President Boucke called the Regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Stinson Beach County Water District to order on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 5:00 p.m., at the District Office located at 3785 Shoreline Highway in Stinson Beach, California.

Directors present:
Barbara Boucke, President
Lawrence Baskin, Vice President
Elizabeth Sapanai, Director
Scott Tye, Director
Jim Zell, Director

General Manager present:
Ed Schmidt

Staff present:
Denise Badstubner, Administrative Assistant


Chris Harrington expressed his concerns regarding the Board meeting being held on Wednesday evening instead of Saturday mornings.


Director Sapanai made a motion to approve the agenda but move forward to Item G-1, Public Hearing, and then move on with the rest of the Agenda. Director Tye seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote.


Director Baskin moved to approve the minutes of Saturday, July 18, 2009 with the following modification, pg.3, line 17 "the Phylochip Project is beginning again", and delete the word "again". Director Tye seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote.


Director Baskin moved to approve the disbursements for July 15, July 28, and August 11, 2009. Director Sapanai seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote.


President Boucke stated that the District had a net gain prior to depreciation of $355,452.00. Depreciation was $160,000, the net gain was $195,041 of which 50% goes into the Reserve for the Water Treatment Plant, and 25% goes to Emergency Reserve and 25% into the Operating Reserve. Director Baskin stated that what is not reported in the quarterly financial report is the loss of property tax revenue of approximately $46,000 that was borrowed by the Governor, and is supposed to be paid back in 2013. President Boucke requested that Janice Payne, the District Bookkeeper provide the Board with a long range projection of the financials. Director Baskin requested that the $46,000 loss be published. President Boucke requested that the Capital Improvement Project Budget be included in the publication. Director Baskin stated that revenues were up at the end of the Fiscal Year, but expenses were 3% over budget.


  1. Consideration of Appeal of Revocation of Discharge Permit by Tim Peterson, 12 Marine Way. Continued from the Saturday, June 20, 2009 Board Meeting.
    The General Manager reviewed the latest version of the Declaration of Restrictions and Wastewater Discharge Permit Reinstatement Agreement. The Agreement incorporates all of the provisions requested by Board members, including: 1) a limitation on the amount of water that can be used, 200 gallons per day; 2) a limitation on the use of the converted garage; 3) a waiver of rights in the event of default by owner; 4) a payment of a monitoring fee and other costs; and 5) a provision that the Agreement will be recorded and binds future owners until the septic system is upgraded.
    Director Zell had questions regarding the agreement starting with Item 4) Water Use Limitation; gallons per day, reported leaks, explanation of "verifiable leak". Item 16) Dispute Resolution; which describes mediation. Riley Hurd explained the process of Alternative Dispute Resolution to the Board, stating, as an escalating process, this means first try to, " work it out", and then seek Alternative Dispute Resolution before attorneys are involved. Director Zell stated, that his main concern was that any problem arising would create a long and drawn out process to settle any violation. Director Zell stated that he was concerned that any dispute be resolved quickly, instead of a lengthy mediation process. Mr. Hurd pointed to Section 8) Default; and stated, that this was a serious point in the agreement in favor of the District, and that it would be rare that any violation would make it to Item 16, Dispute Resolution. Director Zell asked questions regarding occupancy of the second unit. Mr. Hurd responded that the limitation on water use takes away the concern of the second unit. Director Zell stated that the District still has no knowledge of the location of the waste water system on this property.
    President Boucke stated that if the agreement were to be approved by the Board, the Board is serious with regard to violations. If there is a violation then a new septic system will be necessary with no further discussion. Director Zell stated, that the District is deviating from District Policy regarding adding space and not upgrading the septic system.
    Director Tye had concerns regarding Item 5) Converted Garage Use Limitation; he felt this provision was not enforceable. He stated this is a non verifiable enforced agreement; and that the District does not have the power or authority to enforce this limitation. Director Tye stated, that he felt that the District's business is waste water system enforcement and monitoring and not enforcement of habitations.
    Director Sapanai stated that the real issue is additional living space, and that the additional living space should have triggered the District Code requirement of updating the septic system at this property and it did not. Director Sapanai stated that this system is old, is not engineered, the District has no records regarding system engineering, location of the leach field, or if in fact if it is just a seepage pit. She stated one main concern is that the property sits on the bank of the creek. Director Sapanai referred to a picture of the converted garage during construction and it clearly showed new construction of additional space. Director Sapanai stated that she had been supportive of fellow Board members who have wanted to try and come to some sort of compromise. Director Sapanai stated that she voted to allow the preparation of an agreement in the hopes that the appellant could convince her that this was an appropriate position to take. Director Sapanai stated that there are two fundamental problems with the agreement. First, it does not solve the need to upgrade a septic system or even to find out what components that septic system contains, or to determine whether or not it functions appropriately. Secondly, Director Sapanai stated, that the agreement does nothing for the District. It allows the status quo that was created when the owner remodeled the interior from 3 bedrooms to 4, built additional living space and new construction. Director Sapanai was very concerned regarding enforcement. Director Sapanai stated that the agreement requires good faith compliance on the part of the appellant. Director Sapanai stated that she has concern with the reliability of the appellant's good faith. She stated that there was misuse of the permitting process, the permitless grading of the property next door on the creek, and the 200 gallon limitation. Director Sapanai stated that the 200 gallon limitation has been exceeded in May, June and July. Director Sapanai stated, that her main concern is health and safety and protecting and improving ground and surface water quality within riparian zones.
    Director Baskin stated that the evolution of the agreement arises from a dispute on how the Board can define habitable space. Director Baskin did not agree that the 200 gallon limitation had too many loop holes. Director Baskin discussed water limitation, garage conversion limitation, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and the triggering event. Director Baskin stated that the agreement was a reasonable compromise, and an enforceable mechanism.
    President Boucke stated that if the agreement is signed, Item 4) Water Use Limitation will be a triggering event to instigate a new septic system.
    President Boucke introduced Riley Hurd, legal counsel for Mr. Peterson. Mr. Hurd stated that for the record he would review the history and enforcement of this matter. Mr. Hurd stated, that Mr. Peterson submitted the plans for the building to the District to be reviewed. He was charged for the review and during the review process Mr. Peterson was never told this was new construction. Mr. Hurd argued for the appellant that the District process "is broken", the District does not require a high level of detailed plans to conclude if the District determination of new construction is met or not. Mr. Hurd stated Mr. Peterson would not have built the converted garage if he knew that the District would consider this new construction. Mr. Hurd then spoke to enforcement of the agreement. Mr. Hurd stated that in fact you could not enforce the renters. However, the contract is enforceable because it is deed restricted, and if it doesn't happen the owners have broken the law. Mr. Hurd stated, this is not about the second unit, this is about water quality. Mr. Hurd stated that the process that has led us to this place has violated the law. The manner, in which this matter was processed and after the fact deemed new construction, was not fair. Mr. Hurd stated that for four months the agreement has been worked on, Mr. Peterson and the attorneys involved have given the District everything they have asked for in this agreement. Mr. Hurd stated that it would be very disingenuous at the end of the process to not enter into the agreement. Mr. Hurd urged the Board to enter into the agreement for the sake of the District, and because it does further the District's single goal, protecting water quality.
    Mr. Miyaki stated, the real issue is new construction and how the Board deals with that, in addition the occupancy of the second unit is enforceable. Mr. Miyaki addressed the Board's concerns with regard to Section 16 & Section 4 and recommended some changes. Mr. Miyaki stated that he felt it would not be disingenuous if the Board decided not to enter into this agreement.
    The Board reviewed changes in language to the agreement in Sections 3) Wastewater Discharge Permit and Appeal, Section 4) Water Use Limitation, Section 5) Converted Garage Use Limitation and Section 16) Dispute Resolution.
    Director Zell had concerns regarding Item 5) Converted Garage Use Limitation. Director Tye was concerned that the Discharge Permit reflects the gallons allowed by this agreement. Mr. Miyaki discussed Director Tye's recommendation and suggested to the Board where the language should be inserted within the agreement.
    Director Baskin made the motion to enter into the agreement presented with the modifications discussed. President Boucke seconded the motion. President Boucke called for the vote by roll call of the Board. Baskin - yes, Boucke - yes, Sapanai - no, Tye - no, Zell - no. The motion failed 3-2.
    Mr. Miyaki addressed the Board and recommended the Board deny the appeal and instruct staff to proceed with issuing the Failed System Citation.
    Director Zell made the motion to deny the appeal and direct staff to issue the Failed System Citation. Director Tye seconded the motion. President Boucke called for the vote by roll call of the Board. Baskin -no, Boucke -no, Sapanai -yes, Tye-yes, Zell-yes. The motion passed to deny the appeal 3-2.


  1. Discussion and possible direction to staff re: a cost proposal from MASSA Construction Company for additional work at the District's Water Treatment Plant. The Board, by consensus, accepted the cost proposal from MASSA Construction for additional work at the District's Water Treatment Plant.
  2. Discussion and possible modifications to the District Operations Budget as recommended by the District Finance Committee. The General Manager discussed a meeting of the District's Finance Committee on July 16, 2009. The Committee recommended reallocating some funds differently from the existing 70/30 Water/Wastewater split. These changes will not affect any revenue or expense totals. As a formality, it was decided to bring the changes to the Board for approval. Costs applied to Denise and the Manager were changed to a 50/50 split, as has legal. The accounts affected are highlighted and are as follows; Salaries & Wages, Employee Health Insurance Employee Health Co-pay, Employee Dental Insurance, Employee Life Insurance, PERS Retirement, Medicare, General Manager Contract, Workers' Comp Insurance, Legal Counsel. The Board by consensus approved the new allocations.
  3. Presentation and discussion of the District's application for a Coastal Development Permit and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the drilling of a well at the District's Steep Ravine Tank site. The General Manager explained the next step in the process of the application for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from the County. He reviewed the documents prepared for review by the County. The General Manager reviewed the letter to Ben Berto, the CDP Application Cover Page, the CDP Checklist, Environmental Review Questionnaire, Application and Project Description, Site Plan, Title Report, Biological Site Assessment, Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The notice has been posted around town and at the plant for the required 20 days.
  4. Discussion and possible approval of a Records Retention Policy for the District. The General Manager explained that the attached policy will authorize him to have many stored files sorted and destroyed. He further explained that an additional container for storing records has been ordered. The stored boxes of records will be sorted and either destroyed or stored (as designated by the retention period) in the new container. Files in the District main office will be color coded to designate records by the appropriate retention period. Director Baskin moved to approve the attached Records Retention Policy as recommended by District's legal Counsel. Director Sapanai seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote.
  5. Discussion and possible direction to staff re: a plumbing fixture/rebate program survey of local Water and Utility Districts. The General Manager reviewed the data provided to the Board.


The General Manager updated the Board on the Water Rate Study. He stated the 2 week newspaper publication is complete. The date of the Water Rate Public Hearing is September 19, 2009 at the District Office.
The General Manager recommended that the Village Parks have MDU's installed by the District. The Board authored the General Manager to install 4 MDU units. Lance Meade will pay the $200 for the cost of the 4 units. The District will pick up the cost for the installation. The General Manager informed the Board that the well at 321 Seadrift Rd. has not been abandoned to County standards. They have 30 days to comply.
The General Manager explained to the Board that the Districts Water Service Application has been modified to limit the liability to the District if supplies are insufficient to meet demand, the following sentence was added: " In the event that the District is unable to provide satisfactory water service by reason of insufficient or high pressure, inadequate volume of water or intermittent supply, the District shall not be liable to any customer for any damage or inconvenience that may occur as a result thereof."
The General Manager reviewed the progress of the Water Treatment Plant retaining wall. The retaining wall is complete, the next steps are to seal the backside, add drainage and the backfill.






President Boucke called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Director Baskin made the motion to adjourn the meeting. Director Zell seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote. The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. The next meeting will be held on Saturday, September 19, at 9:30 a.m.

SBCWD HomeContactCurrent Weather Rates and ChargesMeter ReadingConservationDo's and Don'ts
Homeowner's GuidePermit ProcessDisaster/EmergencyBoard of DirectorsBoard and Committee MeetingsMinutes
BudgetWest Nile VirusPesticide PolicyWater QualityHydrologic SurveyTitle 3Title 4Title 5GlossaryLinks


Current Weather

Rates and Charges
Meter Reading
Do's and Don'ts
Homeowner's Guide
Permit Process

Board of Directors
Board and Committee


West Nile Virus
Pesticide Policy
Water Quality
Hydrologic Survey
Title 3
Title 4
Title 5