Good afternoon everybody and welcome to the

Secondary Flood Control Agency July meeting and so Lindy would you do me a favor and please call the roll?

Thank you. Director Desmond? Here. Director Hume?

Director Riley? Here. Director Hedges? Here.

Director Munoz? Here. Director Jennings? Here. Director Kaplan? Here.

Director Plekibaum? Director Holloway? Present. Director Johns? Here. Director Hill? Here. Director Baines?

And Director Stevens? Here. We do have a quorum.

Okay. Thank you very much. Please join me in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, and liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. This meeting of SAFCA is being live streamed on Metro14live.satcounty.gov

and will be recorded and re-aired on Saturday, July 19th at 2 p.m. and will also be available on SAFCA's website within 48 hours after the meeting.

Members of the audience who wish to address the board should fill out a speaker form and bring it to me.

When addressing the board, please identify yourself for the record and limit your comments to three minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

It's a public comment for matters that are not on the agenda today.

So if you'd like to speak on an item that's not on the agenda, please come up and introduce yourself and do so.

And we would limit you to three minutes.

Anybody here like to speak?

That is not on the agenda.

You have the cards.

Oh, I wasn't sure if these were on another item.

Okay.

So I have three speaker slips and we'll start with Lisa Sanchez.

Please come up.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Is there any ability to show photos while you speak or is that not an option?

Actually, we need you to be at the microphone.

Thank you.

I can see if I can turn on the camera, the dot camera.

Yeah.

But I don't really know.

Thank you.

There.

Oh, the screens.

There we go.

So thank you.

My name is Lisa and I volunteer with River City Waterway Alliance.

I have spoken here many a times, not really at SAFCA, but with the Board of Supervisors meetings

and also the American River Flight Control District meetings as well.

I come to you today directly from a cleanup.

As you can see from my shirt, it is quite a muddy mess of the attire.

This is due to the massive amount of debris that has been lining our creeks and waterways for decades.

Coming to SAFCA because we are asking that SAFCA get involved with also helping us clean the local waterways.

This is mainly Steelhead Creek, Arcade Creek, our main projects.

But this also falls under Roblox Creek that falls within your purview and your property parcels.

With the illegal encampments that have been allowed to kind of camp in and around the waterways, the levees have been able to be cleared, but they have migrated now into the actual bottom of the creek where all of the debris from every winter storm floods into and flushes.

Just today, due to all the mud that is caking my face and my hat, it was due to a mattress.

It's a queen-size mattress that was brought in and it flushed down and it was about 800 pounds of debris, soaking mud that we had to deconstruct, cut down.

It's a lot of work.

It's a lot of work, but we have a lot of passionate people who are dedicated to helping restore and protect our waterways that need it.

Everybody is aware of the Sacramento River.

Everybody is aware of the American River, which are great.

The city of two rivers.

The city of trees.

We are the state capital of California, the most eco-friendly state in the United States.

But we have a hidden secret that nobody is really aware of.

The contamination of our creeks.

And so people don't recreate in the creeks.

I didn't know about the creeks.

I was born and raised in Sacramento.

Had no idea about the creeks.

Now I know all about the creeks.

So I'm here to educate everybody about creeks.

SAFCA, you're very well aware of them.

We know this.

But again, as a volunteer and a passionate one, we need help.

We have reached out to the city of Sacramento.

We've reached out to the county.

We've reached out to American River Flood Control, RD1000, the Water Board District, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

We've reached out to Fish and Game.

We've reached out to, I mean, who haven't we reached out to DWR?

I mean, every agency that should be responsible for this has been connected.

But so far, it's kind of the finger pointing.

Everybody just says it's not their responsibility to clean the debris that lands in the creek channels.

And we need a partnership of all of these agencies working together to include SAFCA to help us with that.

So again, I'm here to kind of share that with you.

Just to let you know, you have a lot of people who are seeing that this is a problem, and we want to bring it to light.

And we know we can resolve this.

So thank you so much.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Next speaker is Nancy Niskern.

Nancy?

Welcome.

Sorry.

Good afternoon.

Thank you.

And I met some of you in person.

I appreciate you giving me your time.

I'm Nancy Niskern.

I'm from College Greens East in Sacramento.

I've lived there 35 years and have been happily living there and employed.

I am very interested in an aspect of the design for the flood control that the Corp is doing in the lower American River.

They're going to install what's called launchable rock trenches.

And these were discovered initially in use by the Central Board of Irrigation and Power in India in 1956.

They've been used as early as 1900s.

They came here.

The engineers bought it here.

They experimented on the Snake River in 1966.

In every case where erosion undermined the toe, the riprap was completely washed away.

Erodite stone was deposited in the main channel bottom several hundred feet from the damaged area.

They've been tested in Omaha.

And they found if the toe designs were too thick or too thin, it did not work.

And it's been tested in what's called the riprap test facility.

Last time I could read about the test there, it was in Missouri River in 1984.

These trench filled revetments are constructed by excavating a trench along the top of the bank and placing stone riprap in that trench.

As the bank erodes, the stone is undercut and launches down the bank line and resulting in a more gradual protected slope.

Earth removed for excavation of the trench may be used to cover the riprap, thus completely concealing it until it is launched.

These trench filled revetments are placed along banks that are actively eroding or in danger of eroding, but where some additional bank loss can be tolerated.

That helps the design and the build.

Trench filled revetments should be constructed with well graded self launching stone.

The environmental consideration here is excavation of the trench requires disturbance of a corridor along the top bank.

And therefore, this measure is not recommended for sites where the top bank supports valuable riparian vegetation.

That's what we have on the American River.

So the latest testing I could find took place in the Waterway Experiment Station in 1986.

We're installing the rock trenches on the lower American River.

It's now in our design.

And I want to caution the use of this incredible installation.

It's a trench that's 23 by 27 feet filled with quarry rock.

What's our success?

If it never launches, hallelujah, it's there to protect us.

But it's taken away the biome, the trees, the soil, the habitat.

If it does launch, what do we have?

We have a huge hole that needs maintenance and fill.

I don't see a win here with this kind of construction destruction.

Would you please sum up?

Over time, and thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Next speaker is Pete Spaulding.

Welcome.

Great.

Welcome.

Good to see you all again.

Pete Spaulding with American River Trees.

Good afternoon, Chair Kennedy, Vice Chair Holloway, SAFCA board members.

I'm here again to speak about Contract 3B, which Nancy also just mentioned.

And I do want to put in a plug for River City Waterway Alliance.

They do fantastic work.

I do river cleanups.

I never get near that dirty because I'm only out there for about three hours, and I'm not wrestling with mattresses or anything of that.

But they do.

They're incredible.

But I noticed you had a letter from Bill Bratton on your agenda today that's, I think, just received correspondence.

He talks about the miscalculation of heritage oaks in the Contract 3B site.

And that's just one of the many discrepancies that we've found in carefully reviewing the final environmental reports on this project.

But I really wanted to come today because I listened, had a chance to listen to the last Friday's meeting of the American River Flood Control District.

Because Mr. Holloway and Mr. Johns are both on your board.

But there are a couple of things that were said that I really needed to address.

During the discussion about writing a letter of support for this project, one of the flood control trustees said that ART had been asked for alternatives to the erosion control methods that are being proposed by the Corps.

And it was stated that we didn't respond.

We didn't say a word.

We just said there is a better way.

This morning, I sent the clerk of the board copies of materials we left with Chair Kennedy when we met with him on May 27th.

And Chair Kennedy was kind enough to give us 30 minutes of his time because so many people showed up at the April 17th meeting to speak out of Ends Contract 3B.

So the materials we left include the 22-page technical memorandum that we entitled Presentation of Alternative Concepts for Bank Protection.

And it's meant to be an example of the bioengineering alternatives that should have been considered by the Corps in their design and preparation of the final environmental report.

It's not meant to be a detailed engineering design document.

It's a set of reasonable possibilities, visually illustrated, and supported by realistic engineering and scientific knowledge.

There are alternatives that should have been considered before the project got as far as it did.

We've shared this memo with the Central Valley Flood Board, Department of Water Resources, members of the Bank Protection Working Group, and the Corps.

It was the basis for the presentation that we made at the May 23rd meeting at the Central Valley Flood Protection Board when they went through the entire history of the lower American River projects.

It was also stated at that July 11th meeting that our group, American River Trees, doesn't want any work to be done at all.

Just leave it alone was the quote that was made.

Any of you that have heard us speak, have heard me speak, have written any of our correspondence, that is just not the case.

We've continually stressed for a more targeted surgical approach, minimize tree removal, especially to the heritage trees, minimize destruction to the parkway and the wildlife corridor it supports.

I'm out of time, but I just want to say the American River Parkway is the greatest asset that this region has.

Everybody talks about it, everybody that's visited.

Let's take the time to do this right.

At tomorrow's meeting, we're going to push for a pulling contract 3B from the approval documents and take time to get it right.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other public comments?

None?

None appearing.

Okay.

Next item, consent matter.

Our next item are consent matters and items 1 through 11 are in order.

Okay.

Do we have any of the consent matters?

Anyone?

Any of the directors would like to pull from that item?

Okay.

We have a motion.

Second.

And a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

None.

Abstained.

Next item is the executive directors report for July 17th, 2023.

Oh, you're right.

Yeah.

And it was there any public comment on the consent calendar?

I forgot to ask.

I have not received.

Apparently not.

Okay.

All right.

Next item.

The next item is the executive director's report.

Executive director's report.

Mr. Executive director.

Oh, thank you, vice chair.

Jason Campbell, executive director.

It's weird saying that.

I just wanted to say thank you all.

And as we get moving into this next fiscal year, we're kicking it off with a couple of items that are specific to funding at the federal level at this point.

So the president did sign the one big beautiful bill act on July 4th, making way for congressional authority to move forward as well on the budget for fiscal year 26.

The house appropriation subcommittees for energy and water development, which is where our projects go into the core funding, are moving forward.

In fact, there was a lot of discussion today.

Both the house, hopefully the Senate will take it up soon.

But the current bill does identify that the core will have a work plan, which was something that was being in question for a while.

Moving on to the Natomas Basin project is the project that will need funding on a federal on a regular schedule going forward.

We have full funding for many of our projects, but Natomas will need additional funding for reaches F and G.

So we're working with our core partners at the federal level as well as our electeds in the congressional offices as well as with the Senate offices to make sure that we're trying to get those things into the fiscal year 26 work plan, but also into the next real push is going to be for fiscal year 27 funding for the Natomas.

Moving on to other items that we are very much active in our ULOP levy certification process is continuing.

Four of our levy systems are prepared for levy certification.

Those are American rivers, north and south levy's, Robla Creek as well as the dry creek levy system.

Those reports should be coming to your land use entities, so the cities and the counties in the next couple of months.

And of course, we also have three other levy system packages that are being prepared.

And those are the Natomas Beach Lake South, the Sac Streams, the levees, the and Magpie Creek.

With those different systems that are still under work, we are moving forward with four efforts to get those projects ready for certification.

The Natomas Reach A is continuing.

The slurry wall work is necessary for certification.

Contractor is on site once again.

Multiple headings of slurry wall work is moving forward.

We're hoping that they will be able to get that work done by the end of the year.

If not, we have another alternative we're going to be talking about in just a minute.

But ultimately, these, the levy, levee system is going to get certified.

But we will be able to move forward once the core has finished that slurry wall work.

City pump station 89 or sump 89 is being performed by the city of Sacramento.

They're modifying some piping and other work to get over the levee system and proper elevation.

We are also moving forward with the Sweeney Creek pump station.

That's a county pump station that we have taken to your board.

And you've awarded the contract. Contractor is mobilizing.

And the Magpie Creek is currently under design with the USACE.

And that's part of the American River Common Features project.

So the Sweeney Creek pump station I just mentioned is, like I said,

the pump station is a county pump station.

This is what it looked like a few weeks ago.

Fortunately, the pump station no longer is there.

So as you can see, the contractor mobilized, removed the existing facility.

So the existing facility is the picture on the left.

In the middle you can see the facility has been removed.

And over on the right you can see some of the demo of the concrete work

as well as the flood wall that's on that levee system.

The team has been moving very quickly.

And they have degraded the levee, built the foundation,

and are now putting piles in the ground.

So what you can see is on the left is the degraded levee.

In the middle you'll see the rebar cage being flown into a hole,

which is one of many piles that are going in the ground.

And then ultimately on the right they're filling that hole with concrete in the same day.

Moving on to our discussions in regards to how we're moving forward without the levee certification.

So some of those projects that may not be ready will hopefully be covered by SB 639.

It's a bill that was introduced by Senator Ashby.

Many of your entities are a part of that.

The city, the counties, as well as others, city of Marysville and Yuba County have also been included in this bill as it goes forward.

Currently it's headed to the appropriations committee in August.

And it's anticipated that it will get through the assembly and senate floor for consideration.

But most of all we want to get it over to the governor before September 18th so that we can get that signed.

With all of that, that means we're on a good path and we have a little bit of belts and suspenders for these levee certifications

so that we don't have any interruptions with work going forward.

With that I was going to just keep it short and simple.

Okay.

Unless you have any questions.

Thank you very much Jason.

Questions?

Yes.

Dr. Kaplan.

Don't make me a doctor.

Yes.

Jason, quick question because you did mention we're still needing some federal funding for REACH's F&G and Natomas.

If I'm tying it together, Ashby's bill will give us more time if it takes more time to get federal funding.

So I wouldn't say those two things are linked.

Okay.

So the certification process is for us to be able to continue with the protection for the state, I'm sorry, Senate Bill 5 requires that we meet 200 year level of protection.

Senator Ashby's bill will allow us to continue until 2030 to get that certification.

So that means that the land use entities can continue to approve development actions as well as building permits.

And then what will the effect of maybe delayed funding on REACH's F&G be to all of that?

So if we don't receive funding by the time it's necessary for the work to start to be completed by 2030, that will impact it.

So come 2028, if we don't have funding, we will need to have a conversation.

Okay.

So we have a little bit of cush, but not a lot, because a lot of these projects take up ramp for construction.

That's correct.

And the Corps is moving forward with design.

They have some discussions about whether or not they may need to modify that to break it up in smaller pieces and make it a little more palatable for funding.

So those are some of the discussions we're going to likely have in the fall as we go to DC to stump for some money.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Any other questions from our directors?

None appearing.

Okay.

Let's see.

Separate matters.

Item 13.

Is a public hearing and resolution number 2526086 approving the supplemental assessment roll and setting the fiscal year 2526 assessment rate for the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency operations and maintenance assessment district number one.

Mr. Kamm.

Thank you again.

So this is our O&M assessment district.

This assessment district is what funds are, what is our general fund.

So each year we have to bring this back.

This assessment district is under the water code.

The rate has not changed and what we are representing is that we're moving forward with a $6.4 million assessment that is incongruent with our adopted budget and we would ask that the board go ahead and prove this.

Of course we have a public hearing to get through first.

Yes.

Okay.

Any questions from directors?

None appearing.

None appearing.

Okay.

I'd like to open a public hearing and are there any public comments written or otherwise?

I have not received any.

None.

None.

Okay.

Close the public hearing and what's the pleasure of the committee, the board?

Move the item.

Open and close the public hearing and move the item.

Okay.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

None.

Abstentions?

None appearing.

Okay.

Let's see.

The rest of the items on the agenda are received and file and if any other comments, we could be adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.