise location of the tank.
In response to concerns from neighbors about the original proposed location off Valhalla Way, Jon Erickson contacted the District on May 4, 2013 and offered to consider moving the tank to his parcel at the end of Lost Acre Drive. This new site was (and remains) a perfect fit. In the ensuing years, the District determined that the tank capacity should actually be 120,000 gallons (partly in order to meet upgraded fire-flow requirements that became more urgent in the aftermath of the CZU Fire). The Lost Acres location allows for a tank of this size and for staging of fire department vehicles at the site to protect Felton Heights and adjacent downtown Felton from wildfire. Its strategic location also would allow for the installation at some future time of a treated water main along the Shingle Mill Road easement to serve the 21 homes off Felton-Empire road currently served by water from Bennett Springs. Eliminating the weekly service to chlorinate this water source would reduce staff time and lower operational costs. The District therefore moved forward with the necessary survey work and geotechnical tank site analysis.
As the District got closer to executing the easement, Mr. Erickson became concerned with the liability of having a water tank on his parcel. He received calls from three property owners below where the tank would be located, voicing concerns about having a water tank above their homes. In response, the District said it would indemnify him.
On April 1, 2022, the District sent a letter to all residents in the Felton Heights neighborhood explaining the project. It received two responses from property owners in the vicinity of the tank opposing the tank project at the location. One of the property owners has since contacted the District, stating that he could be supportive of the project with some additional information. The second property owner proposed an alternative tank location further up the access road away from his property. The District performed some preliminary engineering and determined that this new location raised the tank site in elevation to where water pressure would exceed pipe pressure ratings and cause damage to the distribution system.
In recent months, there have been various meetings between various subsets of concerned parties, and there has been sufficient neighborhood discontent that Mr. Erickson has stated that he no longer wishes to discuss this matter. For the District, however, the Lost Acres site (roughly 50 feet by 50 feet) continues to look like the best possible location for the needed storage tank. In order to move forward with this plan, the required next step for the District is to undertake an environmental study. This is irrespective of whether Mr. Erickson decides to reengage with the District or whether the District decides to pursue eminent domain.
On September 1, 2022, the District released a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking a qualified firm to complete environmental review and permitting, as well as coordinate with regulatory/resource agencies for the Felton Heights Tank replacement project. The RFP closed on September 28 and four proposals were received. On October 10, 2022, the Engineering & Environmental Committee reviewed the proposals and voted unanimously to recommend that the Board award the proposal to Denise Duffy & Associates Consultants in the amount of $53,533.
The current agenda item was exclusively concerned with obtaining this Board approval, but a number of Felton Heights residents were present and wished to be heard.
District Engineer Josh Wolff said the environmental review would be very valuable both for enabling a more accurate assessment of the parcel value and for moving forward as expeditiously as possible.
Director Smolley, Chair of the Engineering and Environmental Committee reported that Staff had fully addressed all of the committee’s questions and that the Committee concurred with the Staff recommendation to approve the bid from Duffy.
District Counsel Gina Nicholls noted that it wasn’t possible to share any of the Closed Session discussion relating to this agenda item.
Director Ackemann said there were a number of steps the District needs to take to assess the appropriateness of the property in question. Environmental Review will be required before the District can acquire any parcel.
Public comment began with John [Jameson]. [NOTE: All public comment is accurately reported here, but this public comment also included some statements that were incorrect or incomplete or misleading. In some cases, corrective elaborations are provided in brackets.]
Mr. Jameson said his driveway was right next to the proposed tank, and he supported the original plan. It was fine with him that Mr. Erickson was now determined to have no role as he could do without the tank’s impact. He thought a new tank could logically be located on existing District land between this location and Bennett Springs. He felt the District should be transparent, keep its promises, and build the originally agreed-upon tank at the Valhalla site. He felt that residents hadn’t been adequately involved in the process.
Jim Mosher said he doesn’t live in Lost Acres, but the fire flow possibilities might benefit him. He was concerned about making this decision today given the amount of debate and confusion in the Board packet. He felt that more discussion was needed to address neighbor concerns. He also wondered if the Board had decided to use eminent domain to overcome landowner objections. [The report out of Closed Session stated that the Board had voted only to explore eminent domain.]
The Board attempted multiple times to let Bob Elliott speak, but Mr. Elliott was unable to get his audio working. Rich Alter stated that Bob Elliot had prepared an extended statement (more than the three minutes allotted to members of the audience addressing the Board) and that other members of the audience would cede their time so he could present it. Director Ackemann explained that this would not be allowed because it was contrary to usual Board practice. Director Fultz suggested that the Board could allow an exception, but Director Ackemann disagreed. Director Ackemann attempted to recognize Mr. Elliot several times, but he was not able to access his audio via Zoom or on the telephone number he was then provided. No other members of the public asked to speak.
Director Fultz said he wanted to make sure the community understood that it had the right to express itself. He said he believed that this was not the right time to initiate the Environmental Review. He was happy with the bid but didn’t think it was wise to rush things, particularly since there had been bad experiences associated with this kind of rush in the past. He argued that the Environmental Review should be a contingency on a future decision to acquire the property. Director Ackemann responded that Environmental Review was a necessary prerequisite to that decision.
Director Ackemann noted that there were now multiple members of the public seeking to speak, and she reopened the floor for public comment. Judy Darnell said her neighbors on Felton Heights had voted on a resolution in the past 48 hours stating that the Felton Heights Road Association requested that SLVWD cease sowing divisiveness amongst neighbors, stop trying to install a tank on land the District doesn’t own, and move on to other options. The neighborhood needs the 60,000-gallon tank originally agreed to ten years ago.
Rich Alter said his neighbors do not want SLVWD to take land via eminent domain. This is not a nice thing to do, and it would be nice to offer some options. He said the whole process has been done without transparency, and the neighborhood had only recently learned of a number of things. He said the neighborhood had identified other locations and opportunities to do this in a different way that would be best for all. In his view, it made sense to table the vote until the Board’s next meeting to allow time to look at the site on Jon Erickson’s land. He said he wasn’t opposed to a 120,000-gallon tank, nor was he necessarily opposed to having it on Jon Erickson’s land. He didn’t think it was fair to put it in John Jameson’s front yard. [This was misleading in multiple respects. The District disputes the claim that there are superior alternative locations, and the proposed location is not near to Mr. Jameson’s house.]
Larry Darnell said he wasn’t sure why the neighborhood was being forced to come up with a decision about eminent domain at this late date when the District’s obligation was to honor an agreement made 10 years ago. He just wanted to know when a tank would be installed at the top of Valhalla Drive and how big this tank would be.
Director Fultz said he was struck by the comments conveying a perception that an amendment has been made to the agreement without all parties agreeing. He said things may have changed for really good reasons, but the District shouldn't follow only the minimum legal requirements. A more sensitive process was needed as the current situation is not good for the District's relationship with the community in terms of trust and transparency.
Director Smolley asked Rick to address the previous agreement for a 60,000-gallon tank on Valhalla Drive and explain the change in plans.
Rick said the original driver was the location. He summarized the account in the Board packet which stated, “the existing tank parcel was owned by seven different individuals that were difficult to contact or non-existent. After a very long process of several years, the District facilitated a property ownership transfer. The existing tank site parcel was very small, 30' x 30'. The District negotiated an additional 10-foot easement from an adjacent property owner, allowing the District to construct a 60,000-gallon water tank replacing the existing 20,000-gallon tank on the parcel. With construction planning, neighbors in the area started raising concerns about having the new tank very close to their homes and the visual aesthetics of having a water tank in their front yard.” Jon Erickson heard about this and proposed multiple different locations on his own property at the end of Lost Acres Drive. Ultimately a spot was identified that would accommodate a 120,000-gallon tank, and this was good for both the District and the community in terms of fighting wildfires. The District always tries to meet current code and requirements when it replaces tanks and pipes. Rick also noted the letter of support in the Board packet from the Felton Fire Chief citing the strategic location of this site for staging fire trucks to defend Felton Heights and downtown Felton.
Director Ackemann asked why the property owner decided not to proceed, and Rick said he was reacting to animosity from neighbors.
Director Fultz asked for details of the calculation that led to the revised 120,000-gallon tank size, and Josh said this was related to fire-flow requirements. California Fire Code requires that any single-family home of 3,600 square feet or fewer that water be provided with 1000 gallons per minute for an hour. He said the total of 120,000 gallons was based on 2021 records of daily demand. The 21 homes in Felton Heights demand a maximum of 26,000-27,000 gallons. The homes in the Bennet Springs zone use another 30,000 or so gallons. This totals roughly 120,000 gallons which also happens to be a common tank size that allows a little extra capacity for changing circumstances.
Director Fultz asked if this was a new standard, not available in 2012, and Josh said this reflected the most recent version of the standard, which was released in 2019. In response to a further question from Director Hill, Josh said both California Fire Code and California Plumbing Code were revised in 2019.
Director Smolley said he understood that the District needed to perform an Environmental Review as one of the prerequisites for proceeding with eminent domain. Gina confirmed this and, at the request of Director Ackemann, repeated her statement of the action taken in Closed Session (to clarify that Staff was only being asked to begin exploration of a possible eminent domain action).
Director Fultz argued that this exploration could precede Environmental Review. The District could then make the Environmental Review contingent on a decision re: eminent domain. Director Ackemann requested further clarification from Gina, and Gina said a resolution of necessity, the first formal step in an eminent domain process, would need to be preceded by both an appraisal and a successful Environmental Review process.
Director Fultz responded that nothing is stopping the District from saying it will engage in an extended discussion about the eminent domain process in advance of these other steps. He argued that the community reaction should slow the District down. Director Ackemann disagreed about the order of the steps in the process. She argued that there should absolutely be an informed discussion between the District and the community, but this could only occur when the District was adequately informed. She noted that the community also had expressed concerns about continued delays. Director Fultz acknowledged that the delay to date may have produced a benefit (in terms of the 120,000-gallon tank that the District was now seeking to install with no increase in cost to the neighborhood), but he still felt that some further delay would be worth tolerating to satisfy the community.
Director Hill said he thought it made sense to first determine whether the site is environmentally acceptable before engaging the community. He said this is why the Board agreed to explore, not execute, eminent domain.
Director Smolley agreed that the District needed the evaluation to consider whether this is a viable site to continue discussing. He moved that the Board approve the Staff recommendation to issue a contract to Denise Duffy and Associates for $53,533 to proceed with the Environmental Review of this site. Director Hill seconded.
Director Fultz argued that the Board should first discuss whether the community wants to amend the agreement. Director Ackemann countered that the Board allows Staff and technical experts to recommend the appropriate infrastructure for the community. She saw Director Fultz recommending an alternate approach that she disagreed with. Director Fultz asked what the point would then be of having a public agency. He said the Board needs to take into account the balance between how to behave in the local community and what to do. Director Ackemann responded that the Board was doing precisely this.
The motion passed 3-1, with Director Fultz in opposition.
Authorization to Shop for Replacement Vehicles
Operations Manager James Furtado introduced this agenda item. He said the budget provides for the purchase of three new vehicles. A fourth vehicle will be needed when the open Construction Inspector position is filled. Staff contacted twelve vehicle dealerships and received two bids. However, the lead time of eight to ten months was unexpectedly long, and Staff determined that suitable vehicles are available more quickly. Staff therefore recommended that the Board reject the received bids and authorize the District Manager to negotiate directly with a dealership to accelerate delivery. There was no committee review of this item.
Director Smolley asked when a fourth vehicle will actually be needed, given that the Construction Inspector position remains open. Rick said an outreach firm is helping with recruitment, and he expects the position to be filled before the vehicle is delivered.
Director Fultz asked whether Staff was seeking a budget increase. James said Staff wants to move forward with the purchase of three vehicles. There will have to be a budget amendment to purchase the fourth vehicle. Director Fultz also asked whether the new trucks would require after-market modifications. James said there would be a minor modification for the two service vehicles and no modification for the third vehicle.
Director Fultz moved to reject all bids and authorize the District Manager to shop for three District vehicles in accordance with the budget. Director Smolley seconded.
There was no public comment, and the motion passed 4-0.
Consent Agenda
There were no requests to pull any items, so the published minutes were accepted without objection.
District Manager’s Report
Rick reported that the County is getting ready to submit a draft application that now includes Bear Creek Estates Wastewater in its Boulder Creek wastewater upgrade project. This is consistent with a request from the District in a July 2022 letter to Supervisor McPherson. Rick described this as a major milestone and a great move forward. Directors Smolley and Fultz commented appreciatively on this development. It will potentially allow the District to get out of the wastewater treatment process, and it will considerably lower the annual service charge for the affected residents.
Department Status Reports
Director Fultz sought some quick clarifications regarding the list of COP projects. Rick said the Lyon pipe project was the only one, and Engineering was getting ready to go out for bid on this.
Written Communications
There was no direct discussion of written communications.
The Board adjourned to Closed Session at 8:00 PM. There were no items to report from this.