REGULAR BOARD MEETING - Scotts Valley · ACWA JPIA Executive Committee Election Candidate Request...

AGENDA PACKET

REGULAR BOARD MEETING 04/11/19 at 7:00 p.m.

Santa Margarita Community Room 2 Civic Center Drive

Scotts Valley, California

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Danny Reber, President Wade Leishman, Vice President

Bill Ekwall, Director Chris Perri, Director Ruth Stiles, Director

Piret Harmon, General Manager

Water Industry Acronyms

AF – Acre Foot AFY – Acre Foot per Year ACWA – Association of California Water Agencies ACWA JPIA – ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority AWWA – American Water Works Association BMP – Best Management Practices CCR – Consumer Confidence Report CD – Certificate of Deposit CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act CSDA – California Special District Association DHS - Department of Health Services DWR – Department of Water Resources EIR – Environmental Impact Report EPA – Environmental Protection Agency GASB – Governmental Accounting Standards Board IRWM – Integrated Regional Water Management JPA – Joint Powers Agreement LAIF – Local Agency Investment Fund LAFCO – Local Agency Formation Commission LID – Low Impact Development MCL – Maximum Containment Level MGD – Million Gallons per Day MGY – Million Gallons per Year MOU – Memorandum of Understanding O&M – Operations and Maintenance PERS – Public Employees Retirement System PHG – Public Health Goal PPB – Parts Per Billion PRV – Pressure Relief Valve PVC Pipe – Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe RWMF – Regional Water Management Foundation RFP – Request for Proposals ROW – Right-of-way

RWQCB – Regional Water Quality Control Board SCWD – Santa Cruz Water Department (City of) SDWA – Safe Drinking Water Act SGMA – Sustainable Groundwater Management Act SLVWD – San Lorenzo Valley Water District SMGWA – Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency SqCWD – Soquel Creek Water District SWRCB – State Water Resources Control Board TP – Treatment Plant

BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT Danny Reber

VICE PRESIDENT Wade Leishman William “Bill” Ekwall

Chris Perri Ruth Stiles

GENERAL MANAGER Piret Harmon

Board of Directors

Regular Meeting

Santa Margarita Community Room

2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California

04/11/19 7:00 p.m.

Agenda

1. Convene Meeting

1.1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Tele/Video ConferenceDirector Stiles will teleconference/videoconference from 101 E. Kern St., Taft, CA 93268

1.2. Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation

1.3. Closed Session Report

1.4. Additions/Deletions to the Agenda

1.5. Oral Communications

2. Administrative

2.1. Approval of Minutes 03/14/19 Regular Board Meeting

2.2. Presentations (None)

2.3. Committee and other Agency Meeting Reports

Executive & Public Affairs Committee (None) Finance & Personnel Committee 03/25/19 Interagency Committee (None) Water Resources & Engineering Committee 03/28/19 Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) Board 03/28/19 - oral

3. Consent (None)

4. Public Hearings (None)

5. Business

5.1. 2018 Annual Report Groundwater Management Plan

Recommendation: Accept the 2018 Annual Report Groundwater Management Plan.

5.2. Recycled Water Fill Station

Recommendation: Conclude the current Recycled Water Fill Station program until further apparent benefit or critical need.

Scotts Valley Water District Board of Directors 04/11/19 Agenda Page 2

5.3. District FY 2020 Work Plan

Recommendation: Review and accept the FY 2020 Draft Work Plan.

5.4. FY 2020 Budget Assumptions

Recommendation: Receive information and provide input.

5.5 Capital and Maintenance Projects FY 2020-2024 Budget Projection

Recommendation: Receive information and provide input.

6. Staff Reports

6.1. LegalDistrict Counsel - oral

6.2. Administration General Manager - oral

6.3. Finance Financial Reports for period ending 02/28/19

6.4. Operations Operations Report - oral Production, Demand and Rainfall Data Leak Adjustment Program Report

7. Directors Reports

Travel and MeetingsACWA and ACWA/JPIA UpdatesOther

8. Written Correspondence

ACWA JPIA Executive Committee Election Candidate Request Mesa Water District 03/14/19

ACWA JPIA Executive Committee Election Candidate Request Humboldt Bay Water District 03/26/19

9. Community Relations

Newsletter Scotts Valley Water District 03/28/19

10. Closed Session (None)

11. Report on Closed Session and Additional Items (None)

12. Future Items

Water Supply Outlook, Water Efficiency and Rebate Programs (May)Biannual Water Efficiency Activity Summary (May)

Scotts Valley Water District Board of Directors 04/11/19 Agenda Page 3

Memorandum of Understanding (May) Budget Adoption (June)

13. Meetings and Event Calendar

Regular Board MeetingsSanta Margarita Community Room

05/09/19 06/20/19 07/11/19

Committee Meetings District Conference Room

04/15/19 Executive & Public Affairs 04/16/19 Finance & Personnel 04/15/19 Water Resources & Engineering

Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Board Regular Board Meetings Santa Margarita Community Room

04/24/19 05/23/19 06/07/19

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Events 05/07/19 - 05/10/19 Spring Conference Monterey 12/03/19 – 12/05/19 Fall Conference San Diego

Conferences/Trainings/Workshops/Webinars (None)

14. Adjourn Meeting

The next regular meeting of the Scotts Valley Board of Directors is scheduled for 05/09/19at 7:00 p.m. in the Santa Margarite Community Room, 2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley,California.

AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC RECORDS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: THE DISTRICT WILL MAKE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC

REVIEW ANY PUBLIC RECORDS FURNISHED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT THE SAME TIME SUCH RECORDS ARE FURNISHED

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. SUCH RECORDS SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT THE DISTRICT OFFICE DURING NORMAL BUSINESS

HOURS.

PUBLIC ACCESS – ACCOMMODATIONS UNDER THE ADA: PURSUANT TO TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF

1990, THE SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT REQUESTS THAT ANY PERSON IN NEED OF ANY TYPE OF SPECIAL EQUIPMENT, ASSISTANCE OR ACCOMMODATION(S) IN ORDER TO EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE AT THE DISTRICT’S PUBLIC MEETING PLEASE

MAKE SUCH A REQUEST TO THE DISTRICT OFFICE AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS OR BY CALLING (831) 438-2363 A MINIMUM OF

THREE (3) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION WITHIN THIS GUIDELINE WILL ENABLE

THE DISTRICT TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY.

Scotts Valley Water District Board of Directors

Santa Margarita Community Room 2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California

Regular Meeting 03/14/19 Minutes

1. Convene

1.1. Call to Order and Roll Call

President Reber called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Santa Margarita Community Room, 2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California. An online webcast of this meeting is being piloted using go-to-meeting software.

Directors Staff Bill Ekwall Robert Bosso, Legal Counsel Wade Leishman Piret Harmon, General Manager Chris Perri David McNair, Operations Manager Danny Reber Donna Paul, Assistant to General Manager Ruth Stiles

Audience William Brooks, Brooks Properties Todd Creamer, P.E., C2G Civil Consultants Group, Inc. Dave Eggerton, ACWA Executive Director David T. Hodgin Nicolas Kurns, Finance and Customer Service Manager Bill Maxfield, Miller Maxfield. Jennifer Murray, Miller Maxfield Brian Sanders, ACWA Regional Affairs Representative

1.2. Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation

Director Leishman led the pledge of allegiance and Director Perri provided the invocation.

1.3. ACWA Recognition Award for David T. Hodgin Dave Eggerton, Association of California Water Agencies Executive Director presented a recognition award to David T. Hodgin.

1.4. Closed Session Report None.

1.5. Additions/Deletions to the Agenda None.

DRAFT

2.1 -1

Scotts Valley Water District Board of Directors 03/14/19 Minutes Page 2

1.6. Oral Communications None.

2. Administrative

2.1. Approval of Minutes 02/14/19 Regular Board Meeting

MOTION carried to approve the minutes of the 02/14/19 regular Board Meeting by unanimous voice vote.

2.2. Presentations

Bill Maxfield and Jennifer Murray of Miller Maxfield presented the Community Outreach and Communications Mid-Year Update. Click here to view the presentation

2.3. Committee and other Agency Meeting Reports

Executive & Public Affairs Committee None.

Finance & Personnel Committee 02/25/19 There nothing further to add to the written report.

Water Resources & Engineering Committee 02/20/19 There nothing further to add to the written report.

Interagency Advisory Committee None.

Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Board The 3rd education series was a success.

2.4 SMGWA Assignments The SMGWA assignments were discussed.

2.5 Committee Meeting Schedule The Water Resources & Engineering Committee will meet the 2nd Monday at 10:00 a.m.

3. Consent None.

4. Public Hearings

None.

5. Business

5.1. Easement Agreement APN# 022-051-08

General Manager Harmon provided the staff report. Operations Manager McNair, Legal Counsel Rein, Todd Creamer and Bill Brooks all addressed the Board.

DRAFT

2.1 -2

https://www.svwd.org/sites/default/files/board-meetings/presentations/Community%20Outreach%20Communications%20Mid%20Year%20Update.pdf


MOTION carried to approve and authorize the General Manager to execute an Easement Agreement and Grant of Easement in a form mutually agreed by both party’s legal counsel for District property on Carbonera Way, APN# 022-051-08 by unanimous voice vote.

5.2. Recycled Water Fill Station

The Board requested that staff send a letter to the recycled water fill station customers informing them that the Board will be considering closing the station at its April meeting.

5.3 Low Income Rate Program

General Manager Harmon provided the staff report.

The Board directed staff to develop the Low Income Rate Program for further consideration.

5.4 Election for Special District Regular Member on LAFCO

By consensus, the Board voted for Rachel Lather for Special District Regular Member on LAFCO.

5.5 JPIA Executive Board Concurring Resolution

MOTION carried to adopt Resolution No. 01-19 concurring in the nomination of Brent Hastey to the Executive Committee of the ACWA JPIA by unanimous roll call vote.

6. Staff Reports

6.1. LegalActing District Counsel Rein Bosso reported on a recent decision related to the Clean Water Act.

6.2. Administration The General Managers report is appended.

6.3. Finance There was nothing further to add to the financial reports for period ending 01/31/19.

6.4. Operations Operations Manager McNair provided information on the Sanitary Survey that is being conducted and on the WaterSmart software implementation.

7. Directors Reports

7.1 Travel and meetings, ACWA and ACWA JPIA Updates

Director Perri, Reber and Stiles will all be attending the WateReuse Conference in Orange County 03/17/19 to 03/19/19.

DRAFT

2.1 -3


8. Written Correspondence

Water Resources Management Status Report 2018 Santa Cruz County 02/12/19Letter of Support for SB 669 (Caballero) Safe Drinking Water Trust – SVWD 03/07/19Safe Drinking Water Trust - Association of California Water Agencies 01/30/19

The written correspondence was accepted without comment.

9. Community Relations

Newsletter Scotts Valley Water District 02/28/19

The community relations item was accepted without comment.

At 8:45 p.m., President Reber recessed open session

10. Closed Session

At 8:47 p.m., President Reber convened closed session.

Pursuant to Government Code Section §54957Conference with Labor NegotiatorAgency Representative: Piret Harmon, General ManagerEmployee Organization: Scotts Valley Water District Employees Union, AFSCME

At 8:58 p.m., President Reber adjourned the closed session and reconvened open session.

11. Report on Closed Session and Additional Business

General Manager Harmon provided the report on the closed session (labor negotiations).

There were no additional business items.

12. Future Agenda Items

Annual Groundwater Report (April)Proposed Budget (May)Budget Adoption (June)Award Contract for Sequoia Tank RecoatingThink Twice Water Efficiency ProgramRebate Program

13. Meetings and Events Calendar

Regular Board MeetingsSanta Margarita Community Room

04/11/19 05/09/19 06/13/19 rescheduled to 06/20/19

Committee Meetings

DRAFT

2.1 -4


District Conference Room 04/15/19 Executive & Public Affairs (None) 04/16/19 Finance & Personnel 04/15/19 Water Resources & Engineering TBD Interagency

Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Board Regular Board Meetings Santa Margarita Community Room

03/28/19 04/24/19 05/23/19

Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Educational Series Felton Community Hall, 6191 Highway 9, Felton

03/09/19 Managing Groundwater: How Can We Prepare for an Uncertain Future?

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Events 05/07/19 - 05/10/19 Spring Conference Monterey 12/03/19 – 12/05/19 Fall Conference San Diego

Conferences/Trainings/Workshops/Webinars 03/17/19 – 03/19/19 WateReuse Conference Garden Grove

14. Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Scotts Valley Board ofDirectors is scheduled for 04/11/19 at 7:00 p.m. in the Santa Margarita Community Room, 2Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California.

Approved: Attest:

Danny Reber, Board President Piret Harmon, Board Secretary

DRAFT

2.1 -5

STAFF REPORT – General Manager Scotts Valley Water District

Date: March 14, 2019

To: Board of Directors

From: General Manager

1. District is hosting and sponsoring a joint training “From Group to Team” for local public agencies on03/17/19. It is an all-day interactive workshop. We have 30+ attendees registered and there are afew activities for all participants prior to the workshop.

2. Director Reber and I will be attending the National Water Policy Fly-in in Washington DC on04/03/19 – 04/04/19. The event is organized and supported by the Water Environment Foundation,National Association of Clean Water Agencies, WateReuse Association, American Water WorksAssociation, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, Water & Wastewater EquipmentManufacturers Association, U.S. Water Alliance, American Public Works Association, RuralCommunity Assistance Partnership, Association of State Drinking Water Administrators and Councilof Infrastructure Financing Authorities. The two days are packed with Policy Plenary Session, FederalAgency Roundtable, Congressional Reception, Water Week Briefing and Capitol Hill visits. We arehoping the make appointments with Dianne Feinstein’s, Kamala Harris’ and Anna Eshoo’scongressional offices to support the request for continued and increased funding for various waterprograms.

3. This board packet includes a letter of support to SB669 (Caballero) Safe Drinking Water Trust alongwith the talking points provided by ACWA and CMUA. Please use these to reach out to our Staterepresentatives and advocate for Safe Drinking Water Trust as a better alternative to the statewide

2.1 -6


water tax. 4. Soquel Creek Water District Board adopted an ordinance on 03/05/19 fixing rates, charges and fees

retroactive to 03/01/19.

5. Every elected official and public employee who makes or influences governmental decisions a required to submit a State of Economic Interests, also known as the Form 700 annually. The filing deadline is 04/01/19.

2.1 -7

Finance and Personnel Committee

03/25/19 4:00 p.m. District Conference Room

2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California Meeting Report

1. Convene The meeting convened at 4:00 p.m. in the District Conference Room, 2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California.

Present: Director Leishman and Director Reber Guests: None Staff: General Manager Harmon, Finance and Customer Service Manager Kurns

and Assistant to General Manager Paul

2. Discussion Items

2.1 Financial Reports for period ending 02/28/19 The committee reviewed and discussed the financial reports.

2.2 FY 2020 Budget Assumptions The budget assumptions were reviewed and discussed. The Water Resources and Engineering Committee will be reviewing the projects budget on 03/28/19.

2.3 Investment Policy Update The committee received an update on the investment policy. Under consideration is contracting for an investment professional to advise the District.

2.4 Board Compensation Survey The Committee reviewed and discussed the board compensation survey.

3. Future Agenda Items Proposed Operating and Capital Budget Financial Reports for period ending 03/31/19 Investment Advisory Services Update

4. Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at 5:28 p.m.

2.3 - 1

Water Resources and Engineering Committee 03/28/19 10:00 a.m.

District Conference Room 2 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, California

Meeting Report

1. ConveneThe meeting convened at 10:06 a.m. in the District Conference Room, 2 Civic CenterDrive, Scotts Valley, California.

Present: Director Ekwall and Director Stiles Guests: Georgina King, Montgomery and Associates by videoconference Staff: General Manager Harmon, Operations Manager McNair, Assistant to

General Manager Paul and Water Use Efficiency Coordinator Ravinale.

2. Discussion Items

2.1 Annual Groundwater Report WY 2018

Georgina King, Montgomery and Associates presented the Annual Groundwater Reportfor WY 2018 that provides information on the health of the basin and the activities thatthe district is doing to manage the basin. This report will be presented to the Board atits April meeting.

2.2 Proposed Project Budget FY 2020 – 2024

The Committee reviewed and discussed the proposed project budget.

2.3 Water Supply Outlook (period ending 02/28/19)

The Committee reviewed and discussed the water supply outlook report.

2.4 Leak Adjustment Program Report

The Committee reviewed and discussed the Leak Adjustment Program Report

3. Future Agenda ItemsWater Supply OutlookThink Twice Water Efficiency ProgramRebate Program

4. Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at 11:33 a.m.

2.3 - 2

AGENDA REPORT Scotts Valley Water District

Date: 04/11/19


Item: Business 5.1

Subject: 2018 Annual Report Groundwater Management Plan

Reason: Implements District’s Groundwater Management Plan in support of the California Groundwater Management Planning Act

SUMMARY Recommendation: Accept the 2018 Annual Report Groundwater Management Plan.

Fiscal Impact: None

Previous Related Action: On 03/08/18 the Board accepted the 2017 Annual Report Groundwater Management Plan.

BACKGROUND The purpose of the annual groundwater report to provide a management-level summary of groundwater-related activities and issues that occurred in the District during the year. Each year the report is presented to the Board, distributed to local agencies and made available to the public at the District office and on the website.

The District has been producing the annual groundwater reports since 1994. The format of the report has changed over time to meet the evolving needs of the District. Based on recent experience, year-to-year changes in groundwater conditions are typically incremental; therefore, the format was changed to a two-year cycle in 2013 as a more cost-effective approach to accomplish the objectives of the Groundwater Management Plan.

Kennedy Jenks Consultants prepared the annual reports from 2007 to 2015. Two years ago, the District hired Montgomery and Associates, formerly Hydrometrics Water Resources to provide hydrogeological consulting services including preparation of the annual report. The 2018 Annual Groundwater Report provides a comprehensive assessment based on the collection of regional data, analysis of groundwater conditions, updated information on environmental remediation activities in the area, and updating the basin-wide groundwater model while 2017 report is more concise summary focused on District’s operation.

5.1 - 1

DISCUSSION

Rainfall in Water Year (WY) 2018 was 24.3 inches, which is 58% of average rainfall. Since the drought that ended in WY2015, rainfall has been a cumulative 21 inches above normal, with WY2017 having close to record high rainfall. Although, from the start of the drought in October 2011 through September 2018, rainfall is still a cumulative 33 inches below average.

Groundwater production by the District in WY2018 was 1,139 acre-feet, which is 30 acre-feet less than WY2017. Since WY2003, the District’s groundwater production has declined by over 900 acre-feet (about 45%). The District derives nearly all of its potable groundwater supply from the Lompico and Butano aquifers. In WY2018, approximately 73% of District’s groundwater production was from the Lompico aquifer and 26% was from the Butano aquifer.

The District maintains a number of ongoing activities to support the sustainable management of the groundwater resource including water use efficiency program, recycled water program, and water audit and loss control program. In WY2018, recycled water deliveries were approximately 196 acre-feet. Since WY2002, approximately 2,320 acre-feet of recycled water has been delivered for use. This cumulative recycled water use equates to banking almost twice the volume of groundwater that was pumped by SVWD in WY2018.

Groundwater elevations in all aquifers in the Groundwater Reporting Area (GWRA) are generally higher than what has been experienced over the past 10 years. Even though groundwater levels in the portion of the Santa Margarita aquifer in the southern end of the District declined 10 feet in WY2018 from very high levels in WY2017, levels at the end of WY2018 remain high.

Groundwater levels in both the Monterey formation and Lompico aquifer continue upward trends, especially over the past two years. Specifically, Lompico aquifer groundwater levels have increased up to 15 feet over the past two years.

Submitted,

Piret Harmon General Manager Enclosed: Draft Scotts Valley Water District 2018 Annual Report, Groundwater Management

Plan

5.1 - 2

April 4, 2019

Annual Report - Water Year 2018

Scotts Valley Water District

Groundwater Management Plan

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

5.1 - 3

Scotts Valley Water District Annual Report Water Year 2018

PAGE II

Contents

1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................ 1

2 Introduction .................................................................................................. 3

District Overview ................................................................................................................ 3 Groundwater Management Goals and Objectives .............................................................. 3

Annual Report Format ........................................................................................................ 4

3 Groundwater Management Area ...................................................................... 6

Groundwater Basin ............................................................................................................. 6

3.1.1 Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin ..................................................................... 6 3.1.2 DWR Groundwater Basins .................................................................................... 10

Groundwater Management Area ....................................................................................... 10 Historical Groundwater Issues .......................................................................................... 13

4 Water Supply Summary ................................................................................. 14

Precipitation Summary...................................................................................................... 14

SVWD Water Supply ........................................................................................................ 15 4.2.1 Groundwater ......................................................................................................... 15 4.2.2 Recycled Water Deliveries .................................................................................... 17 4.2.3 Changes in Water Use Trends .............................................................................. 18

Regional Groundwater Pumping....................................................................................... 20

SVWD Production Wells .................................................................................................. 23

4.4.1 Condition of Production Wells.............................................................................. 23 4.4.2 Groundwater Pumping by Well ............................................................................ 25 4.4.3 Groundwater Levels in Production Wells ............................................................. 25

5 Groundwater Quality Assessment .................................................................. 27

SVWD Groundwater Quality and Treatment ................................................................... 27 5.1.1 Groundwater Quality ............................................................................................ 27 5.1.2 Groundwater Treatment........................................................................................ 29

Environmental Compliance Sites ...................................................................................... 30

5.2.1 Watkins-Johnson Superfund Site........................................................................... 30 5.2.2 Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners ................................................................................... 33 5.2.3 Kings Dry Cleaners............................................................................................... 34

5.2.4 Inactive Sites ......................................................................................................... 34 Recycled Water Program .................................................................................................. 35

6 Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................... 37

Aquifer Conditions............................................................................................................ 37 6.1.1 Santa Margarita Aquifer ....................................................................................... 37 6.1.2 Monterey Formation ............................................................................................. 41

5.1 - 4


PAGE III

6.1.3 Lompico Aquifer.................................................................................................... 42 6.1.4 Butano Aquifer ...................................................................................................... 46

Aquifer Storage Analysis .................................................................................................. 49

7 Groundwater Management Programs ............................................................ 51

Groundwater Augmentation Projects ................................................................................ 51 7.1.1 Water Use Efficiency Program ............................................................................. 51 7.1.2 Recycled Water Program ...................................................................................... 52 7.1.3 Regional Intertie Project....................................................................................... 53 7.1.4 Regional Water Supply MOA ................................................................................ 53 7.1.5 Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin ASR Project .............................................. 54 7.1.6 Low Impact Development Projects ....................................................................... 54

7.1.7 Purified Recycled Water Recharge Project .......................................................... 55 Groundwater Management Activities ............................................................................... 57

7.2.1 Sustainable Groundwater Management ............................................................... 57 7.2.2 Santa Margarita Basin Groundwater Model ........................................................ 57

Groundwater Management Monitoring Program.............................................................. 58 7.3.1 SVWD Data Collection ......................................................................................... 58 7.3.2 CASGEM Program ............................................................................................... 60

Stakeholder Outreach ........................................................................................................ 60

8 References Cited ......................................................................................... 62

9 Acronyms & Abbreviations ............................................................................ 63

5.1 - 5


PAGE IV

Tables

Table 1. WY2009 to WY2018 SVWD Groundwater Pumping by Aquifer and Recycled Water Usage (in acre-feet) ............................................................................................... 16

Table 2. Summary of WY2018 Private Groundwater Pumping in the GWRA and SMGB (in acre-feet) ............................................................................................................... 21

Table 3. WY2009 to WY2018 Groundwater Pumped in the GWRA by Aquifer (in acre-feet) .... 22

Table 4. Summary of Well Completion Data for Currently Active SVWD Production Wells ..... 24

Table 5. WY2009 to WY2018 SVWD Groundwater Pumping by Well (in acre-feet) ................. 25

Table 6. WY2016 Summary of Key Water Quality Constituents in Raw Groundwater ............... 28

Table 7. Summary of Water Treatment Processes Applied by SVWD ......................................... 29

Table 8. Model-Simulated Change in Aquifer Storage for the GWRA by Aquifer (in acre-feet) . 50

Table 9. Unaccounted-for Water Estimates WY2010-WY2015 (in acre-feet) ............................. 51

Table 10. Wells Used for the Groundwater Management Monitoring Program ............................ 59

Figures

Figure 1. Scotts Valley Water District Location Map .................................................................... 5

Figure 2. Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin ............................................................................... 7

Figure 3. Geologic Cross-Section through the Scotts Valley Area ................................................ 8

Figure 4. Cross-Section and Well Locations .................................................................................. 9

Figure 5. SVWD Groundwater Management and Reporting Areas .............................................. 12

Figure 6. Annual Precipitation for Scotts Valley by Water Year ................................................. 14

Figure 7. Annual SVWD Groundwater Pumping ......................................................................... 15

Figure 8. Annual and Cumulative Recycled Water Deliveries ...................................................... 18

Figure 9. SVWD Monthly Groundwater Pumping Comparison .................................................... 19

Figure 10. Regional Groundwater Pumping in GWRA by User Type ......................................... 22

Figure 11. Locations of Environmental Compliance Sites ........................................................... 32

Figure 12. Recycled Water Management Plan (RWMP) Monitoring Locations ......................... 36

Figure 13. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Santa Margarita Aquifer ...................................... 38

Figure 14. Santa Margarita Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2016 ..... 40

5.1 - 6


PAGE V

Figure 15. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Monterey Aquifer................................................. 42

Figure 16. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Lompico Aquifer .................................................. 44

Figure 17. Lompico Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2018 ................ 45

Figure 18. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Butano Aquifer ..................................................... 47

Figure 19. Butano Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2018 ................... 48

Figure 20. Historical Change in Aquifer Storage for Groundwater Reporting Area .................... 50

Figure 21. Location of Low Impact Development Projects .......................................................... 56

Appendices

Appendix A. Hydrographs of SVWD Production Wells

Appendix B. Hydrograph for Wells with Transducers

5.1 - 7


PAGE 1

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD or District), located in Santa Cruz County, serves water to residents and businesses within an area of approximately 5.5 square miles that includes most of the City of Scotts Valley as well as some unincorporated areas north of the City. Groundwater from the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (SMGB) is the sole source of potable water supply for the District.

SVWD formally adopted its Groundwater Management Plan in 1994 under Assembly Bill 3030 (AB3030). Annual reports describing the groundwater conditions in the Scotts Valley area and the District’s management programs have been prepared since 1994.

Rainfall in Water Year (WY) 2018 was 24.3 inches, which is 58% of average rainfall. Since the drought that ended in WY2015, rainfall has been a cumulative 21 inches above normal, with WY2017 having close to record high rainfall. Although, from the start of the drought in October 2011 through September 2018, rainfall is still a cumulative 33 inches below average.

Groundwater pumped by SVWD in WY2018 was 1,211 acre-feet, which is 31 acre-feet less than WY2017. Since WY2003, the District’s groundwater production has declined by over 900 acre-feet (about 45%). SVWD derives nearly all of its potable groundwater supply from the Lompico and Butano aquifers. In WY2018, approximately 73% of SVWD’s groundwater production was from the Lompico aquifer and 26% was from the Butano aquifer.

Groundwater pumped in the Groundwater Reporting Area (GWRA) by municipal and private pumpers in WY2018 was 1,838 acre-feet. Eighty percent of groundwater pumped in the GWRA is derived from the Lompico aquifer.

SVWD maintains a number of ongoing activities to support the sustainable management of the groundwater resource including water use efficiency, recycled water program, and water audit and loss control program. In WY2018, recycled water deliveries were approximately 196 acre-feet. Since WY2002, approximately 2,320 acre-feet of recycled water has been delivered for use. Cumulative recycled water deliveries equate to banking almost twice the volume of groundwater that was pumped by SVWD in WY2018.

Groundwater quality in SVWD’s production wells is good. Iron and manganese treatment ensures that the concentrations of these constituents in delivered water is below the secondary maximum contaminant level. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) are below

5.1 - 8


PAGE 2

detectable levels in all production wells, except SVWD Wells #9 and #11A which continue to have detections of VOCs that are below their maximum contaminant levels.

SVWD is being informed about the remediation activities at regulated environmental compliance sites within the District. These sites have introduced primarily VOCs into the groundwater. The Camp Evers Combined Site remediation is complete and the case closed. The Watkins-Johnson Superfund site remediation is edging towards closure but still needs to complete the source control component of the remedial action to ensure protectiveness over the long-term. The Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners site continued operation of the soil vapor extraction and air sparging systems in their current configuration. These are remediation systems for the unsaturated soils above the groundwater table so no groundwater is extracted, only soil vapor. Their consultant is also recommending researching environmental data and past use history of the former nearby airport to assess potential source(s) for the elevated PCE and TCE concentrations detected in their distal sampling location. The Watkins-Johnson and Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners groundwater remediation systems have been shut down since 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Groundwater elevations in all aquifers in the GWRA are generally higher than what has been experienced over the past 10 years. Even though groundwater levels in the portion of the Santa Margarita aquifer in the southern end of the District declined 10 feet in WY2018 from very high levels in WY2017, levels at the end of WY2018 remain higher than they have been historically.

Groundwater levels in both the Monterey formation and Lompico aquifer continue upward trends especially over the past two years. Specifically, Lompico aquifer groundwater levels have increased up to 15 feet over the past two years. Model-estimated change in Lompico aquifer groundwater in storage reflects this trend with a net increase in storage of 731 acre-feet. Model results indicate that groundwater in aquifer storage increased by 1,987 acre-feet in WY2017 but decreased by 1,065 acre-feet in WY2018, for a net increase of 922 acre-feet in the Scotts Valley area over the past two years.

5.1 - 9


PAGE 3

2 INTRODUCTION

District Overview

The Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD or District) was formed under the County Water District Law, specifically California Water Code Section (CWC§) 30321, and received certification from the California Secretary of State in 1961. SVWD covers an area of about 5.5 square miles (Figure 1) in northern Santa Cruz County, and is located approximately five miles inland from the Monterey Bay. SVWD provides water to a majority of the residents and businesses in and around the City of Scotts Valley. Groundwater is the sole source of potable water supply for SVWD, so careful management is necessary to sustain the resource.

SVWD has been actively managing groundwater since the early 1980’s; with the goals of increasing water supply reliability and protecting local water supply sources. In 1983, SVWD instituted a Water Resources Management Plan to monitor and manage water resources in the Scotts Valley area. In 1994, SVWD formally adopted a Groundwater Management Plan ([GWMP], Todd Engineers, 1994) in accordance with Assembly Bill 3030 (AB 3030), also known as the Groundwater Management Act (CWC §10750 et seq.).

Groundwater Management Goals and Objectives

The overall purpose of the GWMP is to provide a planning tool that helps guide the District in managing the quantity and quality of its groundwater supply, and to comply with the requirements of AB3030. The main goal of the GWMP is to better manage the sole source aquifers serving the community’s drinking water. The goal of the SVWD GWMP is stated as:

“By implementation of a groundwater management plan for Scotts Valley, SVWD hopes to preserve and enhance the groundwater resource in terms of quality and quantity, and to minimize the cost of management by coordination of efforts among agencies.”

Development of Basin Management Objectives (BMOs) are required for the GWMP under CWC §10753.7(a)(1) as a systematic process to support groundwater basin management. The BMOs for SVWD are currently summarized as:

5.1 - 10


PAGE 4

Encouraging public participation through an annual report of groundwater management activities and its presentation at one or more public meetings.

Coordinating with other local agencies.

Continued monitoring and evaluation of groundwater conditions.

Implementing groundwater augmentation projects.

Investigating groundwater quality and preventing groundwater contamination.

These BMOs continue to guide the SVWD groundwater management program and serve as the major objectives of groundwater management for the District.

Annual Report Format

An annual report is a key part of implementing the GWMP. The annual report evaluates and documents progress on meeting the GWMP goals and BMOs, and identifies any concerns that should be monitored or addressed. This annual report is a management-level summary of groundwater conditions and groundwater management activities conducted by the District during Water Year (WY) 2018. The annual report is presented to the SVWD Board of Directors, distributed among local agencies and stakeholders, and made available to the public at the SVWD office and website.

The District has been producing annual reports since 1994. The format of the annual report has evolved over time to meet the needs of the District. Starting with in 2013, the format of the annual reports began following a two-year cycle with a more comprehensive report provided in even years. Based on past experience, there are only incremental year-to-year changes in the basin; therefore, the two-year cycle provides a more cost- effective approach to accomplish the objectives of the annual report.

The odd year annual reports (2013 and 2015) are concise summaries focused on District operations whereas the even year annual reports (2014 and 2016) provide a more regional assessment that includes an evaluation of data from neighboring water districts and private suppliers, an assessment of water quality issues, an assessment of Basin conditions and the results from of the updated basinwide groundwater model.

In order to evaluate groundwater conditions within the context of California’s climate, data in the annual report are typically reported over a water year defined as the period from October 1 through September 30 of the following year. This period captures the cause and effect relationship on groundwater conditions of the typical rainy winter season followed by low rainfall and higher pumping during the summer.

5.1 - 11


PAGE 5

Figure 1. Scotts Valley Water District Location Map

5.1 - 12


PAGE 6

3 GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA

Groundwater Basin

3.1.1 Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin

The Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (SMGB or Basin) covers approximately 33.2 square miles in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The SMGB forms a roughly triangular area that extends from Scotts Valley in the east, to Boulder Creek in the northwest, to Felton in the southwest (Figure 2). Groundwater is an important source of water supply for many residents living within the SMGB and is the primary water supply for SVWD.

The SMGB consists of a sequence of sandstone, siltstone, and shale underlain by granite that lie within a geologic trough called the Scotts Valley Syncline. This sequence of sedimentary rocks is divided into several geologic formations. Formations are defined by the type of rock and their relative geologic age based on studies by the United States Geological Survey (Clark, 1996, 1981, Muir, 1981, Brabb et al, 1997, McLaughlin et al, 2001). In the SMGB, the sandstone units serve as the primary aquifers that supply the majority of groundwater production for the local water supply. The Basin’s main aquifers are:

Santa Margarita Sandstone (Santa Margarita aquifer),

Monterey Formation,

Lompico Sandstone (Lompico aquifer), and

Butano Formation (Butano aquifer).

The SMGB is a geologically complex area that was formed by the same tectonic forces that created the Santa Cruz Mountains. The Basin is bounded by two regional faults, the Ben Lomond Fault to the west and the Zayante Fault to the north (Figure 2).

Figure 3 presents a geologic cross-section illustrating the highly folded sedimentary layers in the SMGB. Figure 4 indicates where the cross-section runs through the Basin and shows the location of both production and monitoring wells. The deepest part of the Basin is located near SVWD Wells #3B and #7A where the basin is over 1,500 feet thick. The Basin’s geological complexity is reflected by variability of the geologic layers. For example, in some areas the Santa Margarita and Lompico aquifers are separated by the Monterey aquifer, whereas in other parts of the basin the Santa Margarita and Lompico aquifers are in contact with one another. This geological complexity exerts a strong influence on groundwater flow in the Basin.

5.1 - 13


PAGE 7

Figure 2. Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin

5.1 - 14


PAGE 8

Figure 3. Geologic Cross-Section through the Scotts Valley Area

5.1 - 15


PAGE 9

Figure 4. Cross-Section and Well Locations

5.1 - 16


PAGE 10

3.1.2 DWR Groundwater Basins

California’s groundwater basins and subbasins are defined in the Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) 2016 Bulletin 118-Interim Update (DWR, 2016). The interim update includes the SMGB as shown on Figure 2. In 2016, modified basin boundary was submitted by SVWD and approved by DWR as part of a process established for local agencies under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to request that DWR revise the boundaries of a groundwater basin or subbasin, including the establishment of new subbasins.

The approved Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (SMGB) formally defines an area that is already being managed as an integrated and cohesive basin by local public agencies. The majority of the SMGB covers an area not previously recognized by DWR as a groundwater basin because the basin is defined by a series of stacked aquifers rather than surficial alluvium, which was the basis for former DWR basins. The basin expands the former Scotts Valley Groundwater Basin (Bulletin 118 basin number 3-27) to include parts of the former Felton Area basin (Bulletin 118 basin number 3-50) and the former Santa Cruz Purisima Formation basin (Bulletin 118 basin number 3-21). The SMGB’s eastern boundary coincides with the also modified Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (SCMGB).

The SMGB is primarily defined by the areal extent of a stacked sequence of aquifers but also includes a secondary jurisdictional (internal boundary) area that honors the SVWD service area. The internal boundary modification was included so that SVWD’s service area lies only in a single basin. Including all of SVWD in a single basin supports sustainable groundwater management by focusing SVWD’s groundwater management responsibilities on the connected aquifers that supplies its wells. Matching the basin to the jurisdictional boundaries allows for a single Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to cover the shared resource, improve and streamline governance for the shared resource, and allow for easier public communication.

Groundwater Management Area

This annual report focuses on the portion of the SMGB that underlies the SVWD and adjacent areas. Two groundwater management areas are defined in this report for easy reference to key portions of the Basin. The management areas have been revised from annual reports prior to 2016 to match the modified boundary of the SMGB in the DWR’s 2016 Bulletin 118 Interim Update.

5.1 - 17


PAGE 11

The groundwater management areas include:

The SVWD Groundwater Management Area (SVWD GWMA) includes the portion of the SMGB served primarily by the SVWD. The SVWD GWMA is bounded by Bean Creek on the north, Hanson Quarry on the west, and the SMGB boundary to the south and east (Figure 5).

The Groundwater Reporting Area (GWRA) includes both the SVWD GWMA and the Pasatiempo Groundwater Subarea. The Pasatiempo Groundwater Subarea includes the portion of the SMGB served by the San Lorenzo Valley Water District Southern District and by the Mount Hermon Association, and is bounded by the SVWD GWMA on the east, Bean Creek to the north, and the SMGB boundary to the south and the Ben Lomond Fault to the west (Figure 5).

The SVWD GWMA represents the portion of the SMGB where the District is actively involved in groundwater management. The GWRA adds adjacent areas to provide a broader context for a more regional approach to groundwater management. For the most part, the annual report collects and assesses data from the GWRA to support SVWD’s groundwater management activities in the SVWD GWMA.

5.1 - 18


PAGE 12

Figure 5. SVWD Groundwater Management and Reporting Areas

5.1 - 19


PAGE 13

Historical Groundwater Issues

Starting in the late 1960s, groundwater levels in many parts of the SMGB, especially in the Lompico aquifer, experienced significant declines with cumulative totals of up to 200 feet in some areas. Between the mid-1990s and mid-2000s, the rate of decline slowed as a balance between recharge and production was approached. The greatest declines occurred between the late 1960s and mid-1990s. A variety of factors are assumed to have contributed to these declines, including:

Increased groundwater pumping due to residential and industrial growth in the area.

Reduced recharge from the surface to groundwater due to an increase in impermeable land surface associated with urbanization.

Reduced recharge during extended periods of below average rainfall.

Since the mid-2000s, groundwater levels in the GWRA have generally stabilized at the above stated groundwater levels. While the stabilization of groundwater levels in recent years is promising, understanding the history and controlling factors that influence these groundwater level trends provides important context for making future sound groundwater management decisions.

Decreased groundwater levels have resulted in less groundwater stored in the Basin. Groundwater in storage in the SMGB has been reduced by an estimated 25,000 acre-feet, with storage losses in the GWRA making up about 3,000 acre-feet of storage loss in the Santa Margarita aquifer and 13,000 acre-feet storage loss in the Lompico aquifer.

5.1 - 20


PAGE 14

4 WATER SUPPLY SUMMARY

Precipitation Summary

Precipitation is the primary source of groundwater recharge through both direct percolation of rainfall through the soil and infiltration of runoff through streambeds. Therefore, evaluating annual precipitation is a key component of understanding water supply trends and groundwater conditions in the SVWD GWMA. Average annual precipitation in Scotts Valley is 42 inches based on measurements collected since 1947 (Figure 6). In this period, the highest annual rainfall in Scotts Valley was 86.2 inches in WY1983, and the lowest annual rainfall was 20.3 inches in WY2014.

For WY2018, precipitation was 24.3 inches, or about 58% of average (Figure 6). WY2018 is one of eight of the past twelve years with below average precipitation. The cumulative rainfall deficit over the twelve-year period from October 2006 through September 2018 is 50 inches below average. From the start of the recent drought in October 2011 through September 2018, rainfall is a cumulative 33 inches below average.

Figure 6. Annual Precipitation for Scotts Valley by Water Year

5.1 - 21


PAGE 15

SVWD Water Supply

SVWD relies primarily on groundwater from the SMGB for providing potable water to its customers. Recycled water is also available for non-potable uses such as landscape irrigation.

4.2.1 Groundwater

Groundwater pumping by SVWD in WY2018 was 1,211 acre-feet (Figure 7), which was 30 acre-feet less than WY2017. The decline of 240 acre-feet in groundwater pumping observed between WY2014 and WY2015 is likely in response to successful water use efficiency efforts due to the drought at that time. Note that SVWD reports groundwater production and not pumping. Production is the difference between groundwater pumped and process water that is not put in the distribution system. Production volumes will therefore be less than the volumes reported here as groundwater pumping.

Figure 7. Annual SVWD Groundwater Pumping

5.1 - 22


PAGE 16

Although WY2017 and WY2018 had slightly more pumping than WY2015 and WY2016, groundwater pumped is less than what was pumped prior to the drought. WY2018 pumping continues an overall downward trend in groundwater pumping over the past 15 years.

In WY2018, the District obtained about 86% of its total water supply from the Lompico and Butano aquifers (Table 1). An estimated 884 acre-feet was extracted from the Lompico aquifer, which is the basin’s highest producing aquifer. An estimated 322 acre-feet was extracted from the Butano aquifer in WY2018, making it the second highest producing aquifer for the District.

The aquifers are currently being pumped well below their historical maximum annual pumping volumes (Table 1). Annual groundwater pumping from both the Lompico and Butano aquifers has declined since WY2014. For the Lompico aquifer, WY2018 pumping was 40% lower than the high of 1,483 acre-feet in WY2003. Similarly, WY2018 pumping in the Butano aquifer was 56% lower than the high of 735 acre-feet in WY1997.

Table 1. WY2009 to WY2018 SVWD Groundwater Pumping by Aquifer

and Recycled Water Usage (in acre-feet)

Aquifer

His

tori

ca

l

Ma

xim

um

WY

20

09

WY

20

10

WY

20

11

WY

20

12

WY

20

13

WY

20

14

WY

20

15

WY

20

16

WY

20

17

WY

20

18

Monterey 426

(1984) 16 3 3 4 35 23 0 2 6 4

Lompico 1,483

(2003) 1,047 1,009 969 964 1,020 989 896 814 923 884

Butano 735

(1997) 443 346 320 383 345 365 237 323 312 322

Groundwater 2,100

(1997) 1,507 1,357 1,292 1,351 1,400 1,376 1,133 1,139 1,242 1,211

Recycled

Water

200

(2013) 146 134 163 184 200 199 184 195 162 196

Total

Water

Supply

2,096

(2003) 1,653 1,491 1,455 1,535 1,600 1,575 1,317 1,334 1,404 1,407

5.1 - 23


PAGE 17

SVWD Wells #10, #10A, #11A and #11B produce exclusively from the Lompico aquifer, whereas SVWD Wells #3B, #7A, and the Orchard Well which is #7A’s replacement, are screened across both the Lompico and Butano aquifers. Based on results of the groundwater model (Kennedy/Jenks, 2015), 60% of the groundwater pumped from SVWD Wells #3B, #7A, and the Orchard well is from the Butano aquifer and 40% is from the Lompico aquifer. This pumping distribution has been applied for past pumping (Table 1), so the values may differ from past annual reports.

The revised geologic interpretation has SVWD Well #9 screened completely within the Monterey Formation rather than the Santa Margarita aquifer (Kennedy Jenks, 2016a). This change is reflected on Table 1. The maximum estimated groundwater pumped from the Monterey Formation was 426 AF in WY1984 when groundwater levels were about 200 feet higher. Due to low groundwater levels, SVWD Well #9 has been used sparingly over the past nine years. In WY2018, the Monterey Formation accounted for less than 0.3% of the total SVWD groundwater pumped.

4.2.2 Recycled Water Deliveries

Recycled water deliveries of approximately 196 acre-feet in WY2018 are increased from WY2017 deliveries, and are similar to deliveries in WY2015 and WY2016 (Table 1). The Recycled Water Program has issued a total of 52 permits for recycled water use (excluding renewals), with no new permits issued in WY2018 (Figure 8).

From WY2002 through WY2018, approximately 2,318 acre-feet of recycled water has been delivered to customers (Figure 8). The cumulative use of the Recycled Water is equivalent to 190% of the District’s groundwater pumping in WY2018. Since recycled water is used in-lieu of pumped groundwater, it can be assumed that an equivalent volume of groundwater has remained in the SMGB and is available to support current and future water supply needs.

5.1 - 24


PAGE 18

Figure 8. Annual and Cumulative Recycled Water Deliveries

4.2.3 Changes in Water Pumping by Month

Groundwater pumping is highest in the dry season months of May through October and lowest in the wetter months of December through March due to seasonal changes in outdoor use. The timing of increased outdoor water use typically shifts with the amount of springtime precipitation. If March through May rainfall is above average, outdoor water usage tends to be below-average, whereas below-average spring rain tends to increase outdoor water use.

To assess if there are changes in SVWD water use trends, a comparison of the District’s recent monthly groundwater pumped is compared to average groundwater pumped from earlier periods when water use was higher. The results are shown on Figure 9.

5.1 - 25


PAGE 19

Figure 9. SVWD Monthly Groundwater Pumping Comparison

Figure 9 shows four historical average monthly groundwater extraction rates. The first period represents the period of highest historical water use from WY1997 through WY2004, when the average annual groundwater pumped was about 1,980 acre-feet. The second period presents the period of declining groundwater extraction from WY2005 to WY2011, when the average annual groundwater pumped was about 1,630 acre-feet. The third period covers the recent drought from WY2012 through WY2015 when the average annual groundwater pumped was about 1,330 acre-feet. The fourth period includes the three years since the drought through to WY2018 where the average annual groundwater pumped has been about 1,200 acre-feet. Monthly pumping volumes for the four periods are included on Figure 9 as separate vertical bars.

Comparing historical averages to average monthly groundwater pumping for WY2016 through WY2018, monthly groundwater pumped is well below pre-drought historical averages, and even below monthly pumping during the recent drought (except for the month of June). Monthly pumping differences are most pronounced during the summer months of May through October (Figure 9). The difference between the maximum and minimum monthly pumping in WY2018 is 61 acre-feet, while in 1997 it was 133 acre-feet. This

5.1 - 26


PAGE 20

indicates that water use efficiency measures focused on reducing outdoor water usage, primarily landscape irrigation, have been very effective.

SVWD maintains a number of ongoing programs to support the sustainable management of its groundwater resource including the use of recycled water, water use efficiency and water loss reduction programs. These programs have contributed to reduced water demands that results in less groundwater pumping. Other factors that can influence water demand include variations in the weather, economic conditions, and the number and type of customers.

Regional Groundwater Pumping

In addition to SVWD, groundwater in the GWRA is pumped for water supply purposes by other water purveyors, small water systems, and private pumpers. Groundwater has also been pumped historically for purposes of environmental remediation and for industrial uses. Figure 10 provides a summary of annual groundwater pumped by user type in the GWRA. The users include:

San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD) – SLVWD’s Pasatiempo and Mañana Woods systems are within the GWRA. Groundwater pumped by SLVWD in the GWRA was about 225 acre-feet in WY2017 and 320 acre-feet in WY2018. These volumes remain lower than pre-drought (pre-WY2012) pumping by SLVWD in the GWRA, which generally was greater than 330 acre-feet per year. SLVWD pumping from wells outside the GWRA is not included here. Recent pumping is from the Lompico aquifer.

Mount Hermon Association (MHA) – Pumping by MHA was 145 acre-feet in WY2017 and 129 acre-feet in WY2018. WY2015 had the lowest pumping on record at 114 acre-feet. The high was 232 acre-feet in WY2008. Groundwater pumped is derived from the Lompico aquifer.

Industrial Wells – Historically, most industrial groundwater pumping was carried out by the Hanson Quarry before the quarry was closed in 2004. Currently, no large industrial wells are identified in the GWRA. The maximum industrial pumping was 485 acre-feet in WY1987. Groundwater pumping was primarily from the Santa Margarita and Lompico aquifers.

Environmental Remediation – no groundwater for environmental remediation has been pumped since WY2016. The Watkins-Johnson and Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners groundwater remediation systems have been shut down since

5.1 - 27


PAGE 21

2016 and 2015, respectively. Historical pumping for remedial purposes was primarily from the Santa Margarita aquifer.

Private Wells – Pumping from private wells for domestic use, golf course irrigation, landscape ponds and irrigation is not metered, but is estimated at approximately 178 acre-feet in the GWRA for WY2018 (Table 2). The maximum historical private pumping estimate was 381 acre-feet in WY1987 (Todd, 1998). We assume that private pumping has remained the same as WY2015 and WY2016. Private pumpers extract groundwater from the Santa Margarita, Monterey and Lompico aquifers. Appendix A of the WY2016 annual report describes the assumptions used to estimate private pumping.

Table 2. Summary of WY2018 Private Groundwater Pumping in the GWRA and SMGB (in

acre-feet)

Groundwater Use Groundwater

Reporting Area

Santa Margarita

Groundwater

Basin

Domestic

(assume 0.24 acre-feet per

connection)

82 243

Valley Gardens Golf Course 67 67

Small Water Systems 29 37

Total Private Supply 178 347

Annual groundwater pumping from the GWRA has continued to decline over the past several years. Total groundwater pumping in the GWRA was estimated at 1,838 acre-feet in WY2018 (Table 3). This represents a 48 acre-foot decrease in GWRA pumping from WY2017. Total GWRA pumping in WY2018 was 50% less than a high of 3,679 acre-feet in WY1997 (Figure 10). The long-term reduction is due to decreased pumping by water purveyors combined with the elimination of industrial groundwater use and environmental remediation pumping.

Table 3 summarizes total groundwater pumping in the GWRA by aquifer. In the GWRA for WY2018, about 80% of the total pumping is from the Lompico aquifer, 18% is from the Butano aquifer, and the remaining 3% is from the Santa Margarita and Monterey aquifers. Larger municipal and private wells typically pump from the Lompico and Butano aquifers which can sustain higher pumping rates. The Santa Margarita and Monterey aquifers are generally pumped by lower-capacity private wells.

5.1 - 28


PAGE 22

Figure 10. Regional Groundwater Pumping in GWRA by User Type

Table 3. WY2009 to WY2018 Groundwater Pumped in the GWRA by Aquifer (in acre-feet)

Aquifer His

tori

ca

l

Ma

xim

um

WY

20

09

WY

20

10

WY

20

11

WY

20

12

WY

20

13

WY

20

14

WY

20

15

WY

20

16

WY

20

17

WY

20

18

Santa Margarita

894

(1987) 40 53 63 56 74 71 74 57 14 14

Monterey 587

(1984) 62 49 49 50 82 66 37 39 43 41

Lompico 2,705

(2003) 1,862 1,782 1,743 1,739 1,537 1,425 1,449 1,322 1,421 1,462

Butano 738

(1997) 446 349 323 386 576 608 237 323 312 322

Total 3,665

(1997) 2,410 2,233 2,178 2,231 2,270 2,169 1,797 1,740 1,790 1,838

5.1 - 29


PAGE 23

SVWD Production Wells

SVWD currently operates six production wells: SVWD Wells #3B, Orchard, #9, #10A, #11A, and #11B. The locations of these wells are shown on Figure 4.

4.4.1 Condition of Production Wells

Understanding the condition of the currently active SVWD production wells is necessary to help ensure a reliable water supply for the District. Table 4 provides additional details regarding well completions. The service life of a well is difficult to predict and is dependent on several variables. Age of the well is one key indicator. The ages of the active SVWD wells range from 10 to 37 years old.

SVWD Wells #9 and #11A have limited capacity due to their inability to sustain pumping rates. It is believed that SVWD Well #9 is perforated entirely in the Monterey aquifer (Kennedy Jenks, 2016a), which is a poorer-quality and lower yielding aquifer. SVWD Well #11A’s capacity is limited because of a number of factors, including limited saturated aquifer thickness, its well design is likely not optimal, and because of local variations in aquifer properties (Feeney, 2015). Because of the emergency replacement of the collapsed SVWD Well #7A with the Orchard Well in WY2017, planning for a replacement well for SVWD Well #11A has been put on hold.

Most wells show some corrosion over time. Corrosion of the metal in well screens and casing is typically the result of chemical processes related to the high content of dissolved gases (e.g., carbon dioxide, oxygen or hydrogen sulfide) or high concentrations of certain constituents such as chloride. Wells constructed with dissimilar metals, such as stainless steel screens and high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) or mild steel casings are known to suffer from galvanic corrosion where the metals are joined. SVWD Wells #10A, #11A, and #11B are all constructed with dissimilar metals. Conditions at the existing SVWD production wells are continued to be monitored for signs of corrosion.

SVWD Well #3B was producing sand in late 2017 and has since been patched and is not producing sand anymore. Should sanding reoccur, plans to rebuild or replace the well will be made.

5.1 - 30


PAGE 24

Table 4. Summary of Well Completion Data for Currently Active SVWD Production Wells

SVWD

Well Name

Year

Installed

Screened

Interval Depth

(feet bgs)1

Casing Material

Last

Video

Log Most Recent Rehabilitation

Well #3B 1995 700-730,

880-1050,

1180-1370,

1400-1670

16-inch diameter stainless-

steel well casing, 0.040-

inch slot well screen

2017 Mar-2007: Pump, motor &

wire replacement.

Late 2017: Well casing is

corroded and bottom of the

well is filled with sand.

Pump has been lifted and

well is currently not sanding

Orchard

Well

(replaced

Well #7A)

2018 705-784,

805-1063,

1084-1455

14-inch diameter stainless-

steel well casing, 0.050-

inch louver well screen

Feb-

2018

Newly installed

Well #9 1980 155-195,

315-355

12-inch diameter mild steel

casing, 0.080-inch slot well

screen

Jan-

2014

Jan-2014: Mechanical &/or

chemical rehab; and pump,

motor & wire replacement

Well #10A 2007 280-380,

400-450

12-inch diameter well

casing, HLSA steel to 154

feet and stainless steel

below; 0.040-inch stainless

steel wire-wrap screen

Jun-

2012

Jun-2012: Mechanical &/or

chemical rehab; and pump,

motor & wire replacement

Full rehab planned for Mar-

2017

Well #11A 1997 399-419,

459-469,

495-515

mild steel well casing, 12-

inch diameter to 401 feet

and 10-inch diameter

below, 0.012-inch stainless


Sep-

2007

Sep-2007: Pump, motor &

wire replacement

Well #11B 1999 348-388,

423-468,

500-515

mild steel well casing, 14-

inch diameter to 343 feet

and 12-inch diameter

below, 0.012-inch stainless


Jan-

2019

Jun-2018: Airlift re-

development which

inadvertently removed

natural filter pack and well

is sanding.

In 2019: A downhole sand

separator will be installed to

remove sand from the

groundwater before being

pumped to the surface

Note: 1feet bgs = feet below ground surface

5.1 - 31


PAGE 25

4.4.2 Groundwater Pumping by Well

Groundwater pumping varies from year to year to meet the local water demand. To meet changing demands, pumping is shifted between production wells. Groundwater pumping is also shifted between wells to allow for maintenance. In WY2018, SVWD Wells #3B, #10A, #11B, and the new Orchard Well were the highest producing wells (Table 5) and provided 97 percent of SVWD’s potable groundwater supply. These wells are currently being operated substantially below their historical maximum annual pumping volumes as shown in Table 5.

Table 5. WY2009 to WY2018 SVWD Groundwater Pumping by Well (in acre-feet)

SV

WD

We

ll

His

tori

ca

l

Ma

xim

um

WY

20

09

WY

20

10

WY

20

11

WY

20

12

WY

20

13

WY

20

14

WY

20

15

WY

20

16

WY

20

17

WY

20

18

#3B 409 235 150 226 143 208 273 160 257 167 337

#7A 991 504 427 312 501 368 335 236 281 354 0

Orchard - - - - - - - - - - 200

#9 426 16 3 3 4 35 23 0 2 6 4

#10 489 1 1 <1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

#10A 544 397 357 362 378 391 429 374 331 333 371

#11A 152 36 20 1 13 59 19 39 22 34 39

#11B 683 319 400 397 323 339 298 324 246 348 260

Total 2,077

(2003) 1,507 1,357 1,292 1,351 1,400 1,376 1,133 1,139 1,242 1,211

4.4.3 Groundwater Levels in Production Wells

Historical groundwater levels collected and reported for the production wells include both pumping (dynamic) and non-pumping (static) conditions. Monitoring dynamic and static groundwater levels provides a means for evaluating well performance. If well efficiency declines over time, this may be indicated by increasing differences between static and dynamic groundwater levels, thereby demonstrating the well is in need of maintenance.

Furthermore, when groundwater levels decline below the top of the well screen, there is a potential to reduce well efficiency from air entrapment, mineral precipitation, biofouling,

5.1 - 32


PAGE 26

or corrosion resulting in lower pumping rates and higher operating costs. Analysis of dynamic and static groundwater levels in active production wells show the following for WY2018:

SVWD Well #3B: both the dynamic and static groundwater levels are above the top of the upper well screen. The difference between dynamic and static groundwater levels has remained fairly consistent.

SVWD Well #10A, #11A, and #11B: the dynamic groundwater levels are below the top of the upper well screen and static groundwater levels for these wells are above the top of the upper well screen. The difference between dynamic and static groundwater levels has remained fairly consistent in #11A and #11B. There was a slight drop in dynamic pumping levels around 2013 but those levels have stabilized and continued to drop over time.

Appendix A contains hydrographs for all SVWD production wells showing dynamic and static groundwater levels, and screen depths. There is not enough data collected for the Orchard Well yet to analyze, however, what dynamic and static groundwater level data are available is included in Appendix A.

5.1 - 33


PAGE 27

5 GROUNDWATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT

SVWD promotes water quality protection by monitoring groundwater quality, and by operating water treatment facilities to ensure that water delivered to customers meets all drinking water standards. SVWD also reviews activities at environmental remediation sites and provides feedback to the regulatory agencies responsible for these sites.

The District annually prepares and makes available the “Scotts Valley Water District Water Quality Report” to keep customers informed on water quality issues. This report follows the content and format required by law and provides the public with detailed results of water quality testing, a description of the water source, answers to common questions about water quality, and other useful water quality information. The District Water Quality Reports are available at http://svwd.org/your-water/water-quality.

SVWD Groundwater Quality and Treatment

SVWD monitors water quality at the groundwater production wells for the constituents required by the Safe Drinking Water Act and under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. Groundwater is sampled from the SVWD production wells for inorganic minerals, trace metals, total dissolved solids (TDS), pH, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE). Results of water quality analysis are reported to the California Department of Drinking Water (CDDW).

5.1.1 Groundwater Quality

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the USEPA and CDDW have set primary maximum contaminant levels (MCL) associated with public health risks as drinking water standards for various chemicals and constituents. These include industrial chemicals including VOCs and MTBE, and naturally occurring constituents such as arsenic. Secondary MCLs (SMCL) exist for constituents that are not defined as public health risks but require treatment for taste, odor, and other aesthetic issues. These include iron, manganese, sulfate and TDS. MTBE has both an MCL and SMCL.

Table 6 provides a summary of the constituents of concern for untreated groundwater in the SVWD production wells.

5.1 - 34

http://svwd.org/your-water/water-quality


PAGE 28

Table 6. WY2016 Summary of Key Water Quality Constituents in Raw Groundwater

SVWD

Well

VOCs

MTBE

Arsenic

Chromium-

6

Iron &

Manganese

Sulfate

TDS

#3B ND ND ND ND Below

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Above

SMCL

Orchard ND ND ND ND Above

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Below

SMCL

#9 Below

MCL

Below

SMCL ND ND

Below

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Above

SMCL

#10A ND ND ND ND Above

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Below

SMCL

#11A Below

MCL ND

Below

MCL ND

Above

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Above

SMCL

#11B ND ND Above

SMCL ND

Above

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Below

SMCL

Notes: ND – not detected in any samples collected in WY2018 Above MCL or SMCL – At least one sample in WY2018 exceeded respective primary

MCL or secondary MCL

Below MCL or SMCL – Constituent detected in levels below respective primary MCL

or secondary MCL

Historically, the VOCs tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethylene (TCE) and cis-1,2- dichloroethylene (cis-1,2-DCE) along with MTBE have been detected in low concentrations in SVWD Well #9. Groundwater samples collected in WY2018 had low detections of cis-1,2-DCE, TCE and MTBE which were below their respective MCLs.

Chlorobenzene is a VOC that continues to be detected in SVWD Well #11A at concentrations up to 0.97 micrograms per liter (µg/L), consistent with historical levels, and below the MCL of 70 µg/L. For both Well #9 and Well #11A, the source of contaminants has not been defined but is considered to be related to one of the known environmental compliance sites in the vicinity.

Chromium-6 and arsenic are naturally-occurring constituents that can be present in SVWD groundwater wells. These constituents result from the natural dissolution of minerals within the aquifers. Of those, arsenic is the only constituent in SVWD production wells where the concentrations occur near its primary MCL of 10 µg/L:

Concentrations in SVWD Well #11B ranged from 8.8 to 12 µg/L in WY2018.

Concentrations in SVWD Well #11A ranged from non-detect to 4.6 µg/L in WY2018, and

5.1 - 35


PAGE 29

Concentrations in all other SVWD wells were below the detection limit of 1 µg/L (Table 6).

In addition to chromium-6 and arsenic, there are other naturally-occurring constituents that are typical in the SVWD production wells which are regulated by a SMCL for aesthetic issues such as a taste, odor, or staining, i.e., iron, manganese, sulfate and TDS (see Table 5). These constituents require treatment but do not represent public health concerns. There were no major changes in the concentration or occurrence of these constituents in WY2018.

5.1.2 Groundwater Treatment

SVWD treats groundwater extracted from wells to reduce concentrations of certain constituents that are above or approaching MCLs or SMCLs. In addition, the District treats groundwater for hydrogen sulfide for aesthetic reasons, even though it is not a regulated compound. SVWD treats groundwater at four water treatment plants (WTPs) prior to distribution. Table 7 summarizes the four groundwater treatment plants used by SVWD. By applying the appropriate treatment technology, the District is able to deliver potable water that meets regulatory standards and is safe to drink.

Table 7. Summary of Water Treatment Processes Applied by SVWD

Water

Treatment

Plant

SVWD

Wells

Aquifer Chemicals of

Concern

Treatment Type

Orchard

Run

#3B &

Orchard

Well

Butano &

Lompico

Iron, manganese,

and hydrogen

sulfide

Air stripper, chlorination, dual

media filtration, and

sequestering agent

SVWD

Well #9

#9 Monterey Sulfate, VOCs,

and hydrogen

sulfide

Chlorination and granular

activated carbon (GAC)

filtration

SVWD

Well #10

#10 &

#10A

Lompico Iron, manganese,

VOCs, and

hydrogen sulfide

Air stripper, chlorination, dual

media filtration, sequestering

agent, and standby GAC

filtration

El Pueblo #11A & #11B

Lompico Iron, manganese,

and arsenic

pH adjustment, chlorination,

dual media filtration, and

sequestering agent

5.1 - 36


PAGE 30

Environmental Compliance Sites

To protect its potable water supplies and more effectively manage its groundwater basin, SVWD stays informed about local environmental compliance sites in the SVWD GWMA where groundwater quality has been impacted by pollution or chemical spills. Figure 11 shows the locations of environmental sites with known groundwater impacts, and their relationship to SVWD groundwater production wells. These include the following sites:

Watkins-Johnson Superfund site at 440 Kings Village Road (Cleanup Status: Open - Eligible for Closure)

Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners Site located at 272 Mount Hermon Road (Cleanup Status: Open - Site Assessment)

Camp Evers Combined Site associated with four current and former gasoline stations located at the intersection of Scotts Valley Drive and Mount Hermon Road (Cleanup Status: Completed - Case Closed)

Shaffer, Meisser & Rogers Property at 4556 Scotts Valley Drive (Cleanup Status: Completed - Case Closed)

Hacienda Drive Shell Site located at 1 Hacienda Drive (Cleanup Status: Completed - Case Closed)

Kings Dry Cleaners site at 222 Mount Hermon Road (Cleanup Status: Open - Verification Monitoring)

Former Frank’s Auto Dismantlers at 700 Mount Hermon Road (Cleanup Status: Open - Site Assessment, but inactive)

The following is an overview of the remaining active environmental compliance sites in the GWRA. More detailed information for these sites is available from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker website at https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Envirostor web site at www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public.

5.2.1 Watkins-Johnson Superfund Site

The Watkins-Johnson site is located at 440 Kings Village Road in Scotts Valley (Figure

11). Watkins-Johnson is a former semiconductor manufacturer. The site is a Federal Superfund Site, and remediation activities are under the jurisdiction of USEPA Region 9. The site’s current owner is 400 Kings Village, LLC). The site is of interest to SVWD

5.1 - 37

https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/

http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public.


PAGE 31

because of its proximity to SVWD Well #9, which is located approximately 400 feet south of the Superfund site. Two contaminants in particular are present at this site: PCE and TCE, both with a drinking water MCL of 5 micrograms per liter (μg/L). Shallow groundwater extraction by the RA-2 remediation system was deactivated on July 5, 2016 and a draft Groundwater Remedial Action Completion Report (RACR) submitted to the USEPA on December 6, 2016.

The draft RACR report certifies that the clean-up standards set forth in the Consent Decree and in the Record of Decision ROD) have been met. The RACR additionally concludes that all phases of the work, including operations and maintenance (O&M) are complete; and that no additional periodic review, or response action is warranted. On November 7, 2018, the USEPA issued a letter that states Watkins-Johnson has not completed the remedial action, contrary to assertions in the draft RACR. The USEPA acknowledges that Watkins-Johnson has demonstrated to USEPA’s satisfaction that it has attained the groundwater cleanup standards set forth in the Watkins-Johnson record of decision. To complete the remedial action, however, Watkins-Johnson must complete the source control component of the remedial action to ensure protectiveness over the long-term. Actions required to complete the remedial action include:

1) Complete additional response work related to vapor intrusion, and

2) Implement institutional controls and conduct ongoing maintenance to protect and maintain the integrity of the cap (asphalt parking lot, concrete slabs, and buildings) to prevent direct exposure to residual soil contamination, prevent the leaching of contaminants into the groundwater, and implement institutional controls to prevent a threat to human health from vapor intrusion.

The site owner has yet to respond to the USEPA’s letter from November 7, 2018.

No groundwater quality monitoring has taken place since 2016 when the maximum PCE concentration at an onsite well (WJ-43) was 24 μg/L, and the maximum PCE concentration at an offsite well (KV-7) was 78 μg/L. The maximum TCE at an onsite well (WJ-41) was 1.8 μg/L, and the maximum TCE concentration at an offsite well (KV-6) was 3.6 μg/L.

5.1 - 38


PAGE 32

Figure 11. Locations of Environmental Compliance Sites

5.1 - 39


PAGE 33

5.2.2 Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners

The Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners site is located at 272 Mount Hermon Road (Figure 11). Site clean-up is overseen by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). This site is of interest to SVWD because of its proximity to SVWD Well #10A and Well #9. SVWD has installed a granulated activated carbon (GAC) treatment system at SVWD Well #10 WTP as a precautionary measure.

Remedial technologies that have been employed at the site include, soil vapor extraction (SVE), dual phase extraction, groundwater extraction, and permanganate solution injection. From July 2005 to August 2015, groundwater was extracted from shallow (perched) zone wells for treatment and discharge to the City of Scotts Valley’s storm drain system under an NPDES Permit.

A revised Soil Gas Assessment Work Plan was approved by RWQCB in February 2018. To assess the extent of chlorinated VOCs, specifically PCE and TCE in soil gas, ten dual completion soil gas wells surrounding the dry cleaners building were installed by Terraphase Engineering (Terraphase) to a depth of between 5 to 10 feet below ground, and two sub-slab soil gas wells were installed within the Scotts Valley Dry Cleaners Building in May 2018. The report documenting this work is titled Soil Gas Assessment Report, dated August 21, 2018.

One of the findings of the assessment were detections of elevated PCE and TCE at the most distal soil gas well. Because this result is anomalous relative to all other samples, Terraphase suggested in their report that this may indicate an unrelated VOC source, such as the former airport, is impacting the vadose zone and causing the detections. As there are also other detections of PCE in the soil gas, Terraphase recommended a number of further tasks, including continued operation of the SVE and air sparging systems in their current configuration. They also recommend researching environmental data and past use history of former airport to assess potential source(s) for the elevated PCE and TCE concentrations detected in the distal sampling location.

In response to the findings in the Soil Gas Assessment Report, RWQCB appeared to agree with the recommendations in the report. Additionally, RWQCB is recommending offsite monitoring wells, including some Watkins-Johnson wells. Email correspondence between RWQCB and Terraphase in October 2018 indicates that monitoring well ownership transfer agreements have been delayed due to legal negotiations with Watkins–Johnson representatives, and in one instance, denial of access to a monitoring

5.1 - 40


PAGE 34

well that is purportedly being used by a private resident who is claiming ownership and rights to the water.

No groundwater has been sampled at the site since WY2016, even though in WY2016 PCE continued to be detected at concentrations up to 3.2 μg/L in the well MW-13A, but continued to be below detectable levels in two deeper monitoring wells, located approximately 100 and 250 feet north, respectively from SVWD Well #10A. These results are consistent with the findings of the Watkins-Johnson report (ARCADIS, 2015) that migration of PCE in the regional aquifers is through the Santa Margarita aquifer towards the north and away from SVWD Well #10A.

5.2.3 Kings Dry Cleaners

The Kings Dry Cleaners site is located at 222 Mount Hermon Road (Figure 11). Site clean-up is overseen by the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Division (CSCEHD). The site of the former dry cleaning facility is now a retail ice cream parlor. The site is 1,300 feet upgradient from the nearest SVWD production well (SVWD #9), and approximately 690 feet away from SLVWD inactive Mañana Woods production wells.

The soil and groundwater assessment report in October/November 2009 confirmed that groundwater was not affected by dry-cleaning operations. Two deep monitoring wells down to 221 feet and 225 feet, respectively, were destroyed under permit in July 2017, as directed by the RWQCB. There are ongoing investigation to determine if previously detected, elevated concentrations of PCE in soil vapor at the site pose a vapor intrusion risk to building occupants.

5.2.4 Inactive Sites

Inactive sites, which have been approved for site closure or have been found to pose little threat to groundwater, are listed below and also included on Figure 11. See previous annual reports for site descriptions or visit SWRCB’s GeoTracker website for comprehensive information on these sites (https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.

Camp Evers combined site (remediation complete and case closed);

Shaffer, Meisser & Rogers Property (Scotts Valley Drive Chlorobenzene Plume) [remediation complete and case closed];

Hacienda Drive Shell Site (remediation complete and case closed); and

Frank’s Auto Dismantlers (case still open but not active).

5.1 - 41

https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/


PAGE 35

Recycled Water Program

The Regional Water Quality Control Board permit for recycled water use includes a Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP), which requires effluent monitoring and system performance monitoring. The MRP Order No. 01-067 details recycled water monitoring requirements, standard observations, distribution system inspections, and reporting requirements.

The presence of nitrate in recycled water has been noted in effluent samples, which is typical of treated wastewater. USEPA has established a primary drinking water MCL of 10 milligrams per liter (mg/L) for nitrate reported as nitrogen (nitrate as N). Nitrate in the City’s recycled water during WY2018 ranged from 1.3 to 5.7 mg/L, with an average of 3.2 mg/L (City of Scotts Valley, 2019). Nitrogen removal efficiency at the plant ranged from 53% to 78%.

Although neither groundwater nor surface water monitoring is required by the permit, the District has performed this monitoring as part of meeting the basin management objective of monitoring changes in water quality. Figure 12 shows the location of the monitoring features in relation to production wells. During WY2018, however, no samples were collected from surface water sites or groundwater wells. There has been no evidence of increases in nutrients or salts based on the sampling data conducted in previous years.

5.1 - 42


PAGE 36

Figure 12. Recycled Water Management Plan (RWMP) Monitoring Locations

5.1 - 43


PAGE 37

6 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

This section provides a summary of the data and analysis of groundwater conditions in the GWRA, including an assessment of changes in groundwater levels and aquifer storage.

Aquifer Conditions

6.1.1 Santa Margarita Aquifer

The Santa Margarita aquifer consists of sandstone that has widespread surface exposures throughout the Scotts Valley area. As part of the revised geological interpretations in this area, the Santa Margarita aquifer is considered to be about 30 to 50 feet thick over much of the Scotts Valley area and thickens to the north and west towards the Bean Creek and Pasatiempo subareas (Kennedy/Jenks, 2015).

Figure 3 shows a geologic cross-section illustrating the variable thickness of the Santa Margarita aquifer. The Santa Margarita aquifer is the shallowest primary aquifer in the SMGB, so it was developed first by both municipal and private water users. Being the shallowest aquifer, where it is exposed at the ground surface, it is recharged by direct percolation of rainfall. Where there are impervious surfaces over the Santa Margarita aquifer, percolation potential is not lost if the runoff is allowed to be collected and infiltrated in a local percolation location, such as those low impact development (LID) projects described in Section 7.1.6,

Figure 13 provides groundwater elevation hydrographs for three representative Santa Margarita aquifer monitoring wells from different locations across the GWRA. The three well locations are shown on Figure 4. Unfortunately, the Shell’s MW-3 monitoring well has been removed because when the Camp Evers cleanup ended, the wells that were part of the monitoring program were destroyed.

Figure 13 shows that overall, the groundwater elevations in the Santa Margarita aquifer vary by a range of 5 to 30 feet over the period of record, with a pattern that appears to correspond to climatic conditions. In general, groundwater levels in the Santa Margarita aquifer have remained relatively stable for the past 30 years. Note that Figure 13 and subsequent aquifer specific hydrographs have a vertical scale of 300 feet to show the groundwater elevation variations of all the aquifers at the same scale.

5.1 - 44


PAGE 38

Figure 13. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Santa Margarita Aquifer

Groundwater levels for SLVWD’s Pasatiempo MW-2 and SVWD’s TW-18 monitoring well on Figure 13 show how different areas of the aquifer respond differently to rainfall and pumping. SVWD’s TW-18 monitoring well is located over two miles away from municipal wells that historically pumped from the Santa Margarita aquifer. Because of this distance, groundwater levels in the well do not show seasonal fluctuations related to pumping. The groundwater level trend over time has remained very stable. This suggests that the Santa Margarita aquifer in the northern portion of the District has not had much change in groundwater in storage for over ten years. Years when there has been above-average rainfall, when you might expect to see an increase in levels (1995-1998, 2005-2006, 2010-2011, 2017), there are no noticeable increases in groundwater levels in this well. This may indicate that groundwater levels in this part of the District are in equilibrium and that recharge from above-average rainfall results in increased natural discharge and not a change in storage with associated increase in groundwater levels.

The southern portion of the District, where SLVWD’s Pasatiempo MW-2 monitoring well is located, is an area where there has historically been more Santa Margarita aquifer pumping by

5.1 - 45


PAGE 39

SVWD and SLVWD. Currently neither of these agencies pump from the Santa Margarita aquifer. The well’s hydrograph on Figure 13 shows both smaller seasonal fluctuations, and larger fluctuations which correspond to periods of above-average rainfall (1995-1998, 2005-2006, 2010-2011, 2017). Of note, in WY2017 there was an increase in groundwater levels of 16 feet that peaked in June. This increase is probably mostly a result of record rainfall in WY2017, but it does also coincide with the year SLVWD stopped pumping their wells screened in the Santa Margarita aquifer. The peak groundwater levels in June indicate that it takes several months for direct rainfall percolation to make its way down to the water table and recharge the Santa Margarita aquifer. The groundwater levels in the well declined 10 feet in WY2018 from the peak in June 2017 despite there being no municipal pumping. This may have occurred because WY2018 was a below average rainfall year and recharge was limited. Nevertheless, groundwater levels at the end of the water year are higher than they have been for the majority of the life of the well.

Figure 14 presents a groundwater elevation map of the Santa Margarita aquifer for September 2018. In general, groundwater in the Santa Margarita aquifer flows from higher elevations, where the Santa Margarita aquifer is exposed at the surface and direct recharge occurs, toward lower elevations where groundwater is discharged at springs or creeks. The highest groundwater elevations in the Santa Margarita aquifer are found in the uplands south and northeast of Scotts Valley. The lowest groundwater elevations are found along Bean Creek, where groundwater discharges into the creek. As depicted on the hydrographs, little change in the overall groundwater flow pattern has occurred.

Portions of the Santa Margarita aquifer are unsaturated. As shown on Figure 3 and Figure 14, there are areas where the Lompico aquifer directly underlies the Santa Margarita aquifer. Declining groundwater levels in the Lompico aquifer have caused the Santa Margarita aquifer in these areas to become either unsaturated or to have depressed groundwater levels. Percolating rainfall and surface water in this area passes through the Santa Margarita aquifer as groundwater recharge to the Lompico aquifer.

5.1 - 46


PAGE 40

Figure 14. Santa Margarita Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2016

5.1 - 47


PAGE 41

6.1.2 Monterey Formation

The Monterey formation is primarily composed of mudstone, shale, and siltstone. This composition makes the Monterey formation a regional aquitard that separates the Santa Margarita and Lompico aquifers. However, the gradational geologic transition from the underlying Lompico sandstone means that the lower Monterey formation contains several sandstone interbeds that can locally produce groundwater for smaller municipal and private wells.

As noted in Section 3.2.1, the revised geologic interpretation for SVWD Well #9 is that it is screened completely within the Monterey formation (Kennedy/Jenks, 2015). As shown on the hydrograph on Figure 15, SVWD Well #9 experienced over 200 feet of groundwater level decline during the 1980’s and early 1990’s that diminished its water supply potential significantly. A groundwater level decline occurred over WY2013 and WY2014, likely in response to the increased pumping in the Monterey formation during this time (Table 1). Groundwater levels in SVWD Well #9 have risen slowly since WY2006, but are still about 150 feet below elevations prior to 1980.

The historical groundwater trend in SVWD Well #9 follows a trend similar to that observed in wells completed in the Lompico aquifer. The interpretation is that in the 1980’s, when groundwater levels in the Lompico aquifer were higher, it was able to recharge the sandier layers in the lower Monterey formation where SVWD Well #9 is completed. After the Lompico aquifer groundwater levels declined in the mid-1980s, this recharge was greatly diminished such that SVWD Well #9 was no longer able to sustain its earlier pumping rates. Groundwater elevations in the Monterey formation are currently stable to slightly increasing. The Monterey formation in no longer used to produce water for SVWD.

Because of limited wells completed within the Monterey formation with available groundwater level data, a groundwater elevation contour map cannot be constructed for the aquifer.

5.1 - 48


PAGE 42

Figure 15. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Monterey Aquifer

6.1.3 Lompico Aquifer

The Lompico aquifer is typically a 300 to 400 feet thick medium-grained sandstone that becomes thinner and more fine-grained to the north and east across the SMGB (Clark, 1981, Brabb et al, 1997). The Lompico sandstone is found throughout most of the basin; however, the unit only outcrops along the basin margins. Figure 3 shows a geologic cross-section illustrating the complex character of the Lompico aquifer across the area.

The Lompico aquifer is the primary water producing aquifer in the SMGB and provides a large percentage of the municipal water supply, especially in the Scotts Valley area. In WY2018, approximately 77% of the GWRA groundwater pumped was from the Lompico aquifer (Table 3). This pumping has contributed to declines in groundwater levels in the Lompico aquifer in the past.

Figure 16 provides groundwater elevation hydrographs for six representative Lompico aquifer wells from different locations across the GWRA. The well locations are shown on

5.1 - 49


PAGE 43

Figure 4. SVWD monitoring wells TW-19 and SVWD AB303 MW-2 (Skate Park) are measured continuously with electronic data transducers (Appendix B includes more detailed hydrographs of these wells).

As evident on Figure 16, Lompico aquifer groundwater levels have declined by 150 to 200 feet relative to pre-pumping levels across the GWRA. The greatest decline in groundwater levels occurred from 1984 to 1994. From 1995 to 1999, groundwater levels stabilized or increased in some areas. From 1999 to 2004, groundwater levels declined another 50 feet. Since 2005, groundwater levels have fluctuated within a more narrow range; although, groundwater levels in Pasatiempo MW-1 and SVWD #10 continued to decline up to 20 to 30 feet until 2010; thereafter groundwater levels have fluctuated within a more narrow range like the other wells on the hydrograph. It is noticeable that several of the wells on Figure 16 show a trend of increasing groundwater levels over the past two years with up to 15 feet of rise recorded.

Figure 17 presents a groundwater elevation map of the Lompico aquifer for September 2018. Lompico aquifer wells are generally limited to the southern margin of the basin due to the great depth of the Lompico aquifer in the center of the Basin. The general pattern shown on Figure 17 is a broad area of depressed groundwater levels forming a trough along the southern margin of the basin. The individual production wells are shown as isolated areas of increased drawdown. To the north, the higher groundwater elevations are interpreted to represent groundwater flow from the center of the basin towards the pumping centers in the south. Higher groundwater levels along the far southern margin may reflect influence from inflow from the Santa Margarita aquifer.

5.1 - 50


PAGE 44

Figure 16. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Lompico Aquifer

5.1 - 51


PAGE 45

Figure 17. Lompico Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2018

5.1 - 52


PAGE 46

6.1.4 Butano Aquifer

The Butano aquifer is a significant water-producing aquifer in the SMGB for SVWD, with 27% of groundwater pumped by the District produced from this aquifer in WY2018. The Butano aquifer is a deep, thick sedimentary unit that consists largely of sandstone with interbeds of mudstone, shale, and siltstone. It is geologically complex and typically occurs at depths greater than 1,000 feet under much of the SMGB. The Butano aquifer forms a wedge along the northern portion of the SMGB (Figure 3) and has been mapped in surface outcrops along the northern SMGB margin.

During the first few years of SVWD pumping from this aquifer (WY1993 to WY1995), groundwater levels in SVWD Well #7A declined nearly 200 feet relative to pre-pumping levels (Figure 18). However, since SVWD Well #7A is completed in both the Lompico and Butano aquifers, it is unclear whether this drop in groundwater levels reflects conditions in the Butano aquifer or the observed decreases in the Lompico aquifer. From 1996 to 2006, static groundwater levels at SVWD Well #3B and #7A fluctuated seasonally within an elevation range of 200 to 300 feet above mean sea level (amsl). With decreased pumping after 2006, groundwater levels have increased over 50 feet and have remained fairly stable since 2010. The seasonal range in groundwater levels is typically 50 feet, but can be as much as 100 feet.

Due to it great depth, there are currently only two dedicated monitoring wells in the Butano aquifer. Groundwater levels for the SVWD Canham monitoring well are plotted on Figure 18. The Canham well is located 0,9 miles northeast of the nearest District wells, SVWD Wells #3B and #7A (Figure 3). Its groundwater levels are generally very stable. The second Butano aquifer monitoring well is SVWD Well #15 Monitor Well, which is equipped with an electronic data transducer that continuously measures groundwater levels, and is located 500 feet from municipal production well SVWD #3B. The hydrograph for this well is not included on Figure 18 because its levels fluctuate strongly in response to pumping at nearby SVWD Well #3B and #7A, and adding it to the hydrograph obscures the other data. Its hydrograph is included in Appendix B. The groundwater elevation data for SVWD Well #15 Monitor Well shows about a 100-foot decline when SVWD Well #3B is pumping, and about a 20-foot decline when SVWD Well #7A/Orchard Well is pumping. However, over its period of record, including during the WY2012 through WY2015 drought, groundwater level response to pumping remained consistent with no indication of a decline in groundwater levels over the drought or any other overall trend.

5.1 - 53


PAGE 47

Figure 18. Groundwater Hydrographs for the Butano Aquifer

Figure 19 presents a groundwater elevation map of the Butano aquifer for WY2018. Groundwater flow is mostly north to south, from the area of the Stonewood Well towards the actively pumping SVWD Wells #3B and #7A. Groundwater elevation contours curve around to the east to account for the relatively low ground surface elevations in Blackburn Gulch.

5.1 - 54


PAGE 48

Figure 19. Butano Aquifer Groundwater Elevation Contour Map, September 2018

5.1 - 55


PAGE 49

Aquifer Storage Analysis

Aquifer storage is a measure of the volume of groundwater present in the aquifer. The change in aquifer storage measures the increase or decrease in the volume of groundwater in the aquifer resulting from changes in groundwater levels, primarily in response to variations in annual precipitation and groundwater pumping.

Because of the geologic complexity of the SMGB, the SMGB groundwater model provides a quantitative tool to evaluate the changes in groundwater conditions over time. The SMGB groundwater model is calibrated from WY1985 through WY2014. Updates to model pumping and hydrology took place at the end of WY2014 (to include WY2013 and WY2014 data), at the end of WY2016 (to include WY2015 and WY2016 data), and as part of preparing this year’s annual report (to include WY2017 and WY2018 data). The groundwater model is updated using procedures outlined in the SMGB Model Technical Report (Kennedy/Jenks, 2015). As pointed out in Section 3.3, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency should consider revising private well pumping in the model during its upcoming efforts to improve the groundwater model for purposes of using it to help develop sustainable management criteria for the Basin’s GSP.

The results of the model-based calculations for change in aquifer storage since WY1985 are shown on Figure 20. Table 8 provides a summary of the long-term change in aquifer storage per aquifer as calculated by the updated SMGB model. Figure 20 and Table 8 indicate that groundwater storage in the GWRA increased by 1,987 acre-feet in WY2017 as a result of it being a very wet year and decreased by 1,065 acre-feet in WY2018 as a result of it being a below average rainfall year. Over WY2017 and WY2018 there was a net increase of 922 acre-feet of groundwater in storage (Table 8).

Examining cumulative changes over different time periods, the model results show that during the drought years of WY2012 through WY2015, the cumulative decline in aquifer storage was 2,328 acre-feet. The recent drought-related storage decline was much less than the storage decline experienced during the WY1985 to WY1992 drought, which was a decline of 14,834 acre-feet. The greater decline occurred, in part, because average pumping was 290 acre-feet per year more than it was in the WY2012-2015 drought.

The cumulative storage change line on Figure 20 clearly shows that since 2004, when SVWD’s pumping started declining (Figure 7), ongoing cumulative storage declines have been halted. WY2018 cumulative storage change is the same as it was in 2004 (Figure 20), and is attributed primarily to reduced pumping.

5.1 - 56


PAGE 50

Figure 20. Historical Change in Aquifer Storage for Groundwater Reporting Area

Table 8. Model-Simulated Change in Aquifer Storage for the GWRA by Aquifer (in acre-feet)

Aquifer

WY1985

through

WY1992

WY2005

through

WY2011

WY2012

through

WY2015 WY

2016

WY

2017

WY

2018

Annual Average Change in Aquifer Storage (acre-feet)

Santa Margarita -310 91 1,201 55 763 -773

Monterey -201 20 -74 25 109 -23

Lompico -793 92 -635 251 800 -68

Butano -378 -93 -419 48 315 -200

Total -1,682 111 -2,328 379 1,987 -1,065

5.1 - 57


PAGE 51

7 GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

SVWD has actively managed groundwater in the SVWD GWMA since the early 1980s in an effort to increase water supply reliability and to protect local water supply sources. This section provides a summary of these programs conducted by the District to meet the BMOs.

Groundwater Augmentation Projects

One of the key BMOs is to implement groundwater augmentation projects. Current programs focus on water use efficiency, recycled water use and conjunctive use projects.

7.1.1 Water Use Efficiency Program

Water use efficiency reduces the overall demand for groundwater, and thus helps to sustain groundwater levels and long-term groundwater extraction. In recent years, SVWD has implemented numerous policies and programs to encourage water use efficiency among customers through coordinating public outreach activities, issuing monetary rebates to customers, and implementing best water use efficiency management practices. A more detailed description of SVWD’s water use efficiency activities can be found on the water use efficiency section of the District’s website at: http://www.svwd.org/water-use-efficiency.

Of particular note since the last annual report is the District’s focus on water loss control. In 2016, District staff used AWWA M36 software to calculate an updated Water Audit Validity Score. The District received a score of 68 out of 100. Priority areas that were identified for attention included meter data from District sources, estimation of variable production cost, and customer metering accuracies. Table 9 provides a summary of estimated water loss from WY2010 through WY2015.

Table 9. Unaccounted-for Water Estimates WY2010-WY2015 (in acre-feet)

WY2010 WY2011 WY2012 WY2013 WY2014 WY2015

Groundwater Produced 1,358 1,302 1,362 1,400 1,377 1,133

Potable Water Delivered 1,240 1,160 1,208 1,248 1,157 995

Percent Water Loss 9% 11% 11% 11% 16% 12%

Source: 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (Kennedy/Jenks, 2016b)

5.1 - 58

http://www.svwd.org/water-use-efficiency

http://www.svwd.org/water-use-efficiency


PAGE 52

Full system leak detection survey was completed in 2015. The report from the consultant, M.E. Simpson, indicated only a few minor distribution system leaks that were repaired immediately. In addition to system leaks, the District has also operated a leak detection program for customers since 1996. Customers who have spikes in water consumption are sent a courtesy “leak letter” informing them of an increase in water usage and suggesting that there may be a leak at their property. Customers who repair leaks may be eligible for an adjustment on their water bill. In February 2016, the Leak Adjustment Policy was changed to a Leak Adjustment Program, simplifying the process and increasing staff efficiency for implementation.

A significant percentage of District losses are potentially the result of meters that are under-reporting deliveries. The District began a three-year meter change out program in 2016 coupled with an Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system-wide deployment. The District retained TritonAMI to determine which automated metering system would work best. Presently, water meters are radio read every other month. AMI allows for hourly recording of consumption data that is uploaded daily and stored in a cloud-based database. The information can be accessed by the District and customers to gain a better understanding of their water use patterns and to provide alerts about unusual fluctuations in water use.

7.1.2 Recycled Water Program

Recycled water is used in-lieu of groundwater for permitted non-potable uses, mainly for landscape irrigation. This augments the water supply and helps to meet water use efficiency goals. Since all of the recycled water use sites are located within the SMGB, the entire recycled water usage represents an equivalent reduction in groundwater pumping. Groundwater not pumped from the basin is assumed to be available for future beneficial use. Recycled water deliveries by SVWD historically and in WY2018 is reported in Section 4.2.2.

The Recycled Water Program is a cooperative effort between SVWD and the City of Scotts Valley. Recycled water is produced at the City of Scotts Valley Tertiary Treatment Plant, where it undergoes additional treatment including nitrate removal, ultra-violet disinfection, and chlorination. Recycled water is then distributed by SVWD to customers through a designated pipeline system. The City of Scotts Valley has passed an ordinance mandating use of recycled water for new construction where economically feasible.

5.1 - 59


PAGE 53

Since August 2015, SVWD has operated a Recycled Water Fill Station located on Kings Village Road from May to October. All District customers and City residents are eligible to receive up to 250 gallons of free recycled water per day for permitted uses.

In April 2016, the City of Scotts Valley and Pasatiempo Golf Club reached an agreement for the City to provide treated wastewater to the golf course for irrigation. This allows Pasatiempo Golf Club to reduce its reliance on potable water from the City of Santa Cruz during peak-use months when irrigation demand is high. In support of this regional effort, SVWD released 10% of its total recycled water allocation in exchange for compensation that can be applied toward funding future projects. The District did not have a current identified use for the amount of recycled water that it supplied to the golf course.

7.1.3 Regional Intertie Project

The District led a grant application effort to obtain Proposition 50 Water Security funding from the CDDW for constructing emergency intertie pipelines and pump stations between adjacent water systems for sharing water during a water emergency. The grant provided 44% funding for the project. Construction was completed in Spring 2016. For the GWRA, the interties of interest include the following connections:

SVWD and the SLVWD Southern District,

SLVWD Northern and Southern Districts, and

SLVWD and the Mount Hermon Association.

The construction of the intertie between the SLVWD Northern and Southern Districts provides a means for utilizing surface water by SLVWD that could allow for reduced groundwater pumping in the GWRA.

The intertie was not activated in WY2018.

7.1.4 Regional Water Supply MOA

The District is party to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with SLVWD, City of Santa Cruz and County of Santa Cruz to explore and evaluate potential projects for the conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources in the Santa Margarita basin and San Lorenzo River watershed.

5.1 - 60


PAGE 54

7.1.5 Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin ASR Project

Over the past two years, the groundwater model has been used to evaluate a proposed City of Santa Cruz aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) project. The modeling was used to identify benefits or detriments to the basin resulting from the proposed ASR project. This project is ongoing, and additional modeling taking place in WY2019.

7.1.6 Low Impact Development Projects

Low impact development (LID) projects consist of applying stormwater best management practices (BMPs) – such as infiltration basins, vegetated swales, bio-retention and/or tree box filters – to retain and infiltrate stormwater that is currently being diverted into the storm drain system. The infiltrated stormwater recharges the shallow aquifers in a manner similar to natural processes. The infiltration helps augment groundwater levels, and sustains groundwater contributions to stream baseflow that supports local fishery habitats. A complicating factor in implementing LID projects in the Scotts Valley area is that there is no centralized stormwater collection system, which limits the ability to do large scale projects to direct groundwater augmentation to the most beneficial areas.

The District has installed monitoring equipment to assess the performance of the facilities, and WY2018 was the first full water year that infiltration data for these facilities are available. The total amount of stormwater infiltrated at the three LID facilities in the SVWD service area in WY2018 was 22.44 acre-feet.

Transit Center LID

The District obtained grant funding through a Santa Cruz County Prop 84 grant from the SWRCB for the planning, design, and construction of a LID retrofit at the Scotts Valley Transit Center site (Figure 21). The design included construction of a vegetated swale, a below-ground infiltration basin, and pervious pavement. Construction began in October 2016 and was completed in May 2017. In WY2018, a total of 1.75 acre-feet was infiltrated at this location.

Woodside HOA LID

As part of the Prop 84 grant match, the District worked with a local developer to install a stormwater recharge facility at the Woodside HOA along Scotts Valley Drive (Figure 21). This facility includes a large below-ground infiltration basin. Stormwater is routed from the development to the basin where it can percolate down into the groundwater. Initial hydrology reports estimated recharge on the order of 20 to 40

5.1 - 61


PAGE 55

acre-feet per year (Ruggeri, Jensen and Azar, 2010). In WY2018, a total of 17.3 acre-feet was infiltrated at this location.

Scotts Valley Library LID

An earlier grant-funded project installed a below-ground infiltration basin at the Scotts Valley Library (Figure 21). In WY2018, a total of 3.39 acre-feet was infiltrated at this location.

All three LID facilities are located in alluvium which is underlain by Santa Margarita sandstone (Figure 21). Since alluvium is highly permeable and less than 100 feet thick, infiltrating stormwater has a good chance of recharging the Santa Margarita aquifer. Figure 21 shows the location of the LID facilities in relation to surface geology and the area where the Santa Margarita aquifer directly overlies the Lompico aquifer due to the absence of the less permeable Monterey formation. Because the LID facilities are not located in the area where the Monterey formation is missing, there is less potential of the LID facilities recharging the Lompico aquifer.

In addition to large LID projects as described above, the District is part of the Strategic and Technical Resources Advisory Groups for Ecology Action’s regional sponsorship of the Prop 84 LID Incentives Grant. District staff provided input on rating criteria for the landscape certification program and the structure in the grant reporting. Through 2018, 32 SVWD customers were awarded grant incentives for making stormwater management improvements to their properties, with strategies such as rainwater harvesting, lawn and hardscape removal, and stormwater retention methods, such as swales and rain gardens. According to SVWD staff records, the program provided 31,733 square-feet of permeable recharge area.

7.1.7 Purified Recycled Water Recharge Project

In WY2019, the District will commence environmental impact report (EIR) preparation for a groundwater replenishment project using advanced treated purified wastewater. Groundwater replenishment Alternative 3, where the facilities are located at the District’s El Pueblo Yard, is the recommended project alternative (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2017). The El Pueblo site has existing infrastructure that can be reused, including reuse of wells SVWD #11A and #11B for injection. Direct injection of water provides a direct means of replenishing water to an aquifer and raising groundwater levels, without relying on the variable natural recharge process. Modeling results show that the project could add 560 acre-feet per year into the Lompico aquifer, and groundwater levels could increase approximately 150 to 190 feet over 15 to 20 years.

5.1 - 62


PAGE 56

Figure 21. Location of Low Impact Development Projects

5.1 - 63


PAGE 57

Groundwater Management Activities

7.2.1 Sustainable Groundwater Management

SVWD actively participates in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), the Basin’s Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), formed per the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014. The District is a member of the SMGWA, comprising the SVWD, San Lorenzo Valley Water District, and the County of Santa Cruz. The Board of Directors of the SMGWA includes two Board members from each of the member agencies, one from the County, one from the City of Scotts Valley, one from the City of Santa Cruz, one from the Mount Hermon Association Community Water System, and two private well owner representatives. The SMGWA Board meets monthly. The SMGWA will oversee the groundwater management activities of the SMGWB under the requirements of SGMA and will start development of its Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) in 2019. The GSP is required to be submitted to DWR by January 31, 2022.

7.2.2 Santa Margarita Basin Groundwater Model

SVWD received a Prop 84 Planning Grant in 2011 as part of the Santa Cruz IRWMP to update the existing SMGB Groundwater Model developed by ETIC (2006). The SMGB Groundwater Model provides a quantitative tool to assess regional groundwater conditions for the entire SMGB to support groundwater management and design of water augmentation projects. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants updated, calibrated, and improved the model, especially with respect to its ability to accurately evaluate groundwater-surface water interactions and verified the model’s applicability across the entire SMGB, not just the GWRA. The model was also updated with the most recent geological interpretations and incorporated improvements in modeling techniques and software. The technical report (Kennedy/Jenks, 2015) is available on the District’s website at http://svwd.org/resources/reports.

There have been minor updates to the model carried out by HydroMetrics WRI in 2016/2017. In WY2018, the SMGWA commissioned an evaluation of the model based on its ability to support GSP development. The evaluation included a series of recommended updates related to the model’s hydrogeologic framework, recharge and evapotranspiration inputs, model calibration and uncertainty, and SGMA objectives. Updates to the model are expected to be made as part of developing the Basin’s GSP.

5.1 - 64

http://svwd.org/resources/reports


PAGE 58

Groundwater Management Monitoring Program

The BMOs include provisions for ongoing monitoring of groundwater conditions, which is a requirement of Groundwater Management Act (CWC§ 10750 et. seq.) The following provides a brief overview of the monitoring program.

7.3.1 SVWD Data Collection

As part of the GWMP, the District has run a Groundwater Management Monitoring Plan for over 20 years to assess groundwater conditions in the GWRA. The SVWD Groundwater Management Monitoring Program provides a systematic procedure for data collection to support the District in assessing the hydrologic conditions of the SMGB in the GWRA. The primary components of this Monitoring Program are:

Groundwater Levels - Groundwater elevation data collected by SVWD, other local agencies, environmental remediation sites, private entities, and consultants.

Groundwater Pumping - Groundwater pumping compiled by SVWD and nearby groundwater users.

Precipitation - Precipitation data measured by SVWD and other nearby gauges.

Water Quality -Water quality data collected by SVWD, private entities, and environmental compliance sites.

The current Groundwater Management Monitoring Plan was presented in the 2008 annual report. The current monitoring locations are shown on Figure 4 and the monitoring wells are listed in Table 10. The list has been amended to include newly constructed wells and remove inaccessible or destroyed wells.

The results, analysis and interpretation of data collected for the Groundwater Management Monitoring Program are incorporated into and discussed throughout this annual report. The database that was set up as part of the Groundwater Management Monitoring Program was updated with data from WY2015 and WY2016. Although, this annual report does not contain a comprehensive listing of the District’s database, but the database can be made available by contacting the District.

5.1 - 65


PAGE 59

Table 10. Wells Used for the Groundwater Management Monitoring Program

Well Name Well

Owner

Top of

Casing

Elevation

(feet msl)

Primary Producing

Formation

Screen Interval Depth

(feet bgs)

SVWD Production Wells – Measurements taken monthly for both static and dynamic levels

SVWD Well #3B SVWD 672.47 Butano 700-730, 880-1050,

1180-1370, 1400-1670

SVWD Orchard Well SVWD 723 Butano 705-784, 805-1063, 1084-1455

SVWD Well #9 SVWD 528.14 Monterey 155-195, 315-355

SVWD Well #10 (to be

destroyed in FY2020) SVWD 510.85 Lompico 190-220, 240-270, 325-355

SVWD Well #10A SVWD 512.00 Lompico 280-380, 400-450

SVWD Well #11A SVWD 602.60 Lompico 399-419, 459-469,495-515

SVWD Well #11B SVWD 587.95 Lompico 348-388, 423-468, 500-515

SVWD Monitoring Wells - Key Indicator Wells – Measurements taken monthly

#15 Monitoring Well2 SVWD 660 Lompico, Butano 700-1100

#9 Monitoring Well SVWD 528 Monterey N/A

SVWD Monitoring Wells - Measurements taken semi-annually

SVWD AB303 MW-11 SVWD 561.07 Santa Margarita 114-124

SVWD AB303 MW-22 SVWD 524.22 Lompico 705-715, 810-850

SVWD AB303 MW-3A1 SVWD 522.69 Lompico 630-680

SVWD AB303 MW-3B1 SVWD 522.11 Santa Margarita 120-125

Canham Well SVWD 782.78 Butano 1,281-1,381

Stonewood Well SVWD 898.54 Butano 799-859

SV1-MW (filled with sand) SVWD 704.3 Santa Margarita 60-80

SV3-MW A SVWD 584.65 Santa Margarita 60-80

SV3-MW B SVWD 584.65 Santa Margarita 100-110

SV3-MW C SVWD 584.65 Lompico 150-160

SV4-MW SVWD 447.79 Santa Margarita 50-60

TW-181,2 SVWD 715.03 Santa Margarita 285-345

TW-191,2 SVWD 659.49 Lompico 960-1060

Notes: 1Groundwater level measurement data submitted to DWR CASGEM Program 2Equipped with electronic data transducer feet msl = elevation in feet relative to mean sea level feet bgs = depth in feet below ground surface

5.1 - 66


PAGE 60

To further supplement the Groundwater Management Monitoring Plan, three monitoring wells currently have electronic data transducers installed for collecting continuous groundwater level data. The data collected by the transducers provide a key data set for evaluating long-term aquifer responses to pumping and recharge; The data collected by the transducers provide a key data set for evaluating long-term aquifer responses to pumping and recharge that will be included in future reports; however, the District’s experience is that the very deep monitoring wells are not always suitable for the proper functioning of transducers. In WY2014, transducers in the Butano aquifer monitoring wells: Canham Well and Stonewood Well were removed. One of the transducers removed has been redeployed recently in monitoring well SVWD AB303 MW-2. Table 10 identifies the wells currently equipped with transducers.

7.3.2 CASGEM Program

In 2009, the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) program was established to develop a statewide monitoring program to track seasonal and long-term trends in groundwater elevation by establishing a permanent, locally-managed program of regular and systematic monitoring in all of California's alluvial groundwater basins. Participation in CASGEM is typically a requirement for receiving DWR grants.

The Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services is coordinating the DWR reporting responsibilities for all of Santa Cruz County. SVWD supports this effort by providing groundwater elevation data collected as part of the District’s groundwater management activities. Table 10 indicates the wells that are reported to DWR for the CASGEM program. Reported data are available on the DWR website at: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/casgem/.

Stakeholder Outreach

Two BMOs address public participation in groundwater management activities and coordination with local agencies. The District uses several methods to accomplish this BMO. SVWD discusses groundwater management related activities in noticed regular public meetings of the SVWD Board of Directors. Notification of future meetings and agendas are made publicly available prior to the meeting. Copies of the agenda packages including staff reports are available for public review on the SVWD web site (www.svwd.org).

5.1 - 67

http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/casgem/

http://www.svwd.org/


PAGE 61

SVWD encourages public participation through the development of its Groundwater Management Program annual reports. Copies of the annual report are publicly available on the District’s website at http://svwd.org/resources/reports.

SVWD actively participates in the SMGWA and the Santa Cruz Integrated Regional Water Management Group, both forums for developing collaborative solutions with local agencies.

The District’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) filed with DWR is available at: http://svwd.org/resources/reports. The UWMP assesses the District’s water supply, guides water use efficiency efforts, and provides a Water Shortage Contingency Plan to be implemented during times of water shortage. The UWMP is required to be updated every five years.

5.1 - 68




PAGE 62

8 REFERENCES CITED

ARCADIS. 2015. Revised final remedy, former Watkins-Johnson Superfund Site. Prepared for TriQuint Semiconductor, Inc. June.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2016. 2016 Bulletin 118 Interim Update. http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/bulletin118/docs/Bulletin_118_Interim_Update_2016.pdf. December 22.

City of Scotts Valley. 2019. City of Scotts Valley wastewater treatment facility 2016 annual report.

ETIC Engineering, Inc. 2006. Groundwater modeling study of the Santa Margarita groundwater basin final report: Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. May.

Feeney, M. 2015. Technical memorandum: Well 11A replacement project – feasibility evaluation. Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. August 28.

HydroMetrics WRI, 2011. Estimation of deep groundwater recharge using a precipitation-runoff watershed model, Soquel-Aptos, California. Prepared for Soquel Creek Water District, Central Water District, and City of Santa Cruz. August.

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2015. Santa Margarita Basin groundwater modeling technical study. Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. June 24.

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2016a. Scotts Valley Water District 2015 annual report, groundwater management plan. Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. February 26.

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2016b. 2015 urban water management plan. Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. June.

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2017. Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin recycled water groundwater replenishment programs, facilities planning report. Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District. February.

Ruggeri, Jensen and Azar. 2010. Preliminary hydrology report for Woodside, City of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County, California, prepared for Sullivan Land Development, LLC. February 17.

Todd Engineers. 1994. Scotts Valley groundwater management plan (AB 3030). Prepared for Scotts Valley Water District, 94 p.

5.1 - 69


PAGE 63

9 ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS

AMI ...........................Automated Metering Infrastructure

amsl ...........................above mean sea level

ASR ............................aquifer storage and recovery

bgs .............................below ground surface

BMO ..........................Basin Management Objectives

BMP ...........................best management practice

CASGEM .................California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring

CDDW ......................California Department of Drinking Water

CERCLA ...................Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Act

DCE ...........................dichloroethylene

DWR ..........................California Department of Water Resources

GAC...........................granular activated carbon

GPD ...........................gallons per day

gpm ...........................gallons per minute

GAC...........................granualted activiated carbon

GSA ...........................Groundwater Sustainability Agency

GSP ............................Groundwater Sustainability Plan

GWMP ......................Groundwater Management Plan

GWRA .......................Groundwater Reporting Area

IRWMP ....................Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan

JPA .............................Joint Powers Agreement

LID .............................low impact development

LTCP .........................Low-Threat Closure Policy

MCL ..........................maximum contaminant level

mg/L ..........................milligrams per liter

MHA .........................Mount Hermon Association

MRP ...........................Monitoring and Reporting Program

MTBE ........................methyl-tert-butyl ether

NPDES ......................National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NPL ...........................National Priorities List

O&M .........................operations and maintenance

PCE ............................tetrachloroethene

RACR ........................Groundwater Remedial Action Completion Report

RWQCB ...................Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

5.1 - 70


PAGE 64

SARA.........................Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

SCMGB .....................Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin

SGMA .......................Sustainable Groundwater Management Act

SLVWD .....................San Lorenzo Valley Water District

SMCL ........................secondary maximum contaminant level

SMGB ........................Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin

SMGBAC .................Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin Advisory Committee

SVWD .......................Scotts Valley Water District

SWRCB .....................State Water Resources Control Board

TCE ............................trichloroethylene

TDS ............................total dissolved solids

µg/L ...........................micrograms per liter

USEPA ......................United Stated Enivornmental Protection Agency

UWMP .....................Urban Water Management Plan

VOC ...........................volatile organic compounds

WTP ...........................water treatment plant

WY .............................Water Year

5.1 - 71


Date: 04/11/19


Item: Business 5.2

Subject: Recycled Water Fill Station

Reason: Supports Strategic Goal No. 1 Water Resource Management by maximizing the potential use of recycled water.

SUMMARY Recommendation: Conclude the current Recycled Water Fill Station program until further apparent benefit or critical need.

Fiscal Impact: None going forward

Previous Related Action: On 02/20/19 the Water Resources and Engineering Committee discussed the future prospects of the Recycled Water Fill Station and recommended to the board to conclude the program for the time being.

On 03/14/19 the Board discussed not continuing to operate the Recycled Water Fill Station and directed the staff to notify all permitted users of the station.

BACKGROUND The Recycled Water Fill Station program was taken into consideration as a supplemental supply alternative to the residential customers in 2015 when the State of California was in the middle of a severe extended drought. The program was approved by the State Water Resources Control Board in July 2015 and the station opened in August 2015.

DISCUSSION The usage of the station has decreased significantly over the last two years. Only about 57,000 gallons was dispensed over the course of 4 months in 2017 and 2018. Considering the amount of resources that are spent by the District on running the program and weighing it against the benefit to the ratepayers, staff is recommending not continuing to run the program until there is a more apparent need for it.

Submitted,

Piret Harmon General Manager

5.2 - 1


Date: 04/11/19


Item: Business 5.3

Subject: District FY 2020 Work Plan

Reason: Supports District Mission and Strategic Goals

SUMMARY Recommendation: Review and accept the FY 2020 Draft Work Plan

Fiscal Impact: The impact is unknown at this phase of planning. Final FY 2020 Work Plan will be matched with the proposed balanced budget for the upcoming fiscal year.

Previous Related Action: On 02/13/14 the Board adopted the District’s Strategic Goals.

On 04/13/17 the Board approved updates to the District’s Strategic Goals.

On 04/12/18 the Board reviewed and accepted the Draft FY 2019 Work Plan.

BACKGROUND In 2012 the Board initiated a comprehensive organizational review that resulted in major restructuring efforts including a strategic planning process to establish the future visionary direction for the District.

In November of 2013, the Board convened a strategic planning process to identify and develop a programmatic set of goals and objectives allowing the District to make sound operational, financial and organizational decisions. By adopting the strategic goals, the Board established the roadmap and expectations on the outcome. The goals and objectives are anticipated to remain relatively stable for a near future term and set a framework for the annual work plan that is staff level planning document that prescribes the major tasks, projects, and initiatives for each fiscal year. The tasks and projects are aligned with the objectives under each strategic goal and include metrics that help in determining the deliverables and gauging the progress.

In Spring of 2017, the Board reviewed the strategic goals that were adopted in February 2014. The main focus areas were determined to still be relevant and support the District’s mission. To streamline the course and better align with the direction of the District, some updates were made to the management objectives.

5.3 - 1

DISCUSSION As in the prior years, the General Manager and the executive staff used the Strategic Goals document as a springboard for outlining the major initiatives and projects that support the District’s Mission and Vision in the upcoming fiscal year. The Draft Work Plan includes capital improvement projects, maintenance related activities, and major administrative and operational undertakings. The main goal is to ensure optimal alignment between the individual, team and organizational efforts, to reduce redundancies and maximize the use of limited resources.

Each of the tasks listed in the plan requires monetary and staff resources. Dependent on the budgetary constraints, some of the activities might be modified, postponed or eliminated. The Work Plan will be finalized in parallel with FY 2020 budget preparation.

Submitted,

Piret Harmon General Manager Enclosed: FY 2020 Draft Work Plan

5.3 - 2

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT STRATEGIC WORK PLAN FY 2020 - DRAFTSTRATEGIC GOALSMANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

Complete environmental report for purified recycled water recharge. Consider regional partnerships in implementing the project, identifying opportunities and addressing potential hurdles P

P

Carry out the work plan under MOA with SCWD and SLVWD evaluating the feasibility of conjunctive use with those agencies OProvide leadership and ensure active participation and productive involvement in Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) which goal is development of the groundwater sustainability plan by 2022 O

Complete production meter testing at all treatment plants (c/o from 2019) O

Carry out Water Use Efficiency Program (Think Twice) with a goal of offsetting the additional demand from new connections by deploying various water use efficiency measures O

Develop and carry out rebate programs that are supported by ROI metrics and/or community values.O

Leverage WaterSmart Customer Engagement Portal to reduce inefficient use and water waste.O

Evaluate the processes and recommend process improvements for accurately tracking unaccounted for water.O

Improve on 2017 Validated Water Loss Audit score of 53 O

1.2 Improve the esthetics of the drinking water

Complete the improvements to Orchard Run Water Treatment Plant: construction of the reclaim tank, replacement of the air scrubber, and addition of the GAC filter.

P

Replace 250 ft of potable main at Vine Hill School Rd. P

Replace 800-1000 meters P

Well 3B/ Results from the April 9th Magnetic Resonance testing will determin a scope of work on how to best rehab this well P

Sequoia - Project to be bid and contractor selected by end of May 2019. Recoating work to be completed in FY 2020. P

Construct recycled water main under Hwy 17 to provide adequate supply on east sideP

Continue work on Bethany Tank rehabilitation - design and temporary storage in FY 2020, construction in FY2021P

Complete installation of replacement filter control system at El Pueblo Water Treatment Plant PComplete installation of AMI equipment on 1300 meters PCarry out the adoption of WaterSmart Customer Engagement Portal: implementation, training, optimization and integration with existing systems O

Investigate best practices and innovative solutions for reducing the District's "energy footprint"O

Rehabilitate Orchard Run Pump Station by installing new efficient pumps.P

Rehabilitate Hacienda Pump Station by replacing plumbing and installing new building. P

Effectively support the engagement with the District's new audit firm, and establish an effective working relationship with audit staff. OContinue the 3-year process to achieve a CAFR (FY 2020) that meets GFOA Excellence in Financial Reporting Award criteria by Dec 2020 OPrepare FY 2021 budget that incorporates visual enhancements and compelling narratives OEvaluate deploying technology devices as on-site payment processors and as hands-on demo tool for customer engagement portal.

Explore and utilize ways to present financial data in a user friendly online format ODeploy WaterSmart as a functional and user friendly tool for empowering customers to understand and access their water use and billing O

Integrate the results from capital assets valuation report into Springbook OEvaluate options for a comprehensive customer survey that develops baseline and builds a foundation for regular assessment and review O

1.1.1 Maximizing the potential use of recycled water

1.1.2 Identifying and implementing regionally

beneficial conjunctive use projects

1.1 Utilize the additional recharge capacity in the groundwater basin by

P/O *FY 2020 TASKS

1. Water Resource Management: Meet the current and future water supply needs of its customers

3.1 Strive for maximum efficiency and transparency

1.1.3 Achieving maximum feasible water conservation and

efficient use

2.1 Maintain all assets within their useful life threshold

2.2 Utilize technology and other resources to realize increased operational efficiencies

2.3 Optimize the redundancy and effectiveness of the system and facilities

2. Infrastructure Integrity: Provide continual investment in District's infrastructure and process improvements

3. Financial and Customer Service Stewardship: Manage District's financial resources in a responsible manner while being committed to customer satisfaction

5.3 - 3

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT STRATEGIC WORK PLAN FY 2020 - DRAFTSTRATEGIC GOALSMANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES P/O *FY 2020 TASKS

Review and update if necessary District Miscellaneous Fee Schedule ODevelop and implement the policy for "Discontinuation of Residential Water Service" to comply with SB988 by February 2020. OBuild up the reserve funds with the target of $4M by the end of FY 2020 O

Develop SOPs for Low Income Rate Program (if Board decided to go forward) O

Host a booth at SV Art Wine Beer Festival, potentially focused on water supply reliability and resiliency O

Participate in SV Farmers Market utilizing the contect developed prior year and update it as needed O

Maximize direct customer engagement in illustrating how the services provided by the District benefit the community OProduce 3-5 short videos to highlight the District and its services to be used across multiple platforms O

Launch a pilot project for holding digital board meetings O

Coordinate the Interagency Committee activities by developing and implementing a work plan OSpearhead regional efforts and activities increasing awareness on various water matters such as supply resiliency and value of water O

Develop and carry out an employee recognition/appreciation program OAchieve 100% participation at SV AWB Festival for each employee O

Finalize the overhaul of Employee Safety Program and do a presentation to employees. O

Complete Safety Training schedule and have at least 50% of the training requirements completed for each employee OCreate a system for ensuring that all employees comply with regulatory and mandatory training requirements (c/o from FY 2019) OCarry out at least 40% of the records management action plan

Organize and host at least one annual employee non-work event OIdentify relevant opportunities for each employee and Director to attend at minimum 1 training and/or professional event annually OSponsor 1 employee and/or Director to participate in Leadership Santa Cruz County program and Water Eduction Foundation Water Tours O

Optimize using volunteers and interns for various tasks that allow District to promote careers in water industry O* P/O - Project or Operations Budget

5.3 Boost opportunities for continuous training and knowledge transfer

3.2 Maintain fair, effective and legitimate rates and fees that are sufficient for meeting operating and capital needs while providing for adequate reserves

4.1 Engage the community to increase visibility of District activities and advance public awareness on water matters

4.2 Identify, develop and strengthen strategic alliances, both private and public

5.1 Value and reward competence, team spirit and creativity

5.2 Cultivate productive work conditions and positive workforce culture

4. Public Outreach: Foster relationships and communications with District's stakeholders and the community

5. Organizational Vitality: Commit to recruiting and retaining the highest quality employees and board members

5.3 - 4


Date: 04/11/19


Item: Business 5.4

Subject: FY 2020 Budget Assumptions

Reason: Supports Strategic Goal No. 3 Financial Stewardship by striving for maximum efficiency and transparency.

SUMMARY Recommendation: Receive information and provide input.

Fiscal Impact: The impact is unknown at this phase of planning.

Previous Related Action: On 03/25/19 the Finance and Personnel Committee received a report on the FY 2020 budget assumptions.

BACKGROUND District follows an annual budget cycle with a balanced budget adopted at the June board meeting. The Budget is comprised of the Operating Budget, Debt Service Budget and Projects Budget. The Operating Budget is a line item budget that is organized in functional divisions and major expense categories.

DISCUSSION One of the first steps of the budget preparation process is to develop a set of assumptions that will be used in generating revenue and expenditure projections. Below are the assumptions for the upcoming fiscal year.

Revenue

1. Water sales and water service demand from existing connections

- FY 2020 consumption level equal to the 3-year average (FY 2016- FY 2018)

2. Water sales and water service demand from new connections

- Water sales revenue projected to increase very modestly

- Water services revenue will include growth from accounts that connected in FY 2019

5.4 - 1

Rate increases (Basic Meter Charge and Consumption Rates)

10% increase on 12/13/18 - effective 10% increase on 12/13/19 – anticipated

3. Capacity and Meter Fees from New Connections - Approximately $1.5 M anticipated, which reflects service connections at the following

development projects: The Grove, Pinnacle View, Cove at Scotts Valley, and The Terrace at Scotts Valley

4. Demand growth from new connections

- FY 2020 consumption from connections in FY 2019 is not assumed

5. Property tax

- 4.5% increase from FY 2019 actuals (per the Auditor-Controller’s Office)

6. Grants

- No outside funding anticipated at this time.

Expense: Salaries and Benefits

1. Salaries

- MOU negotiations are currently underway. For budgeting purposes, status quo MOU terms are used.

o 3.98% COLA o Step increases are budgeted

- Exempt employee’s compensation adjustment of 6%

2. Health Benefits

- Medical insurance estimated to increase 6.5% based on the 4-year average

o 2016: 11.2%; 2017: 11.9%; 2018: 4.5%; 2019: 0%

- Dental, Vision, Life estimated to increase by 4% inflation factor

3. Retirement Benefits

- Increases to the Required Employer Contribution percentages in FY 2020 o Tier 1 (2.7 at 55): 13.473% (up by 0.927%) o Tier 2 (2 at 55): 9.680% (up by 0.788%) o PEPRA (2 at 62): 6.985% (up by 0.143%)

- Unfunded Liability payment of $148 K (up by 35%)

5.4 - 2

Debt Service

1. Total debt service payments will decrease $40 from FY 2019 with principal of $468,579 and interest of $90,693.

2. Debt Service Coverage Ratio will exceed goal of 1.20. Calculated as net revenue (total revenue less operation and maintenance costs) over debt service payments.

Project Expenditures

Initial proposal of $3.2 M in new appropriation and $1.2 M of carryover funding from FY 2019.

Balance Sheet Transactions

Portion of Notes Receivable from City of Scotts Valley due in FY 2020: $155,817 for the reduction of the recycled water entitlement (runs through FY 2021) and $14,800 for 1997 bond reimbursement (through FY 2027). Remaining Total Notes Receivable of $269,265 principal and interest after FY 2020.

Submitted,

Piret Harmon General Manager

5.4 - 3


Date: 04/11/19


Item: Business 5.5

Subject: Capital and Maintenance Projects FY 2020-2024 Budget Projection

Reason: Supports District’s Strategic Goal No. 2 Infrastructure Integrity: Provide continual investments in District’s infrastructure.

SUMMARY Recommendation: Receive information and provide input.

Fiscal Impact: The total proposed FY 2020 new appropriations for capital and maintenance projects are $3,212,000. The final request will be included in the FY 2020 proposed budget.

Previous Related Action: On 03/28/19 the Water Resources and Engineering committee reviewed a draft FY 2020-2024 Projects Budget.

BACKGROUND Each year the staff prepares a 5-year plan of District’s capital and maintenance projects. Only the upcoming year budget is approved by the board, the rest of years’ project costs are presented for reference only.

In compliancy with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), the definition for a capital improvement project is a new construction project or an expansion; major renovation, rehabilitation, and/or replacement project for an existing facility or facilities with a total cost of at least $5,000 and a useful life of at least 2 years. Project costs can include the cost of land, land improvements, architectural design, engineering, construction, construction management and inspection. Using these criteria all projects were evaluated and categorized either as capital or maintenance. Because the maintenance projects often demand significant time and money resources, they are presented alongside with the capital projects and the staff uses the categorical title of “Project Expenditures” for this component of the budget.

DISCUSSION The staff has prepared a preliminary budget projection for capital and maintenance projects in FY 2020-2024, prioritizing the projects based on their merit, relative importance to effective operations and cumulative cost. All project costs are estimations and should be used only as a reference for years beyond FY 2020.

5.5 - 1

The staff anticipates that only about $1.2M out of the budgeted $2.8M FY 2019 Projects Budget will be spent in the current year with the remainder to be carried over to fund various project activities in the following year. FY 2020 initial request for new appropriations is totaling approximately $3.2M. That includes Orchard Run Water Treatment Plant Improvements, Bethany Tank Rehabilitation, Orchard Run Pump Station Upgrades, Purified Recycled Water Recharge Project and continuation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program.

Submitted,

Piret Harmon General Manager Enclosed: FY 2020-2024 Projects Budget Projection

5.5 - 2

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Revised 3/28/19PROJECTS: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

Category Project Name Project Description PriorityFY 2019 Budget

1-31-19 Actual

FY 2019 Est YE Actual

FY 2020 Carryover

FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Budget

FY 2021 Projected

FY 2022 Projected

FY 2023 Projected

FY 2024 Projected

TOTALFY 2020-2024 Notes

Main Replacement Program - Potable

Replace and upgrade potable water mains based on leak history, service life, and size High 75,000$ -$ -$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 750,000$

FY19: Northridge potable main replacement - might not need to replace (alternative solution); FY20: Vine Hill School Rd + other smaller repairs

Main Replacement Program - Recycled

Replace old, poor condition recycled water main with high pressure rated pipe on Whispering Pines and Mt Hermon (about 1 mile). Medium -$ 134,042$ 160,000$ -$ -$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 500,000$

Recycled Water Main Crossing Hwy 17

Install new main to supply sufficient recycled water flows to area east of Hwy 17 Medium 257,000$ -$ 20,000$ 237,000$ 75,000$ 312,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 312,000$

Main upgrade necessary to support new development (project funded by developers)

Recycled Water Main Hwy 17 Crossing - Third Party Contributions (257,000)$ (20,000)$ (237,000)$ (75,000)$ (312,000)$ (312,000)$

Orchard Run Water Treatment Plant Improvements

Implement esthetic taste & odor improvements to treatment process by adding new GAC filter and chlorine analyzer injection system. Infrastructure improvements incude replacing ammonia based H2S air scrubbing system with a Bio Filtration scubber. Replace 40,000 gallon bolted steel back wash tank and install new sewer lateral.

High/ Medium 500,000$ -$ 200,000$ 300,000$ 1,900,000$ 2,200,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,200,000$ FY19: design and bid process, FY20: construction

El Pueblo WTP Improvements

Replace manual 1980's filter control system with programable automated control system linked with SCADA . High 150,000$ 900$ 50,000$ 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 100,000$

FY19: Design + materials, FY20: Complete installation by in house staff and District SCADA contractor

Well 10 WTP Water Quality Improvements

Implement esthetic taste & odor improvements by adding additional filter bed and Chlorine analyzer equiment. Low -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 300,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,800,000$

The proposed treatment upgrade needs to be reviewed/ evaluated in connection with Lompico Formation Well project. Hypothetical scenario - FY22: design, FY23: construction.

Treatment Facility for New Formation Well

New Lompico Formation Production Well will most likely need a separate treatment facility (due to space constraints) Medium -$ -$ -$ -$ 50,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

NEW FY20: explore viable locations and initiate land acquisition if necessary

Bethany Tank Rehabilitation

Construct additional tank on-site to allow for roof reconstruction and interior and exterior coating replacement of 400,000 gallon Bethany Tank. Project extends tank service life and provides additional permant storage and redundancy. High 200,000$ 8,975$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 200,000$ TBD -$ -$ -$ 200,000$

FY19: geotech and investigation; FY20: design; FY21: construction (500K-2M)

Sequoia Tank RehabilitationRecoat roof, interior, and exterior of 1.25 million gallon Sequoia Tank that has the original coating from 1983. High 650,000$ 26,637$ 50,000$ 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 400,000$

FY19: exterior completed, interior design and bid process, FY20: construction might be postponed from FY19 to FY20

Bethany PS Rehabilitation

Rehabilitate Bethany Pump Station that pumps water to Bethany tank. The station has two 1970's era canned pumps that are beyond repair and need to be replaced. Other improvements include pump control upgrades, plumbing modifications and building repairs. N/A -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMPLETED

Hacienda PS Improvements

Pump shed structure is in poor condition and needs to be replaced. Pumps are very loud and run 24hrs a day. Noise mitigation and structural upgrades will provide better protection for pumps and motors and reduce noise emissions considerably. High 60,000$ -$ 5,000$ 55,000$ 45,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 100,000$ FY19: investigation FY20: design and construction

Polo Ranch PS

Polo Ranch Flow control station has been modified to provide booster pumping into the Southwood pressure zone when needed. The Southwood Booster station on Granite Creek Road will be retired. Medium 20,000$ 8,349$ 20,000$ -$ -$ -$ 60,000$ -$ -$ -$ 60,000$

To be constructed as part of the Polo Ranch Development project. FY19: flow control station and building construction, FY21: purchase and installation of pumps (2) and controls

Orchard Run PS Replacing existing equipment with high efficiency pumps High -$ -$ -$ -$ 200,000$ 200,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 200,000$ NEW Coordinate installation schedule with ORWTP Improvements project to optimize the plant down time

Lompico Formation Production Well(Well 9 Replacement)

Construct a new production well that is needed to offset lost production capicity from Well 9 & Well 11A. The replacement well will in part be sited to provide for a more balanced withdrawel rate from the Lompico Aquifer. Medium -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 3,500,000$ 4,000,000$

Lots of uncertainty in selecting the site for the well and treatment plant: property ownership and future plans for Aviza, Town Center and Valley Gardens. Continue preliminary planning.

Mains

Treatment Plants

Tanks

Pump Stations

5.5 - 3

SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Revised 3/28/19PROJECTS: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

Category Project Name Project Description PriorityFY 2019 Budget

1-31-19 Actual

FY 2019 Est YE Actual

FY 2020 Carryover

FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Budget

FY 2021 Projected

FY 2022 Projected

FY 2023 Projected

FY 2024 Projected

TOTALFY 2020-2024 Notes

Well 3B RehabilitationRehabilitate an existing well that comprises video inspection, cleaning, installation of a new pump, motor, and wire. High -$ -$ -$ -$ TBD TBD -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Initial plan is conduct cleaning and further evaluation as part of operations budget. If determined that the well needs major rehab or/and replacement, include in projects budget in future years.

Well 7A Replacement Emergency well replacement project - new Orchard Well N/A -$ 83,853$ 83,853$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMPLETED

Well 11B RehabilitationDue to Well 7A failure in FY 2018, the production capacity has decreased in Well 11B considerably. N/A -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMPLETED

Conjunctive Use with SLVWD or/and SCWD

SLVWD to provide SVWD excess treated surface water in winter when available to reduce pumping and improve groundwater levels in the shared basin. Medium -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

FY18: SVWD entered into an MOU agreement with SLVWD, SVWD and the County. FY19, FY20: evaluate the project feasibility and required elements

Valley Gardens Consideration of stormwater recharge Low -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ The owner in considering sale of property. This conceptual project on hold for now.

Purified Recycled Water Recharge

Supplemental supply project to increase groundwater reliability, especially in dry years (climate change related change). Could be shifted to SMGWA or replaced with conjunctive use. Medium 300,000$ 994$ 75,000$ 225,000$ 300,000$ 525,000$ 1,700,000$ 6,500,000$ 6,500,000$ -$ 15,225,000$

Feasibility study completed. Consider timing, cost and partnerships. FY19-FY20 CEQA, FY21 funding consideration, preliminary design, permits, FY22-23 construction.

GW Recharge - Grant Reimbursement -$ -$ -$ -$ (850,000)$ (3,250,000)$ (3,250,000)$ -$ (7,350,000)$ GW Recharge - Partner Contributions/Short Term -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Recycled Water Fill StationCarry out a program providing free small quantity (up to 250 gpd) recycled water to eligible customers. Medium 8,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Close the station

Pressure Regulator Station Replacement - Northridge

Replace and relocate Northridge Regulator Station & replace 400' of 4" main. Medium 45,000$ 13,360$ 45,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

FY19: Combine with the main replacement in the same vicinity

Pressure Regulator Station Installation - Granite Creek Estates

Install main line regulator station to reduce 200+ PSI in the distribution system that serves Taryn Ct, Lauren Circ, Traci Ct and section of Granite Cr Rd. Low 100,000$ 5,280$ 5,280$ -$ -$ -$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ 100,000$

This improvement benefits 45 residential services and augments the integrity of the District's potable water system. Preliminary design completed FY19.

PR Station - Third Party Contributions (50,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Install AMI transmitters on all meters over 3-4 year period. High 150,000$ 98,007$ 150,000$ -$ 200,000$ 200,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ 300,000$ FY20: install 1000 AMI transmitters

Meter Replacement ProgramReplace all meters installed before 2012 at the rate of 800-1000 meters per year High 120,000$ 76,862$ 120,000$ -$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 90,000$ -$ -$ -$ 240,000$ FY20: replace 750 5/8" meters

Accounting & Utility Billing Software Replacement

Replace Continental Accounting and Continental Utility Billing (UB) software systems Low 20,000$ -$ -$ 20,000$ TBD TBD -$

Fixed Asset module is pending on the outcome of the capital asset valuation work. Other modules (inventory and work order) still under examination. Possible consideration of a third party financial reporting software.

Computerized Maintenance Management System

Install a Computerized Maintenance & Work Order System, GIS Improvements-Flushing & Valve Maintanence modules N/A -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMPLETED

AV System UpgradeInstall and configure an integrated audio visual system in Santa Margarita Community Room Medium 30,000$ 10,822$ 15,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMPLETED

Vehicle Replacement Program

Replace aging fleet: one vehicle per year on average starting FY 2019. Medium 35,000$ -$ 36,000$ -$ 37,000$ 37,000$ 38,000$ 39,000$ 40,000$ 41,000$ 195,000$

Specialized Operations Vehicles

Replace heavy equipment and specialized vehicles on as needed basis High 50,000$ 53,056$ 53,056$ -$ 80,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ FY20: Hydroexcavator

Gross Total 2,770,000$ 521,137$ 1,188,189$ 1,512,000$ 3,212,000$ 4,654,000$ 2,488,000$ 7,189,000$ 7,240,000$ 5,191,000$ 26,762,000$ Outside Funding (307,000)$ -$ (20,000)$ (237,000)$ (75,000)$ (312,000)$ (850,000)$ (3,250,000)$ (3,250,000)$ -$ (7,662,000)$ Net Total 2,463,000$ 521,137$ 1,168,189$ 1,275,000$ 3,137,000$ 4,342,000$ 1,638,000$ 3,939,000$ 3,990,000$ 5,191,000$ 19,100,000$

Groundwater Supply

Wells

Other

Meters

Technology

Fleet

Recycled Water Supply

5.5 - 4

STAFF REPORT Finance Scotts Valley Water District

Date: 04/11/19


From: General Manager

Item: Staff Reports 6.3

Subject: Financial Reports for Period Ending 02/28/19

Summary Fiscal Year-to-Date (YTD) figures reflect the period of 07/01/18 through 02/28/19. YTD revenues total $5.1 M and expenses total $3.9 M.

Revenue February is the eighth month of the fiscal year and the second month of the January-February potable water billing period. YTD potable water sales revenue is $2.5 M, water services “Ready to Serve” revenue is $1.2 M and new connections revenue is $0.5 M. Total YTD revenue in the potable water fund is $4.7 M, equal to 63% of the budget and 9% higher than the same period last fiscal year.

YTD recycled water sales revenue is $0.3 M, water services revenue is $17 K, and new connections revenue is $6 K. Total YTD revenue of $0.36 M in the recycled water fund equals 36% of the budget, which is 9% higher than for the same period last fiscal year.

Expenses Combined operating expenses YTD are slightly below budget, with expenses of $3.5 M representing 60% of the budget. Project expenditures total $0.5 M and the debt service principal payment has not yet been made.

Fund Balance Cash reserves at the end of February were approximately $2.4 M with another $1.0 M booked in Accounts Receivable, and slightly over $0.3 M invested in CDs.

Enclosures Budget Status Balance 07/01/18 – 02/28/19 Budget Status Revenue 07/01/18 – 02/28/19 Budget Status Expense 07/01/18 – 02/28/19 Projects Expense 07/01/18 – 02/28/19 Balance Sheet 02/28/19 Check Register 02/01/19 – 2/28/19

6.4 -1

Budget Status - Balance

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2018YTD Actual

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019vs. FY 2018

YOY% change

FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 (8 months)

Potable Water - Fund 01Water Sales & Services (R10, R20) 3,446,146$ 3,725,906$ 279,760$ 8% 5,939,385$ 2,213,479$ 37%New Connections (R25) 412,725$ 495,374$ 82,648$ 20% 667,047$ 171,673$ 26%Other Revenue (R30, R40) 501,602$ 524,843$ 23,241$ 5% 936,268$ 411,425$ 44%Potable Water Total 4,360,473$ 4,746,123$ 385,650$ 9% 7,542,700$ 2,796,577$ 37%

Recycled Water - Fund 02Water Sales & Services (R10, R20) 316,370$ 348,533$ 32,163$ 10% 533,677$ 185,144$ 35%New Connections (R25) 9,171$ 6,396$ (2,775)$ n/a 11,896$ 5,500$ 46%Other Revenue (R30, R40) 2,850$ 2,550$ (300)$ n/a 428,217$ 425,667$ 99%Recycled Water Total 328,391$ 357,479$ 29,088$ 9% 973,790$ 616,311$ 63%

TOTAL REVENUE 4,688,864$ 5,103,602$ 414,738$ 9% 8,516,490$ 3,412,888$ 40%

Expenses - Fund 01 and Fund 02 CombinedSalaries & Benefits (E01) 1,711,061$ 1,874,673$ 163,612$ 10% 2,753,386$ 878,713$ 32%Services & Supplies (E03-E80) 1,470,468$ 1,473,394$ 2,926$ 0% 2,808,889$ 1,335,495$ 48%Project Expenses 1,390,115$ 525,704$ (864,411)$ -62% 2,770,000$ 2,244,296$ 81%Debt Service - Principal 452,927$ -$ (452,927)$ -100% 460,030$ 460,030$ 100%TOTAL EXPENSES * 5,024,571$ 3,873,771$ (1,150,800)$ -23% 8,792,305$ 4,918,534$ 56%

NET REVENUE (335,706)$ 1,229,831$ 1,565,537$ -466% (275,815)$ (1,505,646)$ 546%

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 (8 months)Total Revenue 4,688,864$ 5,103,602$ 414,738$ 9% 8,516,490$ 3,412,888$ 40%Total Expenses * 5,024,571$ 3,873,771$ (1,150,800)$ -23% 8,792,305$ 4,918,534$ 56%

Net Revenue (335,706)$ 1,229,831$ 1,565,537$ -466% (275,815)$ 0%

Period: 7/1/18-1/31/19 (7 months)Total Revenue 4,271,262$ 4,557,222$ 285,959$ 7% 8,516,490$ 3,959,268$ 46%Total Expenses * 3,549,480$ 3,426,921$ (122,559)$ -3% 8,792,305$ 5,365,384$ 61%

Net Revenue 721,782$ 1,130,301$ 408,519$ 11577% (275,815)$ 318%

* Expense totals do not include depreciation expense

FY Remain:

6.4 -2

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2018YTD Actual

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019vs. FY 2018

YOY% change FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %

Fund 01 Potable Water

R10 Operating Revenue - Water Sales01-000-41101 Residential Consumption - SF 1,363,892$ 1,397,643$ 33,750$ 2% 2,300,863$ 903,220$ 39%01-000-41102 Residential Consumption - MF 87,666$ 101,431$ 13,765$ 16% 154,315$ 52,884$ 34%01-000-41103 CII Consumption - Commercial 633,097$ 697,322$ 64,225$ 10% 1,219,011$ 521,689$ 43%01-000-41106 CII Consumption - Other 52,460$ 62,786$ 10,325$ 20% -$ (62,786)$ 01-000-41105 Irrigation Consumption 228,154$ 198,978$ (29,175)$ -13% 347,376$ 148,398$ 43%01-000-41200 Other - Bulk Water 7,525$ 26,153$ 18,628$ 248% 16,000$ (10,153)$ -63%

R10 Sub Totals: 2,372,794$ 2,484,312$ 111,518$ 5% 4,037,565$ 1,553,253$ 38%

R20 Operating Revenue - Water Services01-000-41300 Other - Late Penalty 17,480$ 17,730$ 250$ 1% 34,120$ 16,390$ 48%01-000-42100 Standby Basic Meter Charge 1,020,692$ 1,182,660$ 161,967$ 16% 1,808,047$ 625,387$ 35%01-000-42121 Standby FP Basic Meter Charge 27,780$ 32,779$ 4,999$ 18% 48,653$ 15,874$ 33%01-000-43300 Other Operating Revenue 7,400$ 8,425$ 1,025$ 14% 11,000$ 2,575$ 23%

R20 Sub Totals: 1,073,352$ 1,241,594$ 168,242$ 16% 1,901,820$ 660,226$ 35%

R25 Operating Revenue - New Connections01-000-42101 Other Meter Fee 3,194$ 7,678$ 4,484$ 140% 10,535$ 2,857$ 27%01-000-42102 Other Capacity Fee 405,855$ 482,711$ 76,856$ 19% 650,102$ 167,391$ 26%01-000-42120 Other FP Meter Fee 650$ 3,140$ 2,490$ 383% 410$ (2,730)$ -666%01-000-43100 Other Will Serve 375$ 500$ 125$ 33% 1,000$ 500$ 50%01-000-43200 Other Dev Proj Review 2,651$ 1,345$ (1,307)$ -49% 5,000$ 3,655$ 73%

R25 Sub Totals: 412,725$ 495,374$ 82,648$ 20% 667,047$ 171,673$ 26%

R30 Non-Operating Revenue - Other01-000-46000 Property Taxes 482,784$ 497,146$ 14,362$ 3% 869,268$ 372,122$ 43%01-000-47110 Interest & Dividend 4,479$ 3,091$ (1,387)$ -31% 7,000$ 3,909$ 56%01-000-47120 Interest - LAIF 3,671$ 7,452$ 3,781$ 103% 8,000$ 548$ 7%01-000-47520 Misc. Non-Operating Revenue 11,604$ 15,553$ 3,948$ 34% 2,000$ (13,553)$ -678%01-000-47530 Unrealized Gain/Loss on Invest (1,656)$ 882$ 2,538$ -153% -$ (882)$ 01-000-47540 Third-Party Reimbursements -$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 100%

R30 Sub Totals: 500,882$ 524,123$ 23,241$ 5% 936,268$ 412,145$ 44%

R40 Non-Operating Revenue - Grants01-000-45260 Local Grant - ACWA JPIA 720$ 720$ -$ 0% -$ (720)$

R40 Sub Totals: 720$ 720$ -$ 0% -$ (720)$

Fund 01 Revenue: 4,360,473$ 4,746,123$ 385,650$ 9% 7,542,700$ 2,796,577$ 37%Fund 01 Rev Excl Grants & Cap Contributions

4,359,753$ 4,745,403$ 385,650$ 9% 7,542,700$ 2,797,297$ 37%

Budget Status - Revenue

FY Remain:

6.4 -3

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2018YTD Actual

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019vs. FY 2018

YOY% change FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %

Budget Status - Revenue

FY Remain:

Fund 02 Recycled Water

R10 Operating Revenue - Water Sales02-000-41105 Irrigation Consumption 292,445$ 315,907$ 23,463$ 8% 476,216$ 160,309$ 34%02-000-41200 Other - Bulk Water 15,570$ 15,166$ (404)$ -3% 28,000$ 12,834$ 46%

R10 Sub Totals: 308,015$ 331,073$ 23,058$ 7% 504,216$ 173,143$ 34%

R20 Operating Revenue - Water Services02-000-42100 Standby Basic Meter Charge 8,355$ 17,360$ 9,005$ 108% 29,461$ 12,101$ 41%02-000-43300 Other Operating Revenue 100$ 100$ -$ (100)$

R20 Sub Totals: 8,355$ 17,460$ 9,105$ 109% 29,461$ 12,001$ 41%

R25 Operating Revenue - New Connections02-000-42101 Other Meter Fee 250$ 448$ 198$ 179% -$ (448)$ 02-000-42102 Other Capacity Fee 8,921$ 5,948$ (2,973)$ -33% 11,896$ 5,948$ 50%

R25 Sub Totals: 9,171$ 6,396$ (2,775)$ -30% 11,896$ 5,500$ 46%

R30 Non-Operating Revenue - Other02-000-47110 Interest & Dividend 2,850$ 2,550$ (300)$ -11% 9,578$ 7,028$ 73%02-000-47540 Third Party Reimbursements -$ 257,000$ 257,000$ 100%02-000-47560 Reduction of RW Entitlement -$ 161,639$ 161,639$ 100%

R30 Sub Totals: 2,850$ 2,550$ (300)$ -11% 428,217$ 425,667$ 99%

Fund 02 Revenue: 328,391$ 357,479$ 29,088$ 9% 973,790$ 616,311$ 63%Fund 02 Rev Excl Grants & Cap Contributions

328,391$ 357,479$ 29,088$ 9% 973,790$ 616,311$ 63%

Revenue Totals: 4,688,864$ 5,103,602$ 414,738$ 9% 8,516,490$ 3,412,888$ 40%Revenue Total Excl Grants & Cap Contributions 4,688,144$ 5,102,882$ 414,738$ 9% 8,516,490$ 3,413,608$ 40%

6.4 -4

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2018YTD Actual

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019vs. FY 2018

YOY% change

FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %

Fund 01 and Fund 02 Combined

Dept AdministrationE01 Salaries & Benefits 305,417$ 354,890$ 49,472$ 16% 516,744$ 161,854$ 31%E03 G&A - Services 177,972$ 177,912$ (60)$ 0% 322,646$ 144,734$ 45%E05 G&A - Supplies 6,256$ 12,689$ 6,434$ 103% 15,100$ 2,411$ 16%E10 Source of Supply 100,859$ 127,867$ 27,008$ 27% 498,341$ 370,474$ 74%

Dept 100 Sub Totals: 590,505$ 673,359$ 82,854$ 14% 1,352,831$ 679,472$ 50%

Dept Finance/Customer ServiceE01 Salaries & Benefits 236,661$ 274,079$ 37,418$ 16% 393,680$ 119,601$ 30%E03 G&A - Services 103,535$ 105,155$ 1,620$ 2% 185,300$ 80,145$ 43%E05 G&A - Supplies -$ -$ -$ 3,000$ 3,000$ 100%E35 Customer Accounts 51,874$ 66,238$ 14,364$ 28% 94,120$ 27,882$ 30%E70 Other 967$ 989$ 23$ 2% 1,000$ 11$ 1%E80 Debt Service - Interest 51,815$ 47,443$ (4,373)$ -8% 99,282$ 51,839$ 52%

Dept 200 Sub Totals: 444,852$ 493,904$ 49,051$ 11% 776,382$ 282,478$ 36%

Dept OperationsE01 Salaries & Benefits 974,056$ 1,041,644$ 67,589$ 7% 1,505,172$ 463,528$ 31%E03 G&A - Services 75,246$ 105,425$ 30,179$ 40% 186,770$ 81,345$ 44%E05 G&A - Supplies 18,545$ 25,272$ 6,728$ 36% 30,500$ 5,228$ 17%E07 General Production 48,463$ 58,811$ 10,348$ 21% 84,000$ 25,189$ 30%E10 Source of Supply 51,944$ 38,512$ (13,432)$ -26% 80,000$ 41,488$ 52%E15 Pumping 349,126$ 236,591$ (112,535)$ -32% 366,000$ 129,409$ 35%E20 Water Treatment 159,314$ 211,011$ 51,696$ 32% 439,750$ 228,739$ 52%E25 Transmission & Distribution 126,533$ 81,590$ (44,942)$ -36% 131,000$ 49,410$ 38%E35 Conservation 1,053$ -$ (1,053)$ -100% 2,000$ 2,000$ 100%E70 Other 87,247$ 116,781$ 29,534$ 34% -$ (116,781)$

Dept 300 Sub Totals: $ 1,891,527 1,915,637$ 24,110$ 1% 2,825,192$ 909,555$ 32%

Dept EngineeringE01 Salaries & Benefits 51,562$ 59,204$ 7,642$ 15% 94,766$ 35,562$ 38%E03 G&A - Services 17,571$ 31,924$ 14,353$ 82% 97,430$ 65,506$ 67%E05 G&A - Supplies 15$ -$ (15)$ -100% 1,000$ 1,000$ 100%

Dept 400 Sub Totals: 69,149$ 91,128$ 21,980$ 32% 193,196$ 102,068$ 53%

Dept WUE/ConservationE01 Salaries & Benefits 64,414$ 68,477$ 4,062$ 6% 112,455$ 43,978$ 39%E03 G&A - Services 506$ 4,138$ 3,633$ 719% 38,500$ 34,362$ 89%E05 G&A - Supplies 33,891$ 17,589$ (16,302)$ -48% 56,500$ 38,911$ 69%

Dept 500 Sub Totals: $ 98,810 90,204$ (8,607)$ -9% 207,455$ 117,251$ 57%

Dept Board of DirectorsE01 Salaries & Benefits 78,950$ 76,379$ (2,571)$ -3% 130,569$ 54,190$ 42%E03 G&A - Services 6,105$ 7,281$ 1,175$ 19% 16,400$ 9,119$ 56%E05 G&A - Supplies 1,630$ 175$ (1,455)$ -89% 250$ 75$ 30%

Dept 900 Sub Totals: 86,686$ 83,835$ (2,851)$ -3% 147,219$ 63,384$ 43%

Budget Status - Expense

FY Remain:

6.4 -5

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2018YTD Actual

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019vs. FY 2018

YOY% change

FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %

Budget Status - Expense

FY Remain:

SummaryE01 Salaries & Benefits 1,711,061$ 1,874,673$ 163,612$ 10% 2,753,386$ 878,713$ 32%E03 G&A - Services 380,935$ 431,835$ 50,900$ 13% 847,046$ 415,211$ 49%E05 G&A - Supplies 60,336$ 55,726$ (4,611)$ -8% 106,350$ 50,624$ 48%E07 General Production 48,463$ 58,811$ 10,348$ 21% 84,000$ 25,189$ 30%E10 Source of Supply 152,804$ 166,379$ 13,576$ 9% 578,341$ 411,962$ 71%E15 Pumping 349,126$ 236,591$ (112,535)$ -32% 366,000$ 129,409$ 35%E20 Water Treatment 159,314$ 211,011$ 51,696$ 32% 439,750$ 228,739$ 52%E30 Conservation 1,053$ -$ (1,053)$ -100% 2,000$ 2,000$ 100%E25 Transmission & Distribution 126,533$ 81,590$ (44,942)$ -36% 131,000$ 49,410$ 38%E35 Customer Accounts 52,841$ 66,238$ 13,397$ 25% 95,120$ 27,893$ 29%E70 Other 87,247$ 117,770$ 30,523$ 35% -$ (116,781)$ E80 Debt Service - Interest 51,815$ 47,443$ (4,373)$ -8% 99,282$ 51,839$ 52%

Purchase Order Carryover 60,000$ District Expense Total: 3,181,529$ 3,348,067$ 166,538$ 5% 5,562,275$ 2,154,208$ 39%

Fund 01 and 02 CombinedE01 Salaries & Benefits 1,711,061$ 1,874,673$ 163,612$ 10% 2,753,386$ 878,713$ 32%E03-E80 Services & Supplies 1,470,468$ 1,473,394$ 2,926$ 0% 2,748,889$ 1,275,495$ 46%

Purchase Order Carryover 60,000$ District Expense Total: 3,181,529$ 3,348,067$ 166,538$ 5% 5,562,275$ 2,154,208$ 39%

6.4 -6

Period: 7/1/18-2/28/19 33%

FY 2019YTD Actual

FY 2019 Budget

FY 2019 Remaining

Balance %


Project DescriptionC15016 Accounting & UB S/W Replacement -$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 100%C15021 Groundwater Recharge w/ Recycled Water 994$ 300,000$ 299,006$ 100%M16022 Recycled Water Fill Station -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 100%C16023 Orchard Run WTP Water Quality Improvement -$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 100%C16024 Bethany Tank Rehabilitation 8,975$ 200,000$ 191,025$ 96%M17011 Meters with AMI 76,862$ 120,000$ 43,138$ 36%C17011 AMI Technology for Meters 98,007$ 150,000$ 51,993$ 35%C17018 Specialized Operations Vehicle 53,056$ 50,000$ (3,056)$ -6%C17025 Main Replacement Program - RW 134,940$ -$ (134,940)$ C18026 Main Replacement Program - PW -$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 100%C18032 Well 7A Replacement 83,853$ -$ (83,853)$ C18033 Polo Ranch Pump Station Improvements 8,349$ 20,000$ 11,651$ 58%C18034 Pressure Regulator - Northridge 13,360$ 45,000$ 31,640$ 70%C18035 Sequoia Tank Rehabilitation 27,057$ 650,000$ 622,943$ 96%C19010 Recycled Water Main - Hwy 17 Crossing -$ 257,000$ 257,000$ 100%C19020 El Pueblo WTP Improvements 900$ 150,000$ 149,100$ 99%C19030 Hacienda Pump Station Improvements -$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 100%C19050 Pressure Regulator - Granite Creek 5,280$ 100,000$ 94,720$ 95%C19060 AV System Upgrade 14,071$ 30,000$ 15,929$ 53%C19070 FY19 Vehicle Replacement Program -$ 35,000$ 35,000$ 100%

Projects Expense Totals: 525,704$ 2,770,000$ 2,244,296$ 81%

* Scheduled project in the District's Capital Improvement Plan

Projects - Expense

FY Remain:

6.4 -7

Balance Sheet


2/28/18 2/28/19

$1,569,634 $2,401,594Investment $511,965 $308,937

$1,983 $1,494$955,122 $966,646$150,683 $169,477$293,413 $368,440$160,614 $211,827

$30,989 $51,914$554,070 $392,431$641,797 $650,697

$1,641,055 $608,184$5,267,833 $5,267,833

$35,874,108 $37,471,983($21,193,173) ($21,672,284)

$38,181 $36,171$456,821 $656,179

$26,955,094 $27,891,523

$56,353 $8,999$55,000 $50,000

$293,413 $368,440$479,030 $25,862

$52,064 ($67,453)$8,177,704 $10,168,744

$212,630 $183,523$9,326,195 $10,738,115

$14,790,579 $16,700,288$1,332,995 ($1,338,284)

$16,123,574 $15,362,004

$25,449,769 $26,100,119

$1,505,326 $1,791,404

$17,628,900 $17,153,408

$26,955,095 $27,891,523

Total Liabilities and Fund Balance:

Total Retained Earnings:

AssetsCash

Accrued Interest

Interfund Loan Receivable

Prepaid Expense

Liabilities

Unearned Revenue

Plant & Equipment

Construction-in-progress

Note Receivable

Interfund Loans

Water Rights / Intangible Assets

A/R Customer-WaterA/R - Other

Inventory

Land & Right-of-ways

Depreciation/AmortizationLoss on Defeasance of DebtDeferred Pension Outflows

Unrestricted Net Position

Fund Balance

LT Liabilities Due in 1 Yr

A/P & Accrued Expenses

Total Liabilities, Fund Balance, and Retained Earnings:

Total Fund Balance and Retained Earnings:

Investment in Capital Assets

Customer Deposits

Long-term LiabilitiesDeferred Pension Inflows

6.4 -8

Scotts Valley Water DistrictAP Check RegisterFebruary 2019

Vendor Name Check Date Check No. Check Amount DescriptionA T & T 2/22/2019 27339 33.03$ AT&T Circuits - Feb 2019ACCELA INC. 2/8/2019 27270 427.00$ Web Payment Transaction Fees - Dec 2018ACCELA INC. 2/8/2019 27270 2,120.00$ Web Payment Transaction Fees - Jan 2019ACWA/JPIA 2/8/2019 27271 43,133.58$ EE and Retiree Benefits - Feb 2019ACWA/JPIA 2/22/2019 27341 7,899.85$ WC Insurance - Qtr Ending 12/31/2018ACWA/JPIA 2/22/2019 27340 43,227.08$ EE and Retiree Benefits - Mar 2019AFLAC 2/22/2019 27342 382.22$ EE Self-Funded Supplemental Benefits - Feb 2019AFLAC 2/8/2019 27272 382.22$ EE Self-Funded Supplemental Benefits - Jan 2019AFSCME COUNCIL 57 2/8/2019 27273 607.74$ Union Dues - Feb 2019AIRTEC SERVICE 2/8/2019 27274 525.00$ HVAC Maint - 2 Civic CtrANDERSON WENDY 2/8/2019 27275 200.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletsBADGER METER 2/8/2019 27276 1,836.07$ Monthly Cell Charge for PW Meter ReadsBADGER METER 2/8/2019 27276 55.18$ Monthly Cell Charge for RW Meter ReadsBATTERIES PLUS BULBS #314 2/22/2019 27343 82.82$ UPS Batteries - SCADA ServerBATTERIES PLUS BULBS #314 2/8/2019 27277 833.55$ Battery Array - Mt Roberta TankBRASS KEY LOCKSMITH 2/22/2019 27344 135.79$ Lock Install - El Pueblo WTP Chem ShedBRENNTAG PACIFIC INC 2/22/2019 27345 1,491.59$ Water Treatment ChemicalsBRENNTAG PACIFIC INC 2/8/2019 27278 1,096.66$ Water Treatment ChemicalsBUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 2/8/2019 27279 14.21$ Office Supplies - MarkersBUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 2/8/2019 27279 339.32$ Labels/Cartridge for Water Quality SamplingBUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 2/8/2019 27279 32.52$ Special FIN Supplies - 2018 1099 FormsCHRISTIANSEN URSUH 2/8/2019 27280 57.71$ UB Refund CheckCITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY 2/8/2019 27282 34,843.74$ Tertiary Treatment Plant Expenses - Q1 FY2019CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY 2/8/2019 27282 240.00$ Bacti Samples - Dec 2018CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY 2/8/2019 27281 80.86$ Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill - 2 Civic CtrCITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY 2/8/2019 27281 80.86$ Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill - El PuebloCITY VENTURES HOMEBUILDING LLC 2/8/2019 27283 68.92$ UB Refund CheckCITY VENTURES HOMEBUILDING LLC 2/8/2019 27284 68.92$ UB Refund CheckCIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/22/2019 27346 420.00$ Sequioa Tank Rehab - General Engineering ServicesCIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/22/2019 27346 897.38$ RW Main Improvements - Bidding SupportCIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/22/2019 27346 480.00$ General Engineering Services - Feb 2019CIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/8/2019 27285 630.00$ SA-148 Plan ReviewCIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/8/2019 27285 4,940.00$ Northridge Pressure Reduction Station Replacement - Piping, Surveying, ModelingCIVIL CONSULTANTS GROUP INC 2/8/2019 27285 1,895.00$ Bethany 2nd Tank Addition Task 4: Oversee Structural EngineerCORIX WATER PRODUCTS (US) INC 2/22/2019 27347 898.95$ Main Maint - Butterfly ValvesCORIX WATER PRODUCTS (US) INC 2/22/2019 27347 39.24$ Main Maint - Blow-Off BoltsCORIX WATER PRODUCTS (US) INC 2/22/2019 27347 270.80$ Service Line Maint - StockCORIX WATER PRODUCTS (US) INC 2/22/2019 27347 1,222.79$ Misc Main Maint SuppliesCORIX WATER PRODUCTS (US) INC 2/8/2019 27286 6.11$ Service Line Maint - PVCCOUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ 2/22/2019 27348 41.25$ Landfill Waste - Jan 2019DASSELS PETROLEUM 2/22/2019 27349 1,184.53$ Vehicle Fuel - Jan 2019EUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL 2/8/2019 27287 1,280.00$ Lab Testing for Water QualityEUROFINS EATON ANALYTICAL 2/22/2019 27350 1,160.00$ Lab Testing for Water QualityEXCEEDIO 2/8/2019 27288 1,073.00$ Monthly Managed Services: SCADA - Feb 2019EXCEEDIO 2/8/2019 27288 5,598.30$ Monthly Managed Services: HaaS/SaaS/ITaaS - Feb 2019FASTENAL COMPANY 2/22/2019 27351 59.26$ Special OPS Supplies - MiscFASTENAL COMPANY 2/8/2019 27289 448.14$ Special OPS Supplies - MiscFEDAK & BROWN LLP 2/8/2019 27290 750.00$ State Controller's ReportFLYERS ENERGY LLC 2/8/2019 27291 676.10$ Diesel Generator FuelGOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC 2/8/2019 27292 160.00$ Annual GFOA MembershipGRAINGER 2/8/2019 27293 127.69$ Special OPS Supplies - Label TapeGRAINGER 2/8/2019 27293 376.18$ AV Upgrades - Cable Raceway - Conf Room CamsGRAINGER 2/8/2019 27293 522.94$ Storm Drain Cover - Orchard Run WTPGRAINGER 2/8/2019 27293 7,471.90$ Replacement Air Compressor - Orchard Run WTPGRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO 2/8/2019 27294 145.37$ Service Line Maint - Commercial BaseGRANITE ROCK COMPANY 2/8/2019 27295 81.62$ Main Maint - Utility Trench SandGREEN WASTE RECOVERY INC 2/22/2019 27352 235.05$ Monthly Trash Service - El Pueblo - Jan 2019HAIGHT ROBERT 2/8/2019 27296 494.36$ Retiree Medical - Feb 2019HARMON PIRET 2/8/2019 27297 91.36$ Travel Reimb - WateReuse Communications Meeting - HarmonHARMON PIRET 2/8/2019 27297 55.68$ Mileage Reimb - WateReuse Central Coast Chapter - HarmonHINES MICHAEL BRADLEY 2/8/2019 27298 7,000.00$ Facility Maint - Prime & Repaint Orchard Run WTP PipingHOFMANN CHRIS 2/8/2019 27299 50.00$ Customer Rebate - Pressure RegulatorICON CLOUD SOLUTIONS LLC 2/22/2019 27353 121.50$ Phone Service - OPS - Feb 2019ICON CLOUD SOLUTIONS LLC 2/22/2019 27353 357.20$ Phone Service - Feb 2019INFOSEND 2/22/2019 27354 299.79$ UB Past Due Printing & Mailing - Jan 2019JACKSON LANDSCAPE 2/8/2019 27300 300.00$ Landscape Maint - 2 Civic Ctr - Jan 2019KASSIS WILLIAM 2/8/2019 27301 541.38$ Retiree Medical - Feb 2019KBA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS LLC 2/8/2019 27302 189.13$ Copier Maint & Printing Costs - Jan 2019KBA DOCUSYS INC 2/8/2019 27303 425.08$ Copier Lease - Jan 2019

6.4 -9

Vendor Name Check Date Check No. Check Amount DescriptionLAW OFFICE OF ROBERT E BOSSO 2/22/2019 27355 3,000.00$ Legal Counsel Services - Jan 2019LLOYD'S TIRE SERVICE 2/8/2019 27304 1,296.24$ Vehicle Maint - Coolant Leak Repair - Truck #13MCNAIR DAVID 2/8/2019 27305 3,272.53$ Safety Clothes - Shirts & Outerwear - OPSMILLER MAXFIELD INC 2/8/2019 27306 4,006.25$ Execution of Annual Communication Plan - Jan 2019MILLER MAXFIELD INC 2/8/2019 27306 993.75$ Purified RW Recharge Project Kick-Off - Jan 2019MILLER MAXFIELD INC 2/8/2019 27306 175.00$ Interagency Advisory Committee Support - Jan 2019MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 2/8/2019 27307 1,279.78$ Uniform Laundering & Rental Service - Dec & JanMISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 2/8/2019 27307 967.40$ Safety Clothing - Fire Resistant Pants - DeBritoMISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 2/8/2019 27307 (338.96)$ Credit - Incorrect Billing on INV 509096448MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES INC 2/22/2019 27356 4,900.00$ 2018 Annual GW Report - Jan 2019MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES INC 2/22/2019 27356 300.00$ SMGWA Support - Water Education SeriesNATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS 2/8/2019 27308 2,058.86$ IRS 457 Plan - Payroll Date 2/1/2019NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS 2/22/2019 27357 2,058.86$ IRS 457 Plan - Payroll Date 2/15/2019NATURAL ORANGE INC 2/22/2019 27358 104.00$ Monthly Pest Control - 2 Civic Ctr - Feb 2019NATURAL ORANGE INC 2/8/2019 27309 104.00$ Monthly Pest Control - 2 Civic Ctr - Jan 2019NATURAL ORANGE INC 2/8/2019 27309 63.00$ Monthly Pest Control - El Pueblo - Jan 2019NATURAL ORANGE INC 2/22/2019 27358 63.00$ Monthly Pest Control - El Pueblo - Feb 2019NORTON PATRICIA 2/8/2019 27310 458.51$ Retiree Medical - Feb 2019NORTON PATRICIA 2/8/2019 27310 18.56$ Retiree Vision - Feb 2019NORTON PATRICIA 2/8/2019 27310 33.72$ Retiree Dental - Feb 2019OLIVE SPRINGS QUARRY 2/8/2019 27311 131.83$ Main Maint - AsphaltPACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2/8/2019 27312 59.79$ Electricity - Skypark - Jan 2019PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2/8/2019 27312 67.91$ Electricity - RW - Jan 2019PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2/8/2019 27312 13.77$ Electricity - Santas Village Rd - Jan 2019PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2/8/2019 27312 24,620.11$ Electricity - PW - Jan 2019PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 2/8/2019 27312 1,203.28$ Electricity - 2 Civic Ctr - Jan 2019PERRI CHRISTOPHER 2/8/2019 27313 1,676.44$ Director Medical - Feb 2019PURDY ED 2/8/2019 27314 100.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletREBER DANIEL 2/8/2019 27315 2,058.58$ Director Medical - Feb 2019RUBLE KAREN 2/8/2019 27316 683.27$ UB Refund CheckSABRE BACKFLOW INC 2/8/2019 27317 115.00$ Equipment Maint - Calibration Accuracy CheckSALINAS PUMP CO 2/8/2019 27318 36,472.34$ Well Maint - Well 11B Sanding RepairSALISBURY JOHN 2/22/2019 27359 327.00$ Customer Rebate - Low Volume IrrigationSANTA CRUZ COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR 2/22/2019 27360 365.93$ FY2019 Property Taxes #2 - Parcel #09712112SANTA CRUZ COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR 2/22/2019 27360 124.43$ FY2019 Property Taxes #2 - Parcel #09512114SANTA CRUZ UNDERGROUND & PAVING 2/22/2019 27361 1,000.00$ Refund Deposit - RW Bulk MeterSCARBOROUGH LUMBER & BUILDING SUPPLY 2/8/2019 27320 1,013.39$ Scarborough Invoices - Dec 2018SCARBOROUGH LUMBER & BUILDING SUPPLY 2/8/2019 27319 1,266.10$ Scarborough Invoices - Jan 2019SCOTTS VALLEY BANNER - VALLEY PRESS 2/22/2019 27362 265.00$ SV Banner Ad - Feb MeetingsSCOTTS VALLEY SPRINKLER 2/8/2019 27321 164.49$ Special OPS Supplies - MiscSCOTTS VALLEY SPRINKLER 2/22/2019 27363 65.46$ Misc Treatment Plant SuppliesSHRED IT 2/8/2019 27322 81.91$ Document Destruction - Jan 2019SOIL CONTROL LAB 2/8/2019 27323 270.00$ Water Quality TestingSTEVENSON LANDSCAPING 2/8/2019 27324 855.00$ Landscaping at Misc Locations - Jan 2019STILES RUTH 2/8/2019 27325 746.16$ Director Medical - Feb 2019STRELLER EILEEN 2/8/2019 27326 100.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletSUMMERS CAITLIN 2/22/2019 27364 100.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletSWRCB-DWOCP 2/22/2019 27365 100.00$ Training - T3 Cert Exam - BeattonSYCAL ENGINEERING INC 2/8/2019 27327 67.50$ Engineering Services for SCADA - Jan 2019SYCAL ENGINEERING INC 2/22/2019 27366 1,215.00$ Engineering Services for SCADA - Feb 2019TAYLOR TERI 2/8/2019 27328 200.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletsTIMES PUBLISHING GROUP INC 2/8/2019 27329 175.00$ SV Times Ad - Feb 2019TPx COMMUNICATIONS 2/8/2019 27330 189.44$ Phone Service - OPS - Jan 2019TPx COMMUNICATIONS 2/8/2019 27330 568.32$ Phone Service - Jan 2019UNITED SITE SERVICES 2/8/2019 27331 170.61$ Portable Toilet Rental - Orchard Run WTP - Feb 2019UNITED SITE SERVICES 2/22/2019 27367 186.20$ Portable Toilet Rental - 229 Mt Hermon - Jan 2019UNITED SITE SERVICES 2/8/2019 27331 186.20$ Portable Toilet Rental - 229 Mt Hermon - Feb 2019UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 2/8/2019 27332 437.00$ Janitorial Service - 2 Civic Ctr - Jan 2019UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 2/8/2019 27332 355.00$ Janitorial Service - El Pueblo - Jan 2019USA NORTH 811 2/22/2019 27368 868.16$ Regulatory Costs - Digging Tickets FeeUSABLUEBOOK 2/8/2019 27333 2,800.50$ Treatment Plant Maint - Pressure TransducerVALERO MARKETING & SUPPLY CO 2/8/2019 27334 422.92$ Vehicle Fuel - Jan 2019VERIZON WIRELESS 2/8/2019 27335 374.82$ Cell Phones / Tablets - Jan 2019VERIZON WIRELESS 2/22/2019 27369 538.95$ Replacement iPad - OPSVERIZON WIRELESS 2/22/2019 27369 374.82$ Cell Phones / Tablets - Feb 2019WASSERMAN JAMES 2/8/2019 27336 100.00$ Customer Rebate - ToiletWILSON ALISON 2/22/2019 27370 164.51$ UB Refund CheckWILSON ALISON 2/22/2019 27371 18.75$ UB Refund CheckWINCHESTER AUTO 2/8/2019 27337 56.48$ Tank Battery Array - Mt Roberta TankWINCHESTER AUTO 2/8/2019 27337 26.35$ Special OPS Supplies - MiscWRIGHT CORBETT 2/8/2019 27338 2,000.00$ Refund Deposit - PW Bulk Meter

293,671.74$

6.4 -10

Vendor Name Check Date Check No. Check Amount Description

Legend: Abbreviation: Meaning:PW Potable WaterRW Recycled WaterWW Waste WaterWTP Water Treatment PlantEE EmployeeER EmployerCO Change OrderTO Task OrderSA Service ApplicationFY Fiscal YearOPS OperationsEng EngineeringAdm AdministrationFin FinanceWUE Water Use EfficiencyENR Engineering News RecordACWA Association of California Water AgenciesLID Low Impact DevelopmentUB Utility BillingAMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure

6.4 -11

Well Produc on

Total Produc on (Million Gallons)

February 2019 22.3 MG 10.2% decrease from January March 2019 23.3 MG 6.0% increase from February

Produc on is Water Pumped +/‐ Water used for Well Maintenance Ac vi es

6.4 - 1

Potable Water Demand

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

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

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019Dem

and

(Mill

ion

Gal

lons

)

Demand is Production +/‐ Change in Storage

6.4 - 2

Potable and Recycled Water Demand vs. Population

Demand is Production +/‐ the Change in Storage

557

471412 414 441

473397

356 356391 374

69

52

55

47 5259

71

59

66 5858

66

1

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Potable Water (MG) Recycled Water (MG) Population

Dem

and

(Mill

ion

Gal

lons

)

Serv

ice

Area

Pop

ulat

ion

6.4 - 3

Potable and Recycled Water Demand

Potable2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Average

Jan. 31,258,350 27,190,550 23,129,510 31,165,560 27,764,580 33,252,872 24,822,615 23,085,736 24,789,618 23,674,051 24,389,215 26,774,787Feb. 25,802,050 24,924,790 25,004,280 26,813,840 26,124,132 24,779,862 23,217,640 21,968,896 23,490,314 22,427,754 21,923,206 24,225,160March 28,912,350 28,930,820 26,079,310 29,752,014 31,559,240 27,946,154 30,953,420 23,910,892 25,837,232 24,042,592 22,948,490 27,352,047April 37,400,190 27,503,270 30,993,238 29,234,622 35,621,370 28,875,831 29,909,260 28,400,861 25,447,561 25,967,700 ‐ 29,935,390May 45,932,830 37,704,720 40,456,736 43,581,989 49,525,756 38,675,936 30,478,823 31,995,591 38,043,826 35,200,764 ‐ 39,159,697June 49,307,120 47,344,250 38,237,371 46,553,850 47,432,970 39,525,236 32,726,825 36,842,416 42,310,983 36,867,578 ‐ 41,714,860July 54,828,370 49,625,170 46,417,190 48,634,940 49,192,762 41,957,386 34,544,613 38,892,200 41,757,891 39,728,472 ‐ 44,557,899Aug. 53,944,010 49,668,620 45,665,550 48,939,190 50,820,800 41,020,790 35,765,167 38,541,952 40,076,059 38,756,447 ‐ 44,319,858Sept. 41,458,120 46,781,040 43,700,350 42,936,210 45,489,360 36,533,116 33,498,030 35,653,167 38,190,535 37,610,582 ‐ 40,185,051Oct. 39,213,770 37,889,760 34,771,130 37,982,466 42,248,672 34,840,142 32,589,534 30,517,556 36,888,905 34,839,533 ‐ 36,178,147Nov. 34,099,250 18,604,914 28,853,908 28,714,236 34,868,300 25,524,197 24,110,286 24,338,656 24,864,436 30,112,415 ‐ 27,409,060Dec. 28,903,970 15,762,610 30,451,180 26,428,050 32,013,140 24,261,522 23,866,862 24,379,124 26,194,926 25,169,209 ‐ 25,743,059Total 471,060,380 411,930,514 413,759,753 440,736,967 472,661,082 397,193,044 356,483,075 358,527,047 387,892,285 374,399,297 69,260,911 450,161,099

Recycled 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Average

Jan. 496,000 62,000 496,000 2,139,000 620,000 3,019,613 635,420 862,984 156,267 838,172 493,100 892,596Feb. 448,000 0 1,120,000 2,352,000 2,268,000 1,248,862 1,545,957 1,813,868 94,521 2,589,717 366,055 1,258,816March 1,178,000 620,000 620,000 1,054,000 2,723,665 1,579,882 4,231,231 972,360 544,666 1,141,831 322,464 1,362,554April 4,050,000 570,000 3,450,000 1,470,000 5,436,705 4,163,175 4,720,887 4,381,911 713,802 2,333,176 ‐ 3,128,966May 6,293,000 5,301,000 6,448,000 7,843,000 9,248,455 8,409,175 6,686,359 6,909,436 7,908,386 7,306,666 ‐ 7,235,348June 8,700,000 8,250,000 6,150,000 9,420,000 9,801,903 9,135,056 7,488,534 9,639,221 8,940,094 9,739,276 ‐ 8,726,408July 9,486,000 10,013,000 4,936,000 9,610,000 9,394,766 9,911,697 9,935,422 10,841,389 10,981,309 10,744,706 ‐ 9,585,429Aug. 9,269,000 8,680,000 9,207,000 10,199,000 9,875,446 8,542,111 10,471,389 8,767,020 9,618,897 10,078,073 ‐ 9,470,794Sept. 7,200,000 8,070,000 8,610,000 7,680,000 8,288,391 6,176,224 9,092,727 8,287,511 7,957,562 7,522,571 ‐ 7,888,499Oct. 2,852,000 4,681,000 4,185,000 4,960,000 6,537,840 5,282,253 7,233,408 3,956,097 7,557,695 6,967,548 ‐ 5,421,284Nov. 330,000 570,000 1,740,000 1,920,000 4,029,769 1,131,988 2,817,778 1,053,779 2,234,592 5,514,338 ‐ 2,134,224Dec. 1,333,000 403,000 2,201,000 341,000 2,453,395 236,228 1,119,017 529,158 1,670,966 994,336 ‐ 1,128,110Total 51,635,000 47,220,000 49,163,000 58,988,000 70,678,335 58,836,264 65,978,129 58,014,734 58,378,757 65,770,410 1,181,619 53,258,568


6.4 - 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Mar‐16

Apr‐16

May‐16

Jun‐16

Jul‐1

6Au

g‐16

Sep‐16

Oct‐16

Nov

‐16

Dec‐16

Jan‐17

Feb‐17

Mar‐17

Apr‐17

May‐17

Jun‐17

Jul‐1

7Au

g‐17

Sep‐17

Oct‐17

Nov

‐17

Dec‐17

Jan‐18

Feb‐18

Mar‐18

Apr‐18

May‐18

Jun‐18

Jul‐1

8Au

g‐18

Sep‐18

Oct‐18

Nov

‐18

Dec‐18

Jan‐19

Feb‐19

Ma r‐19

Potable Demand Recycled Demand Rain

Potable and Recycled Water Demand vs. Rainfall

Rain (I

nche

s)

Dem

and

(Mill

ion

Gal

lons

)


6.4 - 5

WATER YEAR Oct Nov Dec Jan

Rainfall El Pueblo Weather Station

Feb Mar Apr May June Jul Aug Sep TOTAL % of Ave

1981‐82 0.14 11.20 5.90 28.80 6.88 8.26 8.40 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.04 1.28 70.93 168%High Year 1982‐83 5.35 10.50 7.74 13.90 18.00 19.90 7.80 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.17 1.91 86.25 205%

1983‐84 1.70 12.70 12.90 0.54 2.49 2.62 1.13 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.00 0.25 34.54 82%1984‐85 2.80 13.80 2.95 1.72 4.20 7.92 0.73 0.11 0.15 0.09 0.02 0.54 35.03 83%1985‐86 1.12 7.14 2.62 7.38 22.40 15.00 0.48 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 58.27 138%1986‐87 0.03 0.05 2.47 4.51 9.06 6.31 0.70 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.15 55%1987‐88 1.19 2.30 10.70 4.58 0.68 0.00 3.13 1.07 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.81 57%1988‐89 0.19 5.90 8.89 2.06 1.39 10.60 0.67 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.83 30.67 73%1989‐90 3.53 1.58 0.01 3.42 3.69 2.13 0.16 5.79 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.15 20.58 49%1990‐91 0.50 0.24 1.65 0.61 5.39 17.19 0.51 0.06 0.40 0.00 0.02 0.07 26.64 63%1991‐92 2.37 1.46 5.42 3.03 15.30 4.65 0.45 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.05 0.00 33.55 80%1992‐93 3.41 0.20 11.54 18.51 10.22 3.17 1.37 0.96 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.06 119%1993‐94 0.73 2.74 5.52 3.51 9.72 0.68 2.75 2.10 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.05 27.81 66%1994‐95 1.79 8.29 4.78 23.88 0.65 13.62 3.79 0.89 1.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 58.74 139%1995‐96 0.00 0.32 10.03 13.52 11.35 5.14 2.38 4.31 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.08 112%1996‐97 2.89 6.95 22.43 12.33 0.17 1.50 0.58 0.16 0.12 0.00 0.54 0.00 47.67 113%1997‐98 0.68 10.12 4.06 14.21 21.81 6.17 2.85 3.65 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.17 63.74 151%1998‐99 1.02 9.11 1.85 9.25 11.08 5.22 2.58 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.02 0.14 40.66 97%1999‐00 0.35 5.69 0.53 18.02 17.57 2.77 2.69 1.01 0.18 0.00 0.20 0.40 49.41 117%2000‐01 5.14 1.38 0.94 8.68 10.65 4.05 2.67 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.16 33.74 80%2001‐02 1.13 9.93 16.45 4.97 2.69 4.66 0.52 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 41.30 98%2002‐03 0.00 5.80 21.40 2.77 2.95 2.54 5.75 1.09 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.46 101%2003‐04 0.19 3.93 17.55 4.44 9.69 1.19 0.65 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.11 37.88 90%2004‐05 7.24 3.25 14.39 8.30 7.20 10.01 3.79 2.13 0.94 0.02 0.00 0.08 57.35 136%2005‐06 0.19 2.84 21.73 6.55 5.26 15.29 10.44 1.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 63.33 150%2006‐07 0.25 3.30 5.67 0.89 9.24 0.30 2.17 0.46 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.33 22.72 54%2007‐08 1.93 0.52 5.50 17.59 6.96 0.36 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 33.26 79%2008‐09 1.59 4.80 4.38 1.80 15.28 3.47 0.52 1.42 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.26 33.53 80%2009‐10 9.70 0.33 5.21 11.37 8.66 4.35 5.41 1.17 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.00 46.28 110%2010‐11 3.92 5.13 15.36 1.97 10.59 13.40 0.75 3.42 3.40 0.00 0.04 0.02 58.00 138%2011‐12 2.93 3.41 0.15 6.80 2.75 11.97 4.09 0.02 0.20 0.02 0.00 0.02 32.36 77%2012‐13 1.61 11.32 13.25 1.31 0.47 2.66 0.43 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.70 31.87 76%

Low Year 2013‐14 0.01 0.87 0.78 0.05 11.52 4.02 2.02 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.92 20.32 48%2014‐15 0.44 4.36 16.52 0.00 4.69 0.47 2.13 0.19 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.02 28.89 69%2015‐16 0.07 2.54 6.67 16.20 1.16 14.26 1.18 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 42.65 101%2016‐17 8.66 3.29 10.77 26.13 19.56 7.09 4.47 0.06 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.04 80.14 190%2017‐18 0.10 4.02 0.08 6.43 0.56 10.07 2.85 0.01 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.00 24.26 57%2018‐19 0.08 5.24 3.72 10.49 13.11 6.91 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 39.55 94%

Cumulative 2018‐2019 0.08 5.32 9.04 19.53 32.64 39.55 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 39.55Monthly Average 1981‐2018 2.02 4.90 8.08 8.38 8.16 6.57 2.52 0.93 0.25 0.01 0.04 0.27 42.13Cumulative Ave 1981‐2018 2.02 6.92 15.00 23.38 31.54 38.11 40.63 41.56 41.81 41.82 41.86 42.13 42.13

6.4 - 6

Leak Adjustment Program ReportFY 2019

PeriodRES

RequestsCII

Requests Approved Denied Appeal Reasons Denied Total Adjust

Credit Total Excess Use

(gallons)Jul-18 0 0 0 0 0 $0 -

Aug-18 24 1 22 3 0 < 5 years since last adjustment $13,765 1,196,195 Sep-18 5 1 4 1 1 < 5 years since last adjustment $2,075 175,460 Oct-18 28 4 25 6 1 < 5 years since last adjustment $15,778 1,199,760 Nov-18 14 0 11 3 0 < 5 years since last adjustment $4,625 284,536 Dec-18 1 17 18 0 0 $9,951 825,862 Jan-19 16 0 16 0 0 $5,368 423,017 Feb-19 12 0 11 1 0 < 5 years since last adjustment $6,860 501,889 Mar-19Apr-19

May-19Jun-19

Total 100 23 107 14 2 $58,422 4,606,719

31%

38%

24%

3%

1%

3%

Location of Adjusted Leaks

Irrigation/Hoses

Service Line

Toilets

House Plumbing

Appliances

Other

6.4 - 7

,tNtMesaWater

DISTRICT'

Dedicated to

Satisfyi ng ou r Com m u n ity's

Water Needs

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Shawn DewanePresidentDivision V

Marice H. DePasqualeVice President

Division III

Jim AtkinsonDirector

Division IV

Fred R. Bockmiller, P.E.Director

Division I

James R. FislerDirector

Division II

Paul E. Shoenberger, P.E.General Manager

Denise GarciaDistrict Secretary

Marwan Khalifa, CPA, MBADistrict Treasurer

Atkinson, Andelson,Loya, Ruud & Romo

Legal Counsel

1965 Placentia AvenueCosta Mesa , CA 92627

tel 949.631.1200fax 949.574.1036

[email protected]

March 14,2019

Ms. Piret HarmonGeneral ManagerScotts Valley Water District2 Civic Center DriveScotts Valley, CA 95066-4159

Dear Ms. Harmon,

On behalf of Mesa Water District, it is an honor to request that your agencysuppod and vote for Fred R. Bockmiller, P.E., for election to the ACWA/JPIAExecutive Committee.

Director Bockmiller has served on our Board for over two decades, makingfair and informed decisions that have greatly benefited Mesa Water@ and itsconstituents. Since 2006, he has been our representative on the ACWA/JPIABoard and, since 2008, he has served on ACWA/JPIA's Risk ManagementCommittee. He also serves on the AWCA Energy Committee.

Due to his elected public service experience, community volunteer service,and his 3O-year career at the University of California, lrvine, DirectorBockmiller possesses the qualifications, knowledge, and understanding ofthe many issues facing ACWA/JPIA. Attached for your review is a Statementof Qualifications for Director Bockmiller's election to the ACWA/JPIAExecutive Committee.

Five agencies adopted a concurring in nomination resolution in supporl ofDirector Bockmiller's candidacy for the ACWA/JPIA Executive Committee:o East Orange County Water District;o Municipal Water District of Orange County;. Orange County Water District;¡ Santa Margarita Water District; and,o Yorba Linda Water District.

Our Board has the highest confidence in Director Bockmiller and his provenleadership abilities, which can help guide ACWA/JPIA to continuedorganizational success and excellence in serving to its member agencies. lfyou have any questions or requests for additional information, kindly contactour General Manager, Paul E. Shoenberger, P.E., by calling 949.631 .1206or emailing [email protected]. Thank you for your consideration invoting for Director Bockmiller.

Sincerel

Mesa Water Board President

Mesa Water Board of DirectorsPaul E. Shoenberger, P.E., Mesa Water General Manager

c

8.1

Elect Fred R. Bockmiller, P.E. to AGWA/JPIA Executive Committee

Fred R. Bockmiller, P.E.Director, Mesa Water District

OBJEGTIVE: To further the goals of ACWA/JPIA in best serving itsmembers, by applying my analytical and leadership skills, and my riskmanagement experience, as a member of the ACWA/JPIA ExecutiveCommittee.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS:

o Mesa Water District Director, 1996-present

¡ Five-term Board President, Mesa Water District

. ACWA/JPIA Board, 2006-present

o ACWA/JPIA Risk Management Committee, 2008-present

o ACWA Energy Committee, 2002-present

. Chair of all various Mesa Water District Committees (Executive,Audit Ad Hoc, Finance, Human Resources, lT Ad Hoc,Engineering and Operations, Public lnformation)

. Engineering Manager, UC lrvine Facilities ManagementDepartment

BIOGRAPHY: A Newport-Mesa native, Fred Bockmiller represents Division 1 -- encompassing the West Sideof Costa Mesa and portions of Newport Beach - on the Mesa Water District Board of Directors. Having beenBoard President for five prior terms -- in 1999, 2000, 2004, 2011 , and 2012 - Director Bockmiller currentlyserves as Chairman of Mesa Water's Engineering and Operations Committee.

Director Bockmiller represents Mesa Water on the Board of the Association of California Water Agencies(ACWA) Joint Powers lnsurance Authority (JPIA). He also serves on the ACWA/JPIA Risk ManagementCommittee and the ACWA Energy Committee.

Director Bockmiller has previously chaired every Mesa Water committee (Executive, Audit Ad Hoc, Finance,Human Resources, lT Ad Hoc, Engineering and Operations, and Public lnformation). Additionally, he hasrepresented Mesa Water at the City/Districts Liaison Committee, Orange County Council of Governments,Orange County Water District, and the Costa Mesa Westside Revitalization Oversight Committee.

Throughout his elected service, Director Bockmiller has championed water quality and costefficient servicereliability through a perpetual agency philosophy of long-term planning for the future of Mesa Water andcontinuous infrastructure maintenance, renewal, and improvement. He has been a relentless champion ofhigh-quality, fact-based decision making.

Director Bockmiller is the Engineering Manager in the Facilities Management Department at UC lrvine (UCl), aleader in energy conservation and construction efforts for more than 20 years, including completion of morethan $3 billion in major capital construction projects, and extensive energy and water conservation retrofits,which tripled the developed building space, reduced energy consumption in laboratories by 50 percent, anddecreased per capita water use by more than 30%. He also represents the department at the emergencyoperations center for the campus with a daytime population approaching 60,000 people on 1,500 acres.

Developing the next generation is an area of interest for Director Bockmiller. He is a regular guest lecturer in

UCI's Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, a mentor in the Junior Mentor Program atNewport Harbor High School, and was a Board member for 17 years of the Youth Employment Service -- alocal charity that provides youth with the tools to find jobs -- where he served as CFO and President.

8.2

l¡.ae sr ¡f þ rrso

Á-' '-¡

a>.HUMBOLDT BAY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

828 SEVENTH STREET, PO Box95. EUREKA, CRuronrun95502-0095

Ornce 7 07 443-50'18 Essex 7 07 -822-291 IF M 7 07 443-57 31 7 07 -822-8245

EMAIL [email protected]¡Website: www.hbmwd.com

BOARD OF DIRECTORSSHERIWOO, PRESIDENTNEAL LATT, VICE-PRESIDENTJ. BRUCE RUPP, SECRETARY-TREASURERBARBARA HECATHORN, DIRECTORMICHELLE FULLER, DIRECTOR

GENERAL MAI.¡AGERJOHN FRIEDENBACH

March 26,2019

Dear Fellow Board Member:

We will be meeting in May at the ACWA/JPIA Conference. You will be asked to participate in theselection of the Executive Committee members to serve you in the next term. I am a candidate for re-election and respectfully request your vote.

I am completing my first four-year term on the Executive Committee. In addition to my general role inshaping the Liability, Property and Worker's Compensation programs, I chair the Employee BenefitsCommittee. When I ran before, I said I would work constructively with other Committee members topreserve the financial integrity of the pooled insurance programs and continue high quality service to themembers. I believe I have fulfilled that promise. During my tenure we have held or reduced premiums inboth our liability and property programs while expanding coverage. There was a zero increase in the self-insured employee benefits this year state wide. We have reduced costs in both health and pharmacy byabout ten million dollars with minimal disruption to our members. We are currently frnalizingwork on acaptive corporation to further increase revenues and reduce costs.

I have served on the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District Board for 23 years. The District, located onthe North Coast, provides wholesale water to seven municipalities serving 88,000 rate payers. I havebeen elected as Vice-President and President of the Board for two terms and am now serving a third termas Secretary/Treasurer. In addition to this service, I have been a Personnel Director, City Manager andCounty Administrator. In the last thirteen years, prior to retirement, I was a real estate broker and ownedRupp and Associates Realty Company. In each of these experiences I was involved in the selection andreview of insurance and health benefit programs. The organizations ranged from a county staff of threethousand to a small business of seven employees.

During my time on the District Board I have been actively engaged in ACWA and ACWA/JPIA. Iregularly attend and participate in State-wide meetings. I am serving as a Region I Board member and Iam currently Vice Chair of the ACWA Finance Committee.

If I am elected to the ACWA/JPIA Executive Committee, I recommit to continue working with ExecutiveCommittee to provide the best possible service to our member agencies.

I respectfully request your vote for me to serve another term on the Executive Committee.

Thank vou.,Ã)' i )ry"S,,.(l"fpôruce RuppSecretary/Treasurer

8.3

_+L*1

?JOHN BRUCE RUPP (BRUCE)

RETIRED SMALL BUSINESS OWNERELECTED SPECIAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMBEREUREKA, CALIFORNIA

o Director Humboldt Bay Municipal Vy'ater District for 23 years. Two termPresident of the Board.

o Retired Real Estate Broker and Business Owner.o Married 48 years: V/ife Marilyn, former Real Estate Agent and Paralegalo Family: One son, two daughters and eleven grandchildreno Career History

Five years as United States Army officer, combat veteran Vietnam; Bronze Star,

Jump Wings, Vietnamese Cross of GallantrySeven years of progressively more responsible positions in Alameda CountyGovemment, San Francisco Bay AreaTen years as City Manager, City of Alameda, CAFour years as County Administrative Officer, Humboldt County, CAThirteen years as Real Estate Broker and owner of Rupp & Associates Realty

Education: San Rafael High School, San Rafael, CASan Jose State University, BA, Public AdministrationGraduate Officers Candidate School, Defense Language Institute

Professional and Community Service Involvement:

Rotary Member for 40 years; twice Club President; Paul Harris FellowPast Chair Redwood Region Economic Development CommissionMember City of Eureka Finance Advisory CommitteeMember Humboldt County Headwaters Fund BoardChair ACWA-JPIA Employee Benefits CommitteeMember and Vice-Chair of ACWA Finance CommitteeMember of AC'WA Membership CommitteeMember of ACV/A-JPIA Executive BoardMember Eureka Elks LodgePast President, Humboldt Association of RealtorsPast Board Member League of California CitiesFormer State Governor appointment to North Coast Regional Water Control Board

o

a

8.4

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Scotts Valley Water District <[email protected]> Thursday, March 28, 2019 3:59 PMNewsletterMarch 2019 Newsletter

Water main flushing scheduled April 9-23

Scotts Valley Water District will flush water mains from April 9-23, 2019. Please

locate your home or business on the schedule below and minimize water use

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. on your flushing day.

Flushing removes sediment from pipelines to maintain water quality. Yellow to

brown discoloration may occur from dislodged sediment. Cloudy to milky

discoloration may occur from entrained air. Flushing may cause varying water

pressure. The water is safe to drink and complies with CA Department of Public

Health standards.

If your water appears discolored, then flush from a cold-water fixture as far away

from your water meter as possible and let the water run until clear. This could take

5-10 minutes.

Do not use a hot water tap to flush, as this will draw sediment into your hot

water heater. Please abstain from doing any laundry during the day of flushing

9.1

and make sure your water is clear. Taking appropriate precautions is the

customer’s responsibility. Scotts Valley Water District appreciates your

cooperation. If you have any questions, please call 438-2363 or email.

FLUSHING SCHEDULE

Tuesday, April 9: Green Hills Rd, Elzer Dr, Falcon Ridge Rd, Sunridge Dr, Oak

Creek Blvd & cross streets, Glen Canyon Rd, Flora Ln, Mount Hermon Rd, La

Madrona, Torrey Oaks Ct, La Cuesta Dr, Silverwood Dr, Saddleback Ridge, Kings

Canyon Ct, Lassen Park Ct.

Wednesday, April 10: El Pueblo Rd, Carbonero Wy, Disc Dr, Civic Center Dr,

Erba Lane, Crystal Oaks, Oak Ln, Terrace View, Scotts Valley Dr, Viki Ct, Jolly

Way, Blake Lake, Bean Creek Rd.

Thursday, April 11: Scottsborough Townhomes, Lundy Ln, Silverbirch Ln,

Whispering Pines, Bean Creek Rd, Kings Village Rd, Blue Bonnet Ln, Montevalle,

Lucinda Ln, Lockhart Gulch, Green Valley Rd.

Friday, April 12: Mount Hermon Rd, Kings Village Shopping Center, Scotts Valley

Plaza Shopping Center, Lockwood Ln, Skypark Subdivision, Lockhart Gulch at Mt

Hermon Rd.

Tuesday, April 16: Cathy Ln, MacLeod, Dunslee, Johnston Wy, Grace Wy, Willis

Rd, San Augustine, York Rd, Old El Pueblo Rd, Janis Wy, Victor Sq, Butler Ln,

Scotts Valley Dr, Cadillac Dr, Hacienda Dr, Ridgecrest Dr.

Wednesday, April 17: South Navarra, Meadow Wy, Club Ln, Cross St, Blue Hills

Ct, Sherman Dr, Sherman Ct, Granite Creek Rd, El Camino Wy, Sunset Terrace,

Enterprise Wy, Deerfield Dr, Glenwood Dr, Ponderosa Homes, Sandraya Heights,

Casa Wy, Vine Hill School Rd, Zinfandel Cir, Cabernet Ct, Bordeaux Ln, Riesling

Ct, Elderberry Ct, Scotts Valley Dr, Bethay Dr.

Thursday, April 18: Bethany Dr, Tabor Dr, Bethany Circle, Canham Rd, Sand Hill

Rd, Summerhill Rd, Northridge Dr, Shake Tree Ln, Woodlander Pl, Glenwood

Acres, Granite Creek, Bel Air, Southwood Dr, Lauren Cir, Hilltop, North Navarra Dr,

9.2

Blossom Way, Lauren Cir, Taryn Ct, Sawyer Cir, Crescent Dr, Camino Vista Rd,

Vine Hill Rd, Charles Hill Rd, Timber Ridge.

Tuesday, April 23: Areas missed during the regular schedule.

Award presented to

former Director

Former Scotts Valley Water District's

Board Member Dave Hodgin was

honored for his years of service by the

Association of California Water

Agencies (ACWA) at the March board

meeting.

Hodgin, who served four terms on the

District Board after being appointed in

2003, was the Chair or Vice Chair of

the Region 5 for the Association of

California Water Agencies for a

decade. Hodgin also represented the

District on the Board of Directors of

Students, enter this

video contest!

Calling high school and college

videographers! Enter the Save Water

video contest now for a chance to win

a cash prize. The 5th annual Save

Water Video Contest is here. Inspire

others to save water or prevent water

pollution by making a short newscast,

skit, animation, commercial or even a

music video.

The goal is to create a high-quality

video that convinces people to save

and protect water by learning more

about this year’s theme, Water Wise

9.3

the ACWA Joint Powers Insurance

Authority, an insurance pool for public

water agencies across the state.

Gardening. The contest is open to

high school and college students in

Santa Cruz and Monterey

Counties. Learn more online. The

winning films will earn $500 and be

broadcast on TV and online! Entries

are due April 17.

Facebook Website Instagram

Share Tweet Forward

Copyright © 2019 Scotts Valley Water District, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website to "Stay Connected With Us".

Our mailing address is:

Scotts Valley Water District

2 Civic Center Dr.

Scotts Valley, Ca 95066

Add us to your address book

unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences

9.4

REGULAR BOARD MEETING - Scotts Valley · ACWA JPIA Executive Committee Election Candidate Request...

Documents

Transcript of REGULAR BOARD MEETING - Scotts Valley · ACWA JPIA Executive Committee Election Candidate Request...