Post Office Box 399 • Redw ood Valley, CA 9547 0 • (707) 485-0679
AGENDA
BOARD OF D l RECTORS
Regular Meeting
Time: 6:00 p .
m .
Date: Thursday, December 18, 2014
Location : District Office , 2370 Webb Ranch Road, Redwood Valley , California .
Expected Guests :
• All items listed below are considered action items unless otherwise noted.
• The items listed below are numbered for convenience only and may not ne c essarily be heard in this order.
1. Roll Call.
2. Hear i ng of comments or questions from the attending public .
See end of Agenda for information regarding public comments .
3 . Consider hearing of urgent items rece i ved since the Agenda was posted .
See end of Agenda for information regarding the hearing of urgent items .
4 . Acceptance of Agenda.
5 . Approval of Consent Calendar . a. Financial Statement. b.-1. Bills Paid since those approved at last Meeting. b.-2. Bills Paid as approved at previous Meeting. c. Bills Payable . d . District Activity.
6. Approval of Minutes as present e d .
7 . Directors and Staff r e ports and discussion of non-action topics . a. Personnel C o mmittee Report. b. Ad Hoc/Consolidation Committee Report. c . Discussion of rates.
Agenda, Regular Meeting
Board of Directors , R.V
.
C.W
.
D .
1
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Granvi/Je Pool
Pamela Ricetti
Ken Todd
Jeff Bas iii

8. General Manager's Report and Action Items.
A. District Operations.
B. Water Supply .
C. High usage penalty charges.
D. Modification of high usage penalties.
E. Tank repair.
F . lntertie.
G. Monitoring well.
H. JPA.
I. Customer Billing issues.
J. Resolution/Approval of JPA.
9. Financial Report. a. Discussion and possible action.
10. Local Agency Formation Commission of Mendocino County- LAFCO. a. Discussion and possible action on LAFCO topics.
11 . M. C. Inland Water & Power Commission. a. Report of attendance at IW&PC Meetings. b. Consider any correspondence concerning the IW&PC. c. Discussion and possible action on IW&PC topics.
12 . Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District. a. Report of attendance at MCRRFC&WCID meetings. b. Consider any correspondence concerning the MCRRFC&WCID. c . Discussion and possible action on Flood Control District topics.
13. Sonoma County Water Agency. a. Consider any correspondence or reports concerning the Sonoma County Water Agency . b. Discussion and possible action.
14. Report of attendance at agency meetings, i.e. City of Ukiah, County Board of Supervisors, other
Special District's, County of Mendocino departments, or other entity not listed separately herein.
15. State Water Resources Control Board. a. Updates and possible action.
16. Status report of Place of Use issues. a. Updates and possible action.
Agenda, Regular Meeting
Board of Directors, R .
V.C.W
.
D.
2

17. Status report of 2800 acre-feet Storage Right. a. Updates and possible action.
18. Consider attendance at seminars, training events, conferences as received since last Meeting.
POSTED: 12/12/14
Public Comments
Comme nts will be limited to matters under this District's jurisdiction that are not on the posted agenda and items that have not been previously considered by the Board of Directors.
Comments on a matter not on the agenda are limited to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes for a particular subject.
No action will be taken. Individuals wishing to address the Board are welcome to do so throughout the Meeting.
Urgent Items
In accordance with Section 54954.2 (b)(2) of the Government Code Brown Act, Two-thirds Vote Required for Action Items. (Upon determination by a two-thirds vote of the legislative body, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, unanimous vote of those members present, that the need to take action arose after the Agenda was posted.)
ADA Compliance
The Redwood Valley County Water District complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. To assist us in better understanding your request, please notify the District Office no less than 3 working days in advance of the meeting by calling (707) 485-0679.
Agenda, Regular Meeting
Board of Directors, R.V.C.W.D.
3

CONTENTS
R.V.C.W.D.
Consent Calendar
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5
December 18,2014
REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
CONSENT CALENDAR - CONTENTS a. Financial Statements. b-1) Bills Paid during November 2014 & submitted for Board approval. b-2) Bills Paid as approved. c. Bills Payable. d. Report of District Activity.
December 18, 2014

FINANCIAL STATEMENT
CONSENT CALENDAR a.
Totals Reported are as of November 30, 2014
Unless otherwise noted
1. LIST OF BILLS PAID
(See Con s ent Calendar b-1, next page)
(See Consent Calendar b-2, next pages) b-1. During b-2. As Approved at November 20, 2014 Meeting
$109,348.23
$0
2. LIST OF BILLS ON HAND to be Paid $0 (See Consent Calendar C)
3. IRRIGATION WATER SALES
Monthly
Calendar Y-T -D
Fiscal Y-T-D
Month
11/2014
11/2014
11/2014
Sales (Billed)
$15,590.10
$188,995.47
$ 75,858.03
Sales (Billed)
Same period last vear
$ 14,207.88
$249,010.09
$155,455.90
Acre-Feet Payments Rec'd
8.31
267.36
32.32
$12,265.60
$185,960 .
60
$ 71,961.51
4. DOMESTIC WATER SALES
Monthly
Month Sales (Billed) Sales (Billed)
Same period last year
11/2014 $ 53,755.29
Calendar Y-T -D 11/2014 $626,274.64
$ 56,580.41
$773,700.92
Fiscal Y-T-0 11/2014 $286,303.64 $411,028.41
Gallons
6,234,093
Acre-Feet Payments Rec'd
19.14
77,209,854 237.58
35,561,122 109.16
11/2014 Fees Return Check Fees, Domestic
1,380.00 Late Notice Fees, Domestic
810.00 Doorhanger Fees, Domestic
300.00 Reconnect Fees, Domestic
Admin. Fees, Backflow Prevention Program, Domestic
135.00 Late Notice Fees, Irrigation
Doorhanger Fees, Irrigation
6,639 .
94 Penalties
11/2014 Total Fees Billed $ 9,264.94
$60,179.28
$729,265.67
$359,927.10
FlY-to-Date Fees Billed $122,754.39
2/2006 Inception-to-Date Total FeesBilled $313,239.34
Consent Calendar a . Financial Statement
R.V.C.W.D.
1
December 18, 2014

.
5. STATEMENT OF CHECKBOOK BALANCE
As of November 30, 2014 $254,251.14
6. STATEMEN T MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT
Account Name
Bureau of Reclamation Water Development Fund:
Current Balance
$274,335.81
33 .
82 Interest
$274,369.63
7. STATEMENT- MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT
Water Payment Account $71,550.45
8.82 Interest
$71,559.27
8. STATEMENT - Local Agency Investment Fund:
Current Balance
$720,371.52 Fund for storage of #17593 water
9. STATEMENT- MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT
Sinking Fund (Depreciation Account) $22,272.64
.92 Interest
$22,273.56
*The depreciation fund (Sinking Fund) is only accumulated monthly on the Financial Report. To date it is $646,700.00
Total of usable Balances shown above: Regular Checking Account/Checkbook Balance: $254,251.14
Bureau of Reclamation Water Development Fund: $274,369.63
Local Agency Investment Fund: $720,371.52
Money Market Water Payment Account Fund: $ 71,559.27
Money Market sinking Fund: $ 22,273.56
Less Tenant Deposits: ( 26,066.27)
Total: $1,316,758.85
Consent Calendar a. Financial Statement
R.V.C.W.D.
2 December 18, 2014

CONSENT CALENDAR b-1.
List of Bills Paid since those approved at last Meeting
& Submitted for Board Approval:
$109,248.23 General Expense
100.00 Customer Deposits
$109,348.23
NET PAYROLL: $18.508.81
PAYROLL TAXES: $6.752.18
HOLDING ACCOUNT FOR DIRECT DEPOSIT PAYROLL & TAXES: $25.260.99
1. RVCWD Payroll Account
$12,200.89
Deposit for payroll & taxes for 111414 pay date
2 . RVCWD Payroll Account
$13,060.10
Deposit for payroll & taxes for 11/28/14 pay date
ICMA Retirement Trust, Contribution, Deferred Comp. Plan, $1, 146.16, 11/14/14 Pay date
ICMA Retirement Trust, Contribution, Deferred Comp. Plan, $1, 146.16, 11/28/14 Pay date
INSURANCE: $8,509.13
1. #1 0895: State Compensation Insurance Fund
$1,241.25
Monthly Premium, December, 2014
2. #10874: ACWA/JPIA
$7,267.88
Health, Dental, Vision Premium, life, E.A.P.
GENERAL OFFICE: $333.14
1. #1 0875: Postmaster
$333.14
Postage for Domestic bills, October 2014
December 18, 2014
Consent Calendar b-1
R.V.C.W.D.
List of Bills Paid & Submitted for Board Approval
1 November 18, 2014

TRANSPORTATION: $846.42
1 . #1 0870: Valley Auto Center
$329.20
Statement 10/31/14
Alternator truck #1 , belt, fuel treatment , core return charge .
2. #1 0878: R.V. Gas Station & Country Store, LLC
$481.54
Statement 11/1/14
Fuel for District vehicles , October 2014
3. #10890: Fast Lube Plus
$35.68
Oil, fluids, 2010 Ford Ranger
COMMUNICATIONS : $167.48
1 . #1 0872: Tri-Cities Answering Service & Call Ctr, Inc.
$167.48
Answering service , November 2014
UTILITIES : $10.155.82
1 . #1 0886: Pacific Gas & Electric Company
$7 , 706.37
Booster Pump- Tomki Road, $98.38
East Road, $19.06
Master Valve@ Vault, $13.48
Water Treatment Plant, $20 .
37
Lake Mendocino Pump Station, $7,549 .
94 lntertie , $5.14
2 . #10884: Macquarie Holdings (U.S.A.) Inc.
$2,449.45
Solar power, October 2014
SPECIAL DEPARTMENT EXPENSE: $61.782.93
1 . #1 0871: Waste Management
$53 .
86
Garbage service , November 2014
2 . #1 0876: State Board of Equalizat i on
$1,000.00
Place of Use Permit , Lake Mendocino
3. #1 0877: State Board of Equalization
$433.62
Water rights filing fee, Lake Mendocino
Consent Calendar b-1
R.V.C.W.D.
List of Bills Paid & Submitted for Board Approval
2 November 18, 2014

4. #1 0879: Redwood Valley Gravel Products , Inc.
$378.56
Statement 10/31/14
Gravel for pavement patches, base for several repair jobs
5. #1 0880: B & B Industrial Supply, Inc.
$5.97
Statement 10/31/14
Tubing
6. #10873: Alpha Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
$1,082.00
Water Analysis, October 2014
7 . #1 0882: Cash
$112.96
Reimburse petty cash- notary charges, certified mail, postage
8. #1 0883: Association of California Water Agencies
$5,350.00
Membership dues, 2015
9. #1 0885: Wipf Construction
$32,352.75
Install pump system for intertie, vactor truck services for pothole and leaks
10. #1 0887: Luhdorff & Scalmanini
$5,062.35
Professional services rendered, through October 26, 2014 ( E xploratory test hole drilling, East Road)
11 . #1 0888: Minasian, Meith, Soares, Sexton, & Cooper, LLP
$130.00
Professional services rendered, 10/28/14
12 . #10889: Thrifty Supply Company
$545.43
Materials for Calpella lntertie
13. #1 0891 : Brelje & Race
$1,175.00
Professional services, Calpella intertie, October 2014
14. #10892: Performance Pump Service, Inc.
$10,410.49
Labor and parts for two centrifugal pumps and a custom duplex control panel for
Calpella transfer pump station
15 . #10893: Performance Pump Service, Inc.
$3,103.83
Labor and parts to design and prefab 2 15hp pumps, skids and 2 4" threaded eccentric reducers for Calpella intertie
Consent Calendar b-1
R.V.C.W.D.
List of Bills Paid & Submitted for Board Approval
3 November 18, 2014

16. #1 0894: Ukiah Paper Supply, Inc .
$48.61
Case of paper towels
17 . #10899: Jeanette Wise
$437.50
Prepare minutes for 10/16/14 Board Meeting and 11/5/14 Dual Board Meeting
18 . #1 0896: Customer
$100.00
Refund on tenant deposit
Consent Calendar b-1
R.V.C.W
.
D .
List of Bills Paid & Submitted for Board Approval
4 November 18, 2014

b~
LIST OF BILLS PAID: $0
(AS REVIEWED AND APPROVED at meeting of November 20, 2014)
None
None
CONSENT CALENDAR d.
District Activity, November 2014
Monthly Report of Total Water Pumped during as reported to Flood Control District 30.08 A. F.
Leaks repaired: 11/3/14 Irrigation leak repair West Road
Consent Calendar b-2
List of BILLS PAID AS APPROVED
December 18, 2014

REDWOOD VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT AND ACTION ITEMS
DECEMBER 18, 2014
AGENDA. ITEM 8
Please note: The packet this month may be less complete than usual. We are preparing for (and hoping for) a major storm Wednesday and Thursday. I normally do a final review of all materials Thursday. If the projected flooding occurs I probably will not come in but will be available by phone. We don't foresee any problems with flooding. Our one trouble spot in the past was the chemical vault at the treatment plant. That has been eliminated. The field crew is spending 12/10 inspecting all potential trouble sites and will take appropriate action if necessary.
A. District Operations. The district is operating well with no particular problems to report . We had a couple of major ag line leaks. They need to be repaired although we are not using ag water because of the hydrants on the ag lines.
B. Water Supply. We used up the 355 AF 12/8. We still have 67 AF in reserve and will be testing the intertie. We will be fine this year but need some significant rain to make it through another year. We will continue to be on restriction and not able to pump under our own ' permit until the lake level reaches 68,400 AF.
C. High usage penalty charges. Although we are not out of danger of drought, the Board should consider lifting the penalty phase of the drought pricing. I am hoping to have enough time to develop a new drought pricing schedule this winter to be better prepared for another drought .
Discuss and possibly approve lifting the penalty phase of drought pricing including an effective date.
D. Modification of high usage penalties. This is a place holder for a committee report and recommendation.
E. Tank repair. I negotiated a reduced price on the tank repair. Hopefully they will get it done soon so we can put this behind us.
F. lntertie. I am waiting for a last few invoices on the intertie project. The grant was $378,000. We will probably be over~ $10,000. All of the overage is due to higher engineering charges. WIPF,
Ukiah Construction, Ukiah Electric, and Performance Pump all did an exceptional job and came in under budget. Ernie Wipf is particularly to be thanked. He performed the role of general contractor for all the work but did not mark up the subcontractors.
G. Monitoring well. I have asked Luhdorf & Scalmanini to provide an evaluation of what more we might learn from the monitoring well regarding possible yield. They can deliver a presentation in person in February but I would prefer a written report before that. We have not yet received the

IRWM grant funding but it should come at any time. Assuming we do get enough grant money I recommend a second monitoring well on North State Street. There is some interesting geology and a line of springs that may provide more yield. However, the primary benefit may be a final determination that there is no reliable groundwater in sufficient volume in the valley. This information, combined with a recommendation from the EPA climate change study would be excellent support for a regional pipeline and water system project. We may have enough money left over in the grant to at least begin an exploratory study of pipeline costs and unified well projects with Millview and Willow. Discussion and possible direction from the board regarding a second monitoring well.
H. JPA. This is a place holder to allow the Board to appoint a representative to the JPA if the application is completed. Discuss and appoint a Board member to represent Redwood at the
JPA.
I. Customer Billing Issues. This is a place holder for customers with complaints. One customer has asked to address the board.
J. Resolution/ Approval of JPA.

f\~ · ~ j b
· j ' . .J.:,j.' "· 9401 Colony Drive
Redwood Valley CA 954 70
Redwood Valley County Water District
23 70 Webb Ranch Road
Redwood Valley CA 9547-
Dear Board Members,
I'm writing to request a reversal of a fine of some $770 levied on my property for over usage of water this fall.
I bought this property, derelict at the time, four years ago and have been steadily improving and renovating it since. The previous owner had created a fantasy garden
(there is a "canal") installing system over system of water pipes for both well and District water , along with layers of electrical wiring . Needless to say, my renovation project has been slow going, often mystifying, and extremely expensive. I have done my best to unravel these labyrinthine systems and to finally make the house livable. I moved in more or less full time this spring when I cut back on work in the Bay Area.
Naturally on a property like this we are constantly having work done. In rewiring the barn the electrical crew dug into and destroyed another circuit that nobody knew was there. Several crews, one hired by PG&E, have been on the property to cut down a dozen or so dead trees during the drought. One, maybe more of these crews, drove a rig over an embankment and, unbeknownst to me, broke a pipe that turned out to be connected to the district system.
A friend who was staying on the property found a muddy area at the bottom of the embankment, dug back a little, and found the culprit broken pipe. I was on vacation at the time. I have no idea .how long this leak went on. But some weeks later, when I got home, I found the bill with the fine, a hefty water bill, and an advisory that I needed a new back flow valve.
I feel the fme was incurred through circumstances outside of my control; all the more ironic because we regularly recycle gray water and limit showers. Furthermore, I live mostly on Social Security and the occasional free lance assignment, so I'll probably be in assisted living before I can pay it off. I can't see that anyone is well served in this situation. I hope you will agree and cancel it.
Sincerely,
Patricia Roberto

Operating Revenu$s ! '~~~£ ;,
1 280 Domestic Payments f r om Water Sales
1 260 Irrigation Payments from Water Sales
4305 Late No t ices (Domest i c)
4310 Doorhanger Fees (Domest i c)
4315 Admin F ees (Domestic ) Backflow / Annual
4320 Return Check Fees
4330 Meter Fees (Domestic) 1 336 x $20 .
00 v
4330 Meter Fees (Domestic) (2") 9x$40 .
00
4331 Meter Fees ( I rrigat i on) 2" 102 x $35 .
00
4331 Meter Fees ( I rrigation) 4",6" 94 x $55 .
00
4335 Re-connect Fees (Domestic)
4340 Late Notices (Irrigation )
4345 Doorhanger Fees (Irrigation)
4355 Ir r igation Re-connect Fees
Lien Fees
4360 Safe Drinking Water Bond Surcharge
4365 Domestic Penalties Fees for Overage
1;otal Operating , RevE(nues ·. ~.~!~
+
4500 Property Tax Revenue
,'8.~\1:;;;;
·
' ''c;~i' Xi'
1520 FEMA Reimbursement O.E
.
S .
1000 Interest Income Checking Account
1180 Interest Income Payroll Account
1110 Water Payment Money Market Account
1120 Interest Income Bureau Reclamation Account
1120 SC I F Dividend
1160 Interest (Quarterly) LA I F Account
1190 Interest Sinking Fund (Depreciation acct)
1 530 Reimburse from JP I A/surge tank overf l ow
5500 Cal Card Incentive check
5561 ACWA/JP I A Property Program RPA Refund
Total Income Operating & Non-Operating
Op~r!ltiruJ ~penses
¥ox
'IL r. ""4' ;~r;, '!~~,~~';''' /{
Customer Accounts
Operating Supplies
2200 Customer Deposit Other
2240 Tenant Deposits/Refunds
2260 Owners Deposits/Refunds
5400 Customers Accounts
5420 Operating Supplies Cus t ome r Accts .
Redwood Valley County Water District
Financial Report
Revenue/Expenses/Capital FY 2013- 2014
Agenda Item. 9 December 18, 2014
' :;''* July ~ 14 i!M:I August-14 September·14
43 , 519.42 33,389 .
75 44,474 .
12
3 , 332 .
10
1065 .
00
5 , 339.49
1290.00
600 .
00
9,168 .
51
1260 .
00
540 .
00
550.00
25 .
00
26 , 720 .
00
360 .
00
3570 .
00
5170 .
00
400 .
00
360 .
00
25.00
26,720.00
360.00
3570 .
00
5170.00
250 .
00
240 .
00
25.00
26720 .
00
360.00
3570.00
5170.00
300.00
240.00
266.40
-580 .
79
84,757.13
25 .
07
0.26
9.11
34 .
30
396 .
86
0 .
95
85,223.68
136 .
58
25 .
16
266.40
14 , 836.35
92,056.99
1,796 .
98
2 , 015.99
18.59
0.27
9 .
11
34 .
60
0 .
95
. 95,933.48
136.45
37 .
62
266.40
6,366.46
98,460.49
18.19
0.29
8 .
82
33 .
71
1 , 184 .
11
0.92
99,706.53
48 .
10
25.00
,, October-14
33,574 .
60
5 , 770 .
81
1 , 335 .
00
570 .
00
250 .
00
25 .
00
26,720 .
00
360 .
00
3 , 570 .
00
5,170 .
00
250 .
00
285.00
November-14
23 , 702.94
3 , 390 .
60
1380 .
00
810 .
00
26,720.00
360.00
3570.00
5170.00
300.00
135 .
00
December-14
266.40
6 , 020 .
31
84,167 .
12
16.79
0 .
30
9 .
11
34 .
95
438 .
66
0 .
95
84,667.88
36 .
05
266.40
6,639.94
72444.88
11.31
0.27
8 .
82
33.82
0 .
92
72,500.02
100 .
00
Page 1

j
Customer Accounts Cont'd I'
' '
5430 Backflow Prevention Tes t s & Devices
~umping ,,.
}
1 530 Surge Tank Overflow/Mitigation
: ~
5118 Operating Supp l ies
5120 Power (Master Valve)
5120 Power (Lake Pump Station)
5130 Repairs & Maintenance
Water Treatment
''' lll"'
'''),@, 0c;;~~
5200 Other
5220 Mechan i cal (pumps , pipes , fittings etc)
5221 Electrical
5222 Lab Supplies
5223 Ach
5224 Chlorine
5225 Potassium Permanganate
5226 Zinc Orthophosphate
({
A
5228 Alum
5230 Power Costs
5235 Solar Power
5236 Solar Powe r Repair Project
5240 Repai r s & Maintenance
5250 Water Analysis
Transmission & Distribution ~
5320 Operating Supplies
' ,;;.~; f
5330 Power (Tomki Road)
5330 Power (East Road)
5335 PG&E lntertie
5340 Domest i c Main Repair
5341 Irrigation Main Repair
5342 Repair & Maintenance Dom . Svcs.
5343 Transmission Main
5344 Repair & Maintenance I rrigation Svcs .
5346 Repair & Maintenance Other
5350 Telemetering
5355 New Installation Costs
5365 Tank Ma i ntenance
~Jneral & Admiostrative i:jH
5575 ICMA ( e mployer)
2180 Payroll Taxes (employers sha r e)
"' ~"',
,,
.
we~
Redwood Valley County Water District
Financial Report
'
Revenue/Expenses/Capital FY 2013-2014
Agenda Item. 9 December 18, 2014
" JuJy .
14
August ~ 14
September·14
1 , 365 .
0 0 2 , 004 .
00 484 .
50
16 .
54
8 1 30 .
39
2043 .
79
1 9 .
71
2 , 801.41
2,410 .
59
2 , 180 .
59
84 .
21
19 .
71
1 , 60 7 .40
508.44
12 .
36
1 , 146 .1
6
2 , 063.48
20 .
06
8090 .
60
61 .
33
21 .
03
3 , 198.91
5 , 749 .
97
672.00
79 .
05
19 .
71
1 , 614 .
3 1
1,504 .
68
3,879 .
34
1,146 .
1 6
2 , 082 .
0 1
16 .
97
7 , 954 .
91
1 , 965 .
17
19 .
71
3,226 .
70
3 , 734 .
53
702 .
00
83 .
40
2 1.
03
3 , 392 .
34
653.48
1,146 .
16
2 , 022 .
22
Page2
October·14
''
228 .
0 0
Novemb~r 4 4 Decernper l'> 14
15.80
7 , 307.57
5 , 839 .
20
19 .
05
2 , 867 .
79
1 , 340.95
1 , 307 .
00
85.35
19 .
06
130.86
4 , 32 0 .
71
1 , 719.24
2 , 863.40
13.48
7 , 549.94
102 .
27
20 .
37
2,449.45
168.86
1082.00
9 8.
38
19 .
06
5.14
96 6 .
75
792 .
78
1 , 146.1
6
1 , 988 .
2 7

Gel')eral & Administrative Continued v" , , ··
5500 District Elections Costs
5500 Board Meetings/ Minutes/Recording Secretary
5500 Board Stipends
5500 LAFCO (RV share of 20011-2012 Budget
5500 Miscellaneous
5500 ACWA/JPIA Ins. Check/Surge tank overflow
5510 Payroll (net all employees)
5510 .
1 Payroll Willow W.D.
5520 Bank Service Charges
5522 Return Checks
5523 Return Check Bank Fee
5540 Dues, Fees , Subcriptions
5550 Equipment Rental/Copier/Maintenance
5560 Health Insurance
5560.1 Willow Employee Health Insurance
5561 Property Prog r am
5562 Auto Insurance & General Liability
5564 State Comp. I nsurance
5565 Field Uniforms
5572 Loan Interest Expense
5580 License & Permits/CDPH
5 590 Text Book & Training
5 595 Employment Advertising
5 600 Office Supplies
5605 Operating Supplies
5610 Postage
5620 Printing
5630 Website Fees
5631 Legislative Consultant
5632 Professional Fees Acct./Payroll Maste r s
5633 Core B i lling/Badger Service Contracts
5634 Professional Fees Audit
5636 Professional Fees Legal
5638 Professional Fees Engineering
5639 Eng i neering/School Way Bridge
5640 Repairs & Maintenance Other
5642 Repairs & Maintenance Bui l ding
5644 Repairs/Computer EquipmenUSatellite
: ··
Redwood Valley County Water District
Financial Report
Revenue/Expenses/Capital FY 2013- 2014
Agenda Item. 9 December 18, 2014
<:1 .,.,
JuJg-14
August-14 September ~ 14
550 .
00 28 7.
50
, October-14
275 .
00
November 14
43 7 .
50
December 14
18 , 388 .
69
215 .
70
14.00
152.94
298.51
5 , 108.67
18 , 522.28
10 ,
36.00
7
267
023
.
.
.
00
85
78
18,665 .
23 26 , 558 .
84
150.25
7.00
639 .
00 (CRWA)
7,217 .
04
75.00
7.00
207 .
72
7 , 217.04
1,839
1 ,
243.32
517
659
160
456
.
.
.
.
.
60
18
84
08
17
1 , 241 .
25
106.75
91.18
16.34
570.49
167.58
920.44
1,241 .
25
343 .
59
4 , 323.13
60 .
00
54 .
62
965.09
167 .
58
13 , 546 .
00
1 , 24 1 .25
228.32
162.25
7 9 .
78
332.56
160.08
99 .
95
243 .
89
99.95 99.95
75 .
38
389.08
Page 3
18 , 508 .
8 1
5 , 350 .
00
61 .
09
6 , 767 .
88
2,482 .
50 ( 2 m onths )
300.00
180 .
93
333 .
14
5 , 000 .
00
130 .
00
199.90

General & Adrili'nistration continued ' &fi
5646 Repairs Eq u ipment
5650 S m all Tools & Equipment
5652 Safe t y Equipment
5670 Bus i ness Lunch
5674 Trave l Expense Board/Recordi n g Secretary / Staff
5680 Ga r bage/Pest Control
5685 Sec u rity Fees
1020 Petty Cash
4ommunications at,
"t it~i
1.
5660 Answering Svc/Tr i Cities
5660 Pacific Internet
5660 !
SAN , AT&T
Vehicle ., f C¥
~:
,, 'i·
5690 Fuel
5695 Ma i ntenance
'11
5696 New Vehicle Payments
Total Expenses (Opera ti ng)
Water . System Fee~ ·
' ill%•·
~'~
1620 County Clerk Recorder/filing/place of use iNi
,, 1·'':
":.?ik
!'• v• w.
. :: ,; _. · ( pi P '"' ,i\1
1720 SWRCB Water Rights Fi l ing Fees
2800 State Dept. of Water Resources
Dep t. of Transportation Encroachment Permit
4 500 M .
C. Property Tax Admin . Svc . Fee
~CIW&PC Annual Fee
1730 Dam Feasibil i ty Study
1664 Wa t ershed Sani t ary Survey
50 0 0 MCRRFCD Water Purchases
5000 SCWA Water Purchases
State Board Equalizatio n (Mill Creek)
1668 State Board Equalization (West Fork)
State Board Equalizatio n (Lake Mendoc i no)
State Boa r d Equa l ization Place of use Lk Mendocino Diversion
Capital Expenses . "' ·
$'!'
..
· ,
1640 West Fork
1 821 .
1 Pumpi n g Plant B u i l ding & Improvement
1 82 1 .
2 P ressu r e F i lters
1 821 .
3 Production Pumps
Redwood Valley County Water District
Financial Report
Revenue/Expenses/Capital FY 20132014
Agenda Item. 9 December 18, 2014
J41y-14 ,, "' August-14 September~f4
728.35 31 1 .
31
59 .
14
565 .
26
70.56
63.21
52.95
78.40
53.86
52.95 hF
October~14
18 .
01
133.86
105.90 (2 months)
67 .
20
53 .
86
· Novem~er-14
15 .
58
75
53
.
.
04
86
52.95
December-14
253 .
96
105 .
00
161 .
60
1094.45
122 .
06
59 , 329.47
208 .
12
173.41
793 .
68
931.98
144.72
171 .
77
952.42
965 .
00
1027.65
209 .
84
105 .
00
385 .
26
782 .
24
603 .
93
298 .
44 (2 months)
1,188.70
870.08
1433.62
Page4

Redwood Valley County Water District
Financial Report
Revenue/Expenses/Capital FY 2013- 2014
Agenda Item NO.9 December 18, 2014
Capital Expenses coptinued
1 821 .4 Clarifiers
1 821 .
5 WTP Road Maintenance Project
1 82 1 .
6 Backwash Ret u rn Pump
1 822 .
3 C l ar i f i e r S l udge Valve Project
1822 .
5 Potassium Feed
1822 .
9 WTP Upgrade
1824 Radio Reads-Meters
1830 Ground Water Study
1831 Pond Research
1833 Water Reliabil i ty
; " ' ' ",~
1850 Conservation
1856 Scada Upgrades
1858 School Way Bridge Project
1859 B&R lntertie Ca l pe ll a-Millv i ew/Wip f /Laco/Ukiah Con
1859 .
5 lnter i tie- Ukiah Const r uction-Pace Supply
Total Expenses (Capital & Operating)
R.H.& Son Backflow tests (reiumburse by customers)
Return checks and bank fees (reimburse by customers)
Safe Drinking Water Bond (reimbursed by customers)
Minus FEMA Project Expense
Conservation Fund (To be reimbursed)
Total Expenses excluding projects to be reimbursed
Projected Water Purchases
Total Expenses+ Projected Water Purhases
5700 Depreciation Expense
Total Expenses+ Depreciation Expense
Calendar Year Total Income
Calendar Year Total Expense
Calendar Year Net Income
FN Total Income
FN Total Expense
FN Net Income
Net Income Adjs. for reimbursements (grant)
FN Net I ncome
July-14 ";; Al.utust-14 September-14
840 .
00
8 , 876.00 4,436.43 13,432 .
28
10 , 950.00 (Solomon Electric)
134 , 866.30 27 , 806.81
271,240.08
-1 , 365.00
-229.70
98,088.10
-2,004 .
00
-43.00
17 , 128 .
75
94,345.06
-484.50
-157 .
25
, i¥,.
pctober: ~ 14
;1 ' November -' 14
6,180 .
98
61,924 .
18
10 , 500 .
00
60,473 .
80
7,484 .
78
227,444.41
-228 .
00
-82 .
00
5062.35
32 , 152 .
75
14,059.75
111,517.78
December-14
269,645.38
2 , 073 .
29
271,718.67
22 , 300.00
294,018.67
96,041.10
2,848.79
98889.89
22300 .
00
121189.89
93,703.31
1,207.90
94,911.21
22,300 .
00
117,211.21
227,134.41
2,001 .
03
229,135 .
44
22,300 .
00
251,435.44
111,517.78
1,767 .
20
113,284.98
22,300.00
135,584.98
935 , 538 .
34
-1,514 , 740 .
58
-579,202 .
24
· ; ~ " ''," ~
~
,.t• . ;y jR b:l~::
I '
1
' · " 'r -\;,,_1 " .
438 , 031 .
59
-919 , 440.
1 9 •rnclude~ ' proJected water purchases+ Depreciation Expense from July 2014 ,,
-481 , 408.60
1 43 , 742 .
30
-337,666.30
,,
Page 5

Redwood Valley County Water District
2370 Webb Ranch Road
Redwood Valley, CA 95470
(707) 485-0679
Redwood Valley County Water District and Russian River Flood Control District Boards of Directors - Dual Board Meeting
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
RVCWD Directors Present: Granville Pool, Ken Todd, JeffBasili, Pamela Ricetti
RVCWD Staff Present: General Manager Bill Koehler
RRFCD Directors Present: Paul Zellman, Richard Shoemaker, Alfred White, Lee
Howard
RRFCD Directors Absent: Judy Hatch
RRFCD StaffPresent: General Manager Sean White
Call To Order : 4:00P.M.
1. Roll Call for RRFC
Paul Zellman, President
Richard Shoemaker, Vice President
Alfred White, Treasurer
Lee Howard, Trustee
Roll Call for RVCWD
Granville Pool, President
Pam Ricetti, Director
Ken Todd, Director
Jeff Basili, Director
2 . Hearing of Comments or Questions from the Attending Public
None.
3. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding the Dissolution/Annexation of
RVCWDIRRFCD.
There are eight topics that will be discussed tonight as listed on the agenda along with the
RRFCD memorandum of understanding with RVCWD that has expired. The final item is the Request for Proposal (RFP) to develop a plan for services from outside vendors. One response has been received and she is listening in on Trustee Shoemaker's phone.
1

Trustee White would like to know if the RRFCD Board is still committed to the D/ A since some time has passed since it was first voted for. He, for one, is stilllOO% for it.
Trustee Zellman doesn't see how this question is part of either public expression or the first item on the agenda. Trustees Shoemaker, Howard, and White all chime in on the order of the agenda. It is noted that the RVCWD agenda has a few extra procedural items thanRRFCD.
Motion: Accept the Agenda
Motion by Dir Todd, Second by Dir Basili
In favor: unanimous
Trustee Zellman continues with introducing the items as what GM Koehler presented to the RVCWD about a month ago and was passed along to RRFCD . Those items are read and introduced.
1. Firm Access to Water Supply
Following D/A, will Redwood Valley have the same access to water as the other water systems? Trustee Shoemaker says that he and Trustee Zellman have talked about the document and he wrote down responses to the items presented at the previous RVCWD meeting and while these are only his views, they may be adopted. He clarifies that
Redwood Valley will have a firm contract like the other RRFCD customers. GM Koehler says that previous statements have been made to indicate a contract would not lift the moratorium to which Trustee Shoemaker replies that it may be due to circumstances beyond the scope of a contract. GM White clarifies that if some entities who have thought about dropping their contracts do so (like the City of Ukiah), than there would be enough water to lift the moratorium.
Dir Ricetti asks ifRVCWD is only annexed into RRFCD, would they be able to contract with them. GM White says they can. Trustee Shoemaker clarifies that a firm water contract and lifting the moratorium are two separate issues. GM White says that
Redwood Valley's water right would be just as good as any other in the valley, but they can't make water out of nothing if Lake Mendocino is dry. GM White says there will probably be enough water immediately to serve all RVCWD customers, but not to lift the moratorium right away. But the D/A would have given guaranteed water in a year like this.
Trustee Shoemaker asks a procedural question about how we go about accepting answers to these questions. Do we vote on them or what? He asks if the answer to the water right question has been adequately presented. GM White says that these would go into the Plan for Services and that would go to approval with LAFCO. Trustee Shoemaker says that his written answers can be considered a start. He adds that the new entity would work toward the good of all of its members, including the lifting ofthe moratorium. GM White reminds that this one action [the D/ A] will not solve 50 years of supply problems , but it will be an incremental step in that direction.
2

Trustee Howard asks what this new entity will look like and who'll be calling the shots.
He is reprimanded by Trustee Shoemaker for not staying on the agenda. He continues with his question of what Redwood Valley is looking for and Dir Pool answers that they are looking at the options of an annexation or a contract with RRFCD. Trustee Zellman says that they voted on options a long time ago and annexation was decided upon as the best option, mostly because of high costs for the others. Discussion ensues about whether or not there was a vote and what it was. Trustee Zellman contends that they did vote and that annexation was the chosen route.
Dir Ricetti asks GM White about the status of the City of Ukiah's water right. He says they buy 800 acre feet every year and they discuss internally if they should do. They do have a right to water outside of RRFCD so they have discussed giving up the RRFCD contract.
Trustee Howard asks how RVCWD would expect things to be different with RRFCD.
Also, the Board could be made up entirely ofRedwood Valley residents who could then give themselves any contract they wanted. He is once again told they will discuss that later in the meeting. He then clarifies what they said earlier that RRFCD could give a contract by taking the water from somebody else. He says that the fact they don't have enough water right now to supply Redwood Valley means they will have to take it from other customers and that has changed his way of thinking on this proposed D/ A. Also, adding Redwood Valley would go further toward using all of RRFCD's 8,000 af and it could someday lead to nobody in the district being able to expand. He reiterates that five
Redwood Valley residents sitting on the board would have the ability to take it all for
RV. GM White counters that it could already work that way, in theory, with Millview or
Ukiah. Trustee Howard says that it couldn't because they aren't part ofRRFCD, but GM
White says that is an inaccurate statement. Also, there are limitations due to zone of use and beneficial use. Also, RRFCD is maxed out on Ag water. Trustee Howard says that this is another reason the D/A is a negative thing because right now, RRFCD could petition for more Ag water but only because right now there is a surplus of water (that is currently being sold to RVCWD). GM Koehler brings up that the in the event of aD/A,
Redwood Ag customers wouldn't be able to get water. GM White says that their limit is only for their area, which does not include Redwood Valley. Also, trying to change the place of use would take decades at best.
Dir Ricetti asks about where recycled water would go when/if that system gets up and running. It would go wherever there's need and is not part ofRRFCD's allotment. He continues that Redwood needs to look at this like a water portfolio with a little water here and a little water there.
2. Moratorium
GM Koehler introduces this as more than just trying for growth in Redwood Valley as there is pending legal action from people who have been paying a meter deposit for years without getting a meter connection. So right now, if Redwood asks for 5,000 af, they won't get it because RRFCD doesn't have that much to give. Trustee Zellman agrees.
3

Someone asks about the contract and GM White says they can be viewed on the website.
Someone else asks about the other contracts and GM White says that all the contracts are up for renewal since they were all terminated. They have a few years to sign the new contract.
GM Koehler brings up a hypothetical situation in which one of those people that has reserved a meter for years and has not received on files a lawsuit, who deals with that lawsuit? Trustee Shoemaker suggests that it would be on the zone of benefit [Redwood
Valley] . Dir Ricetti asks, ifRVCWD is no more, how can anybody sue it? Trustee
Shoemaker says that that's a legal question about the zone of benefit that needs to be figured out. Dir Pool clarifies that if that happens, the cost of that lawsuit would be added to the rates of the consumers in the zone of benefit, but any rate change needs to go through the Prop 18 protest process. GM White again says how Redwood Valley would be like every other contract ofRRFCD. Trustee Howard disagrees and says that if someone wanted to sue Redwood Valley, they would sue the parent entity, namely
RRFCD, but then they would pass that cost along to the zone of benefit, namely
Redwood Valley customers. He has been told variably that this can be done and that it cannot be done. One way, it works out, but the other way is very unfair.
GM White says this kind ofleads to the next agenda item and asks DWR representative,
Joy. She says she's not very familiar with the water code and mostly works with Title 22 issues. She says the new entity would be permitted as a public water system and, when pushed, that the license wouldn't be hard to obtain. GM White clarifies that no personnel at the plant would change. She said an answer could be given within 30 days.
GM Koehler brings up a question about which section of the Water Code this new district would operate under. RRFCD is an offshoot of Mendocino County Water Agency and is therefore operating under that section of water conservation districts. GM Koehler reads that section which gives RRFCD the power to distribute water.
3. Assets and Liabilities
We're still waiting on the Bureau ofReclamation about RVCWD's debt. Trustee
Shoemaker again comes to the zone of benefit and that's where the liabilities stay. Dir
Pool asks about the assets and GM White says they will stay with the zone of benefit as well. RVCWD can store 2,800 aflegally, but doesn't have facilities to do so. Some questions come up about water rights and GM White makes it very clear that Redwood
Valley would keep its water right and would contract with RRFCD for any extra that it requires. Trustee Howard again brings up the lack of clarification of what the new entity would look like and what powers it wou l d have.
GM Koehler brings up the ad valorem tax. The tax for Redwood Valley should stay in
RV, but it has been said before that it would go to the overall organization. GM White said the attorney said it would stay with the property. Tony Shaw adds that the new
Board would be able to allocate monies the way it wants to.
4. Water Code
4

It is agreed that this has been discussed in detail already.
5. Staffing
Trustee Shoemaker mentions some previously mentioned retirement. GM White says that they are PERS and that the new entity would have to be PERS. It's not cost-effective for
GM Koehler and Paula to switch over, but they can remain as contract employees. The issue of contribution matching comes up to which Trustee Shoemaker asserts that they match a higher amount than RVCWD does currently. Some more discussion ensues about what the levels are called.
6. Contract Issues
GM Koehler says he is frequently asked, "If Redwood ceases to exist and are now part of
Flood Control, why would Redwood need a contract with itself?" Trustee Shoemaker says "Because Daddy said so." He then elaborates it's because that's the way they do it.
GM White adds that it will help know the allocations to different customers. It also helps the recordkeeping and satisfies regulatory agencies. Dir Pool makes a point that under the new way of paying for water whether or not they use it, a new rate structure will have to be developed, particularly for the Ag users. GM Koehler says to assume that there will be a contract between North-of-20 and Flood Control, who signs said contract? Trustee
Howard says that the devil is in the detail of this. He then goes back to talking about how
Ag and domestic water is different and should be treated differently. Ag is pretty simple to figure out costs, but with the domestic side, there are many more considerations when setting a cost structure. Dir Todd proposes a system where everyone who 'orders' water pays the cost to RRFCD and then at the end of the year they look at the individual meters and pay the RVCWD rate on the water they actually used minus the RRFCD cost. GM
White thinks the best course is to turn this over to an entity that specializes in analyzing usages and needs and setting rates. An audience member speaks up to say that he's hearing a lot of complexity in this D/ A process and is wondering what's in it for RRFCD and why they can't just give a contract? The loud response is that they can't because
RVCWD is not part of their district. Trustee Howard disagrees . The audience member then asks what's in it for RRFCD?
Trustee Howard says there is absolutely nothing in it for RRFCD. The negatives far outweigh the positives and there's no way to do it except to just do it and "to hell and be damned with whatever falls in the way." You'll be doing away with long-term reliability in the district, you change the way the long-term debt will be handled, and you wouldn't be able to petition for more Ag water. How will they decide when domestic takes precedent over Ag users?
Trustee Shoemaker talks about property values going down in Redwood Valley which drags down property value in Ukiah [unsubstantiated] and that keeps businesses from wanting to come to Ukiah. He paints a picture of a brown, desolate Redwood Valley which would reflect poorly on Ukiah. Also, a bigger district would have more a voice in
Sacrament and Sonoma County.
Trustee White mostly agrees with what Trustee Shoemaker says.
5

Trustee Zellman is looking to use all ofRRFCD's 8,000 afto show to the State that it is being used. Trustee Howard says that contracting the surplus to RVCWD counts as beneficial use to which Trustee Zellman counters that it's not the same as having a steady contract every year. Trustee Howard reiterates that it counts and Trustee Zellman says that this will be a better way of accounting for it.
Joy Williams asks why they can't just annex RVCWD into RRFCD without the dissolution ofRVCWD. Trustee Shoemaker says that it's much more expensi v e. GM
White says there are three different scenarios for Redwood to get more water: a contract for surplus water, annexed and have a contract like everyone else, or the annexation/dissolution. There is no minimum contract amount.
Tony Shaw reads a letter from John Mayfield, Chairman of the Employers Council of
Mendocino County to Chairman Zellman. The letter is included with these minutes. The main point of the letter is asking about the benefits to the constituents in the event of the
D/A .
Trustee Zellman backs up to the options stated by GM White. The first option of a surplus contract is what they have been doing and doesn't fit the needs of Redwood
Valley. There are some questions about the second options, mostly about regulatory agencies and how they will treat it. GM White adds that having a bunch of small districts is not the best thing for Mendocino County. Once one water district goes through the D/A process, he's hoping more will follow . Even with all the districts put together, they would still be small in the overall scheme of things and he feels that we're all hurt by squabbling between districts.
An audience member speaks up to say that he cannot see enough Redwood Valley people voting in enough Redwood Valley Board members to make any difference on the Board.
Dir Pool agrees that it's pretty slim. Tony Shaw speaks up about how many studies have been done by other agencies that would satisfy SCW A.
7. Plan for Services
Talk moves to the annexations ofRVCWD (reservations and such). They are areas that are not part ofRVCWD but are within their service area. They use about 75-100 afper year. GM White asks if he thinks the new well will produce that much water. GM
Koehler says he'd rather use the word 'hope' and GM White says "Well that's how you deal with it." If the well doesn't, file for a change in place of use. Dir Pool says they applied for that years ago and it's still sitting in Sacramento. GM Koehler asks the
RRFCD if they are willing to continue serving those areas in the event of a D/ A to which
Trustee Shoemaker replies that he can't see just shutting them off. GM Koehler then asks what they'll do when they receive a cease-and-desist order telling them to tum offthe reservation because it's not in their zone ofuse? A lot of people laugh and nobody answers. They finally say they would continue to serve those areas (even though it's technically illegal).
8. Options
6

GM Koehler mentions that under the stipulated judgment by the Superior Court,
Redwood and RRFCD shall put forward all effort to form a JP A or pursue a pool agreement. Would RRFCD be willing to pursue a JP A? Trustee Howard says that the
JPA would be with other counties like Sonoma and Marin. GM Koehler says that those counties are allowed to join, not that they must join. Trustee Shoemaker says he would not want to. GM Koehler says that the judgment says "shall" and Trustee Shoemaker says
"Sue me. Take me to jail. I'll serve the , reservation, but I won't do that." He then continues to talk about how terrible JP As are. GM Koehler asks if Trustee Shoemaker's statement represents the RRFCD Board and Trustee Zellman says they haven't voted on it and won't tonight. Trustee Shoemaker expresses disbelief that they would ever want to form a JP A with RVCWD because "we have all the toys, we have all the cards .... what do you have to give us in a JPA?"
Trustee White says he would like to vote and have in writing what the goal is, namely that they are working toward a D/ A and not thinking about other options. Otherwise, they will keep talking around issues without a unified goal in mind.
GM Koehler talks about two agencies that made it through a successful D/ A process and has been a model for this process. There is more talk about the wording of the agreement.
Somebody mentions the Bureau ofReclamation and GM White says they have people working on getting ahold of them and getting some answers about the debt. Tony Shaw speaks up to say that Mendocino County has a legislative program that gets the Board of
Supervisors involved since they have a stronger voice in politics.
Dir Ricetti proposes to do the annexation now to get a firm contract with RRFCD and then work on the dissolution later since that process takes much longer. Trustee Zellman mentions that there isn't much in it for them to do that. Someone asks to describe what annexation would look like and GM White answers that it would combine the footprints ofRRFCD and RVCWD. Then RVCWD would be entitled to the same level of service as other county water districts within RRFCD. The main difference is that there would still be two Boards and there would be no benefits of having a larger entity. Trustee
Shoemaker thinks the current district voters would protest such a move.
Trustee Zellman comes back to the Memorandum of Agreement with the change suggested by Trustee White. The change to the MoA is "The goal is to create a combined entity either through annexation or annexation/dissolution." Trustee Howard agrees to that being a defined goal. Trustee White agrees as well. So does Trustee Zellman.
GM Koehler points out that in the stipulated judgment, it states that RVCWD cannot become a part of Mendocino, which means that a D/ A can't happen.
Motion: Accept the rev i sion to the MoA and renew the timeframe
Motion by Dir Todd, second by Dir Basili
In favor: unanimous
7

Trustee Zellman mentions that there has been one response from a company to work through the LAFCO process. Also, it needs to be done before Christmas before there are overage charges. Talk ensues about what kind of monetary cap to put on the consultant.
Motion: Enter into the contract with the consultant with the changes as stated and make recommendations to further action
Motion by Trustee Shoemaker, second by Trustee White
In favor: Trustees Shoemaker, White, Zellman
Opposed: Trustee Howard
Absent: Trustee Hatch
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Todd
In favor : unanimous
Trustee Shoemaker wants to know how long it will take to get the answers given tonight back on one paper to get worked out legally. Some answers will come from the consultant mentioned above and some will come from Joy.
Motion to adjourn
In favor: unanimous
Meeting adjourned at 6:50pm.
Minutes submitted by Jeanette Wise
Approved:
Date Approved:
Signed:
Board of Directors
8

L,UUN I · Y J MCH
November 5, 2014 · .
Mr. Paul Zellman,
Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement District (District)
151 Laws Avenue, SuiteD
U1ciah
CA._ 95482 .
Dear Chairman Zellman:
The Employers Council or" Mendocino County is following with heightened interest the ongoing effort to consider the dissolution/ annexation of the Redwood Valley County Water District into the
Russian River Flood Control
&
Water Conservation Improvement District (District).
The ECMC is gravely concerned about an apparent lack of communication about this effort frorr the District Board of.Trustees to District constituents . Has the District Trustees reached out k eer their constituents informed of this process? Other than the requirement to post . an agenda
.
.
. ir advance of meetings of the District Board ofTrustees, what is the District's
plan tc incre
ase the awareness of its constituents the opportunity to participate, ask questions and addres : concerns?
A prime question to answer immediately is what is the real benefit of annexation/dissolution t o tht
District and its constituents?
Please send your response to ~he ECMC email at ECMC@pacific.net Thank you for y ou r tim , and attention to this matter_
Sincerely,
EMPLOYERS COUNCIL OF ~l\TDOCrno COUN1Y

Redwood Valley County Water District
2370 Webb Ranch Road
Redwood Valley, CA 95470
(707) 485-0679
Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Directors Present: Granville Pool, Ken Todd, JeffBasili
Directors Absent: Pamela Ricetti
Staff Present: General Manager Bill Koehler
Call To Order: 6:00P.M.
1. Roll Call
Granville Pool, President
Pamela Ricetti, Director
Ken Todd, Director
JeffBasili, Director
2. Hearing of Comments or Questions from the Attending Public
An audience member wants to speak about her having a recent water leak. She is informed that water leaks are an agenda item. GM Koehler recommends moving the leaks up in the agenda.
3. Consider Hearing of Urgent Items Received Since the Agenda Was Posted
None.
4. Acceptance of Agenda
Motion: Accept the agenda with customer complaints moved forward
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Basili
In favor: Unanimous
Jump to Agenda Item 8.a. Customer Leak
*Note: names have been omitted*
There are two customers with a problem and while only one is present , they both have the same problem. These problems arise when we have a customer who is normally very frugal and has a leak resulting in a high water charge as well as the drought penalties associated with the overage. The customer states her case that they have been very careful with water usage and when they discovered the leak, they fixed it within hours.
She continues that the penalty is there to punish abuse or carelessness and shouldn't apply to these cases. Dir Ricetti refers the question to GM Koehler who says he told them what he's said to previous cases such as this where the extra water pushes them into the higher
1

usage tier, but that hasn't touched the penalty. Dir Pool thinks he remembers them talking about not invoking the penalty for the first month or something along those lines (he'd have to refer to the old meeting minutes). The customer says she still thinks the penalty shouldn't apply to her situation. She has no problem paying the usage fee. Her last bill was about $31 and this one is about $2,000. GM Koehler says that the issue is ifthe
Board wants to change the policy and if so, how to work with people who have already gone through this and had to pay the drought penalty. The Board debates who to reimburse and fme, and how to tell the difference. It will probably depend on previous month's usage to determine if the overage is from carelessness/disregard or just an unexpected leak. Dir Ricetti says this is a tough problem because it is the job of the customer to keep an eye on their plumbing and watch their meter during the month to see if they have a problem. There's also the problem of figuring out a way to reimburse those people who have paid overage charges in the near past. Dir Pool asks GM Koehler how difficult it would be to sort this all out, including the people who have already paid. He says it would probably take a couple of days. Dir Ricetti asks how they would know who to reimburse. GM Koehler says they would just have to look for people who have normally low usage and then have a sudden, large increase. GM Koehler suggests forming a committee to look into how this process would work and how much to reduce the bills by, along with a head count of customers affected and a monetary amount to reimburse.
An audience member speaks up that some other water districts have a Leak Policy wherein the customer shows proof (bill from a plumber, picture, etc) of a leak and it waives penalties. GM Koehler says that we do have such a policy, but this year, with the water restrictions, the penalty has been instituted. GM Koehler restates his committee idea and the Board agrees, with Dir. Ricetti and Todd comprising the committee with the help of Paula and Liz from RVCWD. Dir Pool states that in the current penalty cases, the penalty amount will be on hold until the Board reaches a decision.
5. Approval of Consent Calendar
Dir Ricetti has a question about the checks to Luhdorff & Scalmanini, will they be reimbursed later? GM Koehler answers to the affirmative.
Motion: Approve the consent calendar
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Todd
In favor: Unanimous
6. Approval of Minutes as Presented
Motion: Accept the October 7th Special Meeting minutes.
Motion by Dir Basili, second by Dir Todd
In favor: unanimous
Motion: Accept the October 16th Regular Meeting minutes.
Motion by Dir Todd , second by Dir Basili
2

In favor: unanimous
7. Directors and Staff Reports and Discussion ofNon-Action Topics
Items are either not relevant or will be discussed later.
8. General Manager's Report and Action Items a . Customer Requests for Bill Reductions
Already dealt with. b. District Operations
District employee Wise has left RVCWD for a job with the County Department of
Transportation. GM Koehler says he was very happy with Wise as an emplo y ee and that the County should be a good fit for him. He gave plenty of warning about the job change and was courteous about it. We wish him well. Dir Pool asks if GM Koehler has been looking at replacements . GM Koehler says that he has the same problem now as he did before where good, qualified operators are hard to find. Fortunately, this is the slow time of year or we'd really be scrambling . Dir
Ricetti asks about advertising methods and GM Koehler says he advertises in many places, but the money isn't high and people from cities don't stay long in the country. His wife will continue to type the minutes.
Dir Todd asks who the mini-excavator being used on West Road belonged to
01 alley Paving) and GM Koehler says they were over there for some time but they didn't have to pay for the three-day weekend. They used a boring machine to go under the road for the Ag repairs . c. District Engineer
Michelle Fredrick is leaving her job with CDPH to spend more time with her kids.
They will probably be bringing up someone in house to fill that position. d. Election Costs
GM Koehler contacted Katrina and she said she wouldn't be able to get back to him until mid-January or so. e. PG&E Penstock Repair
PG&E says they have no choice and have been suffering a lot of negative comments but it is the best time to do it. Sonoma County Water Agency also complained about it. The State Water Board has told PG&E that they will have to make up for some of the lost water later. They have 60 days to make a plan , but no dates have been set. Dir Todd points out that with the way the Army Corps manages Lake Mendocino, it may be better to have the water released later in
20 15 than normal . Seeing as how this repair HAS to be done, this may be the best way to do it.
3

f. Humboldt Bay Water Proposal
This was brought up about a year ago when it was first proposed. The best price that they can offer is $2,000/acre-foot for untreated water but that's only with an installation of a 48-inch water line and pump 40 million gallons per day through it. But since there isn't near that demand, their other idea was to use the river to convey the water, but environmentalists put a stop to that very quickly.
The consensus is that the cons greatly outweigh the pros and it's much too expensive in any case. g . Bureau ofReclamations Loan
Let ' s not go knocking on their door until we know exactly what we want. h. Clearwell Repair
We are not happy with Utility Services. There are a few options here including holding them to the original estimate (with legal action if needed), not working with him at all, or paying the new estimated cost. Options for another crew to do this are limited. Maybe there is a middle ground that can be reached where we pay more, but less than the work would normally be done for. The field crew did say they were doing a job in Willits, so GM Koehler is trying to chase down who they did work for and what those people thought of this company. i. LAFCO Election
The Board has the ballot form. There is some talk with GM Koehler explaining a new policy where that Board is trying to stagger the times when the Board members are elected to prevent a complete Board tum-over every four years. This does not need to be voted on tonight.
Various candidates are discussed as to their abilities and who recommends them.
Dir Ricetti nominates Teresa MeN erlin for the Regular Member Seat 4-Year
Term. Dir Todd nominates Guiness. The Board does a poll where McNerlin wins with votes from Ricetti, Pool, and Todd; while Basili votes for Guiness.
The 2-Year term: Dir Ricetti nominates Kenneth Franklin and Dir Todd nominates Richard. Richard wins the poll with votes from Pool, Basili, and Todd.
Dir Ricetti votes for Tony Orth but Angela wins with votes from Pool, Basili, and
Todd.
They all vote for the staggered-term proposal. GM Koehler says they need to make it formal, so:
Motion: Vote for Teresa McNerlin, Richard Shoemaker, Angela Silver, and
Yes to the Staggered Term Proposal
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Basili
In favor: unanimous
4

j. Climate Ready Water Utilities, EPA
Dir Pool says that they should continue to participate in it since there aren't any downsides and would keep them eligible for grants. GM Koehler says that
RVCWD has been asked to do some data entry to give information about impacts of climate change. It will benefit the District in that they can attach it to grant applications to show how the climate is hurting Redwood Valley. Also, GM
Koehler has asked both Tribes that RVCWD supplies water to to participate as well as Sonoma County Water Agency.
Motion: Participate in the Climate Ready Water Utilities study
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Basili
In favor: unanimous k. Draft Well Study
The final report has been written. Basically, there's water down there, but it's locked in clay (like a mush). They recommend to abandon that layer (around 400') and go for a layer at 190-200' where they optimistically guess at 150 GPM. That's the same depth as the Calpella well where they only get 30 GPM and even that has impacted the neighbors' wells. GM Koehler recommends not proceeding with a production well at that site, asks Dir Todd to talk to the owners to talk with the
County to turn the well into a permanent monitoring well at which point RVCWD steps away from it. Dir Pool asks if the casing can be cut down if it becomes a monitoring well. He feels it's an eyesore and Dir Todd says that they're planning on putting up a fence and will do something about it.
It is questioned why they can't just put a submersible pump down this well and pump it for a week and see what happens. This is about as dry as things will ever get, so whatever you can get out of this well will be the minimum you'd ever get.
That idea meets with agreement. GM Koehler will talk with the engineers to see what the options are with this well.
Another thing is whether or not to drill another well over by Barra. Considering the springs along Forsythe, there could be different hydrogeology on that side of the valley. But the geology doesn't look promising, and Dir Ricetti doesn't want to waste money.
1. Intertie
The intertie was tested today. Getting water from the South works really well, but it isn't very automated right now, but that's a minor thing. The intertie from
Calpella to Millview is also upgraded. With all this work, the balance is about
$30,000 so we may go in the hole a bit, but grant money is on the way. The property has officially been transferred. The biggest problem is that there's no drain in the floor but Ernie [Wipff] will core out a hole for drainage. Also, the place is a wasp condo. ·
5

m. School Way Bridge
They're done for the year. Unfortunately, there's a leak on the west side under all the dirt piles and plastic. It's isolated so it's not leaking right now. Dir Pool asks if we can go out and fix it, but it's too hard to get permission this time of year. It's a
1 0-inch pipe, 4 feet deep, about 20 feet from the creek and if it does keep leaking it could take that part of the hillside into the creek. The best thing to do will be to wait until the construction season opens next year and get the County to lean on
MCM to get the work done before the job opens again . n. Dissolution/ Annexation
GM Koehler asks Zellman ofRRFCD if he read the email from Joy about the annexation. He highly recommends that they read it and have another special meeting just to talk about what's contained in that email. RVCWD and other districts have been working on a JP A, but it is NOT ready for public access yet.
Joy ' s email states that RRFCD will have to answer all the questions brought up at the last special meeting.
GM Koehler guesses that in a few weeks there will be a draft JP A ready for the public and RRFCD will have answered the State's questions at which time the
Board will need to decide which route they want to take . Also, how can the
District get word out to the residents of the valley about the possible mergers ?
GM Koehler says the easiest way may be to send out a single fl y er to every customer saying "Here's what's going on and if you're interested, go to the
RVCWD website periodically for updates." Dir Pool even suggests FaceBook.
Dir Todd asks how RRFCD feels about the JPA. Zellman replies that at first look it seems like a good thing for this valley. But in the bigger picture, it's harder to get one going with government. Also, a JP A may be better in terms of district cooperation, but it still doesn't necessarily give Redwood Valley better access to water, which is a concern to Dir Todd and a reason he favors the Annexation. o . Local Agency for Groundwater Monitoring
Somebody needs to be monitoring groundwater by 2017. Whether or not the
County is/will be doing it is uncertain right now. Zellman says that there are lots ofwebinars about it. Right now, the program only applies to the Russian River
Basin and not the whole County, though that may change. p.JPA
Already discussed in n. q . Customer Complaint
A couple of letters have come in about paying for Ag water that they have not received. GM Koehler doesn't understand the complaint since months ago he sent a letter to all Ag customers explaining the situation and why they are still being
6

charged for Ag water. This customer also didn't show up when there was a hearing for Ag customers. The Board won't change their policy on this.
9. Financial Report
Things look really bad until you take into account that the monies spent on the well will be reimbursed. In addition, there are two charges that are once-a-year expenses. Taking all of that into account, we're only down about $4,300 this month. There is also an issue with the State losing a reimbursement request.
Motion: Approve the financial report
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Todd
In favor: unanimous
10. Local Agency Commission of Mendocino County (LAFCO)
No attendees.
11. Mendocino County Inland Water & Power Commission (IW&PC)
There may be some money available for groundwater management. There has to be a feasibility study before Coyote Dam can be raised and this is a way to get that study done with a minimum of cost (still about $1.5 million).
12. Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation Improvement
District (RRFC)
At the dual board meeting, the Board approved the contract with the consultant preparing the plan for services and there have been some minor revisions but she will be checking in with the customers.
13. Sonoma County Water Agency (SCW A)
Nothing.
' 14. Other Meetings
At the Farm Bureau meeting, Devon commented that the farmers on the West Branch
(us) are no-shows when it comes to talking about pond construction. Dir Todd says he's doing it. He ' s come to realize that the frost water regulations are going shut off water access from the river. They start talking about possible legal action against pond owners.
Willow met and talked about the JP A in a closed session .
The ad-hoc are still looking at Prop 1 funding for the Humboldt Bay project.
Prop 84 funding will be Spring 2015 for the next round.
Items 16-18
Nothing to discuss at this time.
7

Motion to adjourn.
Motion by Dir Ricetti, second by Dir Basili
In favor: unanimous
Meeting adjourned at 8:21pm.
Minutes submitted by Jeanette Wise
Approved:
Date Approved:
Signed:
Board of Directors
8