Good afternoon once again.

It's my pleasure to call to order this special joint meeting between the city of San Jose and Santa Clara Valley Water District for the afternoon of August 19th.

Tony, would you please call the role on the city council side?

Come here.

Campos?

Tortillos?

Here.

Cohen?

Here.

Ortiz.

Present.

Okay.

Here.

Kendallas.

Here.

Casey?

Here.

Foley.

Here.

Mayhem.

Here.

You have a quorum.

Thank you so much.

And I'll turn things over to Cheris Tremera to do the same.

Thank you, Mayor.

Madam Clerk, please call the role.

Director Ballard.

Director Bell.

Director Eisenberg.

Director Shua here.

Vice Chair Santos.

Director Varela.

Chair Estramera.

Aye.

You have a quorum.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

All right.

We will now do the Pledge of Allegiance if you would stand and join us in that.

If you're able, thank you.

Aye.

And to the Republic, which is stands.

One nation.

Under God.

Liberty and Justice Raw.

Thank you.

Under orders of the day, I just wanted to note uh two things, and I'll I'll make sure Chair Estremera is on board with both of these.

Uh first, we are going to have uh given the size of our joint meeting here, we'll give each elected a five-minute opportunity on rotation just so we can hear from everyone.

If anyone really needs more time, we can come back around and offer an additional five minutes.

But on each item, we're gonna try to limit uh ask folks to be concise because there are a lot of us and we want to be able to hear from everyone.

Uh for speaking time for public comment, I I would suggest one minute, and then I would also like to note that uh we had a discrepancy in ordering the agenda items.

We will go with the Valley Water Ordering, which has item 6.2, status report on Purified Water heard before item 6.1 status report on Anderson Dam seismic retrofit.

Uh that was how it was originally printed on the Valley Water Agenda, and then we will move open forum to the end of the meeting instead of having it heard before our agendized items.

Chair Estramero, if that's okay with you, that'll be our plan.

I don't think any of those items require a vote.

Any other questions or comments on the printed agenda, orders of the day?

Okay, not seeing any.

Excellent.

Well, I'll just say by way of brief um welcome and introduction.

I want to thank the Valley Water Board of Directors for joining us.

We have done a lot of work together over the last few years to build a stronger relationship between our two agencies because we have uh shared constituents and um and a lot of shared goals, and we know that we're stronger when we work together.

I'm really uh excited about the it is a little crowded up here.

I hope everybody's okay.

Um excited about the progress we're making on cleaning up our waterways, advancing purified water, as we'll talk about today, improving the overall safety of the system as we'll talk about relative to the dam, and uh I'm just grateful for the collaboration uh and all the work we're doing on the the mutual challenges and opportunities that we face together.

We've got some great items today, and I'll turn it over to Chair S.

Tramera to make his opening comments.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh a pleasure meeting with all of you this afternoon.

Um this uh as you mentioned, Mayor has uh been one of our most uh productive and most collaborative uh years.

Uh very productive, as uh most of you will see with uh when we go through our items today.

Uh as a senior on the board, it's my 30th year, 1996.

Uh, when I first was appointed to the board, I looked around and said, uh, when uh when do we meet with the city of San Jose?

And I was told we don't meet with the city of San Jose.

We don't have a lot of things in common, but of course uh that wasn't the case.

In two thousand, the year 2001.

When I became chair, I sent a letter to then Mayor Gonzalez and said, We we all have we share the same constituents.

We have financed by the same folks.

Our financing comes out of the same pocketbook, and so since that time till now, we've been meeting sometimes even two or three times a year, and like I said, this year has been the most productive yet so far.

So thank you, Mayor.

You and uh your council uh have been very, very supportive of us and our efforts, and we certainly appreciate it.

Most importantly, our constituents appreciate.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair of the Feelings Mutual.

We're gonna move to our items.

First, though, I did just want to note that our friends at Valley Water brought us some purified water, which is pretty exciting.

So we could do a little ceremonial cheers, maybe grab a photo afterwards.

Um but uh thank you for the gift.

It's under the $50 gift limit, isn't it?

That's right.

Okay, good.

Thanks for keeping us out of trouble.

It sure is.

All right.

So we're on to item 6.2, which uh again is agenda item 2.1 on the Valley Water agenda.

Apologies for the complexity there.

We have a staff presentation, so I'm gonna turn it over to staff to jump in.

Thank you all.

Good afternoon, honorable council and board.

Uh, my name is Kirsten Strufe, assistant officer uh for what the water supply division at Valley Water.

Uh, this is a joint presentation with my colleague, Eric Dunlavy, who is with the City of San Jose Environmental Services Department.

And we're really excited to speak to you about our progress on developing the direct potable reuse project since our last update.

Where do I find it?

Well, it's not advancing.

You try.

Oh, there you go.

Do you want me to go back one?

Yeah, back one, please.

Um, so just for background, um, in January 2023, um, Valley Water and the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara executed a letter of intent on collaborating uh on the expansion of recycled and purified water in Santa Clara County.

This letter of intent recognizes that climate change makes our community more vulnerable to extreme weather conditions, including periods of long-term drought.

At the last joint meeting in November of 2023, the Valley Water Board and San Jose City Council provided the guidance to staff to ensure development of collaborative win-win solutions that meet the cities and Valley Waters needs.

And Valley Water has added a direct portable reuse um demonstration facility, which is needed to develop a full scale facility to our capital uh program.

Okay.

Um, so here's our current timeline when we get the PowerPoint to advance.

Oh, it's all.

Um, so we are currently in the planning stage.

Yeah, sorry, it's not advancing.

We're even a technical issue.

Okay.

We'll just give our tech team a moment to try to resolve that.

While we wait, I just wanted to note um that the council meeting that was scheduled at 1 30 p.m.

concluded, and this is a special meeting that's joint between the water district and the city of San Jose, so open forum cards regarding City of San Jose Business are not being taken for this meeting, um, because that meeting already ended.

Thank you, Tony.

Looks like we're still working on it.

We swear this doesn't happen often.

We also want to remind the people on the dais to share your microphones.

Make sure your microphone is turned on.

If you have a microphone in front of you and you're not used to using it, there's a button.

Your neighbor should be able to show you how to turn the microphone on.

I'm getting a couple texts that people can't hear.

Okay, so we'll be sure to help our colleagues from Valley Water know how to use the system here.

We do have paper copies, but for the benefit of the public and the recorded video that'll be on YouTube, I'd like to give it another minute just to see if we can get this going.

It's preferable to have it on the screen and recorded.

So I kind of got interesting.

Good afternoon.

All right, what do we think?

Is it possible to just manually advance these slides for now?

Okay, sorry about that.

All right.

Does that work for everyone?

Yes, we continue with this.

Okay.

Let's do it.

We'll just say whenever we need the next slide.

So here's our current timeline.

We are in the planning stage for the development of the direct potable reuse project.

The demonstration facility will be done in two phases, a pilot first to gather needed data for obtaining regulatory permits, followed by a demonstration facility and learning center.

And then the full scale facility is expected to begin operations in late 2035.

And we're currently in the validation process for our CIP project for that.

Next slide, please.

So now we'll go over progress on both the demonstration facility and the full scale facility.

The demonstration facility will enable permitting of the full-scale facility in an expedited manner and reduce risk on a large capital cost uh project that will cost nearly two billion dollars.

So this pilot will be used to perform validation studies required for permitting to ensure that pathogens and chemicals are removed to meet the stringent direct potable reuse standards.

And the demonstration facility will continue to be used to evaluate advanced water treatment technologies and ensure operator training.

Thank you, Kirsten.

Good afternoon.

Eric Dunlevy, deputy Director for um City of San Jose Environmental Services Department.

So uh continuing on with the progress.

Uh Valley Water and the city also executed a staff funding agreement last year, allowing the city to have dedicated staff for this project.

So the agreement provides funding for the San Jose Purified Water Program staff.

And then in June, the Valley Water Board of Directors and San Jose City Council approved amending the existing agreements that govern the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center to allow for the direct potable reuse demonstration facility that we're talking about.

Allow for that to be built and operated.

Next slide, please.

So that's our progress to date on the demonstration facility.

We've made very good progress on that component of this larger project.

I'll now walk through where we are in terms of the envisioned full-scale facility.

So progress to date on that includes some opportunities to collaborate with the San Francisco Public Utility Utilities Commission.

So we held a workshop last September with SFPUC, Valley Water, City of San Jose, and City of Santa Clara.

Having SFPUC on board as a collaborator on this project is preferred because they're the other wholesale water provider for portions of the county.

And this project, if successful, will provide a very meaningful and reliable increase in potable water supply for all customers, either directly or indirectly, regardless of the water wholesaler from whom the water comes.

So following the workshop with SFPUC, Valley Water, the cities and SFPUC expressed support for the project, and they were interested in joining this project in the future.

We also have been working, the City and Valley Water have been working on a charter and a vision.

We've met a number of times to develop a project charter that will lay out the framework, identify the key studies and unknowns, prioritize the work in terms of urgency and sequencing, and identify key decision points.

This is a very complicated project that we're embarking upon.

As part of this process, the multi-agency team developed a draft vision, which you can see on the screen.

And I'll give you a moment to read through it and just point out that this draft vision statement, we endeavored to capture the key driver of sustainable water supply as well as the concepts of innovation, multi-agency cooperation, and environmental stewardship, which are values that our agencies share.

So just a moment to read through that.

And then the final piece that I'll give an update on the full-scale facility is as a critical first step in moving the full scale project forward.

Valley Water and the city are developing an exclusive negotiation agreement for the land envisioned for the full-scale facility.

This would be a time-limited agreement that would protect both the city's and Valley Water's interests because it would provide assurances to Valley Water that the identified land area envisioned for the full-scale facility would not be offered to or available for other uses for the duration of the exclusive negotiation agreement.

It does not guarantee the land to Valley Water, that would come later, but rather promises that for the term of the agreement, the city will only negotiate with Valley Water for the use of the land.

And because it is time limited, this also protects the city's long-term interests in the land by not tying it up indefinitely.

And so here is a map up on the screen showing the various components of the project, both the demonstration facility and the envisioned full-scale facility that Kirsten and I just walked through.

This area is part of the 60 acres set aside as part of the RWF master plan for recycled water use expansion.

So these purified water projects are consistent with the master plan's designated uses.

As you can see, the land is also directly adjacent to the existing Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center.

So the pilot, which is located in the skinny red box along the southern edge of the existing uh facility, is proposed to be within the current fence line, the demonstration facility and learning center, which is the other large red boxes to the east.

We'll add additional purified water to the South Bay water Recycling System, and we'll include the Learning Center to expand outreach and direct potable reuse education to the public.

The demonstration facility site is about two acres, and the new parking lot, which would be built by Microsoft, is about one acre.

The remaining land to the east in the black line box is the land envisioned for the full-scale facility, and this is the portion that would be set aside as part of the exclusive negotiation agreement that's under development.

Once ready, that agreement will be brought to the JRW PAC, TPAC, the full board, and full council within the next few months is what we anticipate.

So I'll now turn it back over to Kirsten for the rest of our presentation.

Thank you, Eric.

Next slide, please.

We've been discussing our roadmap with the JRW PAC, and it includes working on those long-term interagencies agreements that we need to develop, and that will build off the charter that Eric talked about.

And so we're talking about wastewater availability, the reverse osmosis concentrate and other waste stream management, the direct potable reuse regulatory requirements, including source control and wastewater characterization, operations and maintenance, and the land lease.

And this regulatory process ensures that multiple safeguards are in place and the water produced by the direct potable reuse facility meets the most stringent safety requirements and will uh it will require close coordination between our two agencies going forward.

Next slide, please.

Valley Water has procured a consultant to develop a feasibility study, which will be required to obtain future construction grants.

City of San Jose staff helped us with this process in selecting the consultant.

This program feasibility study is estimated at about 1.5 million dollars, and the US Bureau of Reclamation funded it at around 380,000 dollars.

So we're currently working on that feasibility study to be to be ready for future grants.

Next slide, please.

And in terms of outreach, public concerns over climate change and support for a resilient sustainable water supply has been very consistent since 2015.

We continue outreach via public education and monitor the public pulse through public perception polls.

Tours of the existing Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center have been in place since 2014 and are used to educate the public about potable reuse.

Our latest poll in 2024 included questions relating specifically to direct potable reuse and tested the impact of an increase to water rates on the favorability of purified water.

And some key takeaways are listed in your memo as well.

Even with minor adjustment to question phrasing to make the concept of using advanced purified recycled water in the drinking water supply more relatable, public support has remained consistent with previous years.

There's a slight decrease in support when discussing specific methods of purified water use, such as indirect and direct potable reuse.

Overall perception of recycled water has become marginally less favorable.

The impact of cost concerns is mitigated when additional context is provided on the need, safety, and benefits of advanced purified recycled water for enhancing the drinking water supply.

Older adults aged 50 and over have a lower net support than adults aged 18 to 49.

So that gives us an opportunity for tailored outreach to older adults.

And then scientists and doctors are the most trusted messengers for purified water advocacy.

So we continue working on that.

And we're also collaborating with the city on outreach opportunities and ensuring public support.

The learning center that Eric talked about is a good investment to strengthen public support for direct potable reuse.

We hope to have it constructed in 2028 and opening in 2031.

And our target audience will be students as young as fifth grade um to for recycling purified water, and uh then giving tours as well.

And we, as you noted, have purified water bottles here for you to try.

Next slide, please.

We request um direction and guidance from the Valley Water Board and San Jose City Council to ensure development of win-win solutions that meet the cities and valley waters needs.

Specifically, continued support for the development of the project charter and exclusive negotiation agreement to implement the full scale advanced water purification facility support for coordinated public education outreach programs to ensure the success and support for project updates twice a year or as needed to the JRW PAC and with that we're open for any questions great thank you appreciate the staff presentation this is exciting progress why don't we go to public comment first Tony do you have any comment cards?

Yes bean please come on down great this is on item 6.2 not seeing anyone come down do we have any other comment cards?

Not for this item okay coming back to the joint body let me turn to colleagues all right and I see the mic up at Councilmember Kamei's spot I don't know who's speaking but go ahead the Director Eisenberg welcome it's me all right Councilmember go ahead.

So first of all I am uh so delighted that we've come to this point it's been a number of years and years and years and you know I I thought well you know when will I see this sort of come together and you know I want to thank the the board of director the Valley Water board of directors my colleagues as well as the staff the staff who have been working so closely to get us to this point in time I know we've got a ways to go but um it's just been uh tremendous progress over the years I recall when um I uh worked as a representative on the I think with uh with director estramer at the time um as a representative on the other side for Valley Water and you know trying to uh get this idea of of uh you know long-term sustainability how can we create uh that sustainability and certainty because you know the the the issues of imported water are very real and you never know what you're gonna get or not yet and so I I sincerely want to say thank you thank you so much to all who worked uh over the many many years to get to this point in time and and I look forward to you know finally I mean in 2031 I don't know I I may be retired by then but um we shall see but I I think that um it's a good thing it's a good thing for San Jose it's a good thing for our community I mean I I think that even beyond San Jose this is gonna this is gonna have tremendous reach and it is that sustainability and certainty that uh that I think that you know whether it's our community uh our homes our businesses we really need to rely on so I just want to extend my gratitude and you know gratitude to everyone who's involved in this because definitely this is something that will help us uh into the future as we look at any growth or changes and uh and I just look forward to our continued partnership thank you very much here here thanks council member appreciate that okay let's go to council member compost or director ball thank you mayor um and thank you to Valley Water staff for the report and the tour my team and I um were on the uh valley water purification site just last week uh touring the facility uh tasting the purified water it's great and um you know I I think it is important that we get more buzz around purified water uh as a drought proof source of water that lessens our uh dependency on external partners and I'm excited that we're moving forward on this project together.

It's critical that we recognize as our population grows, both in residents and businesses that we think critically about water sustainability and and so I'm curious about the overall capacity for long term and more purified water and what steps we can be taking right now that will help us get there more quickly.

So how can we uh as a city in partnership with the county and Valley Water be reducing our reliance on imported water?

And what are the risks associated by increasing or or what risks can be associated with this by increasing our production of purified water?

Thank you for the question.

So reducing reliance on imported water is already a state requirement, so that's why we've had uh water conservation programs and recycled water for a long time.

In terms of purified water, we're currently planning for uh 24,000 acre feet per year, um, which will require uh roughly uh like close to 30 million gallons a day of source water, and uh we've been working very closely with Eric's team.

Um we want to make sure that we balance um non-potable reuse that may expand uh in the city's service area, uh water conservation, and um this uh new potable reuse.

And so this seems like uh around there is is a good spot to make sure that everyone can get the water they need.

Uh the the biggest risk I would say is is the cost.

It is um very expensive, um, but we're doing our water supply master plan currently, and it is one of the most effective projects in um filling future shortage during droughts because it is drought-proof, like you said.

Thank you.

And is there an opportunity as we're thinking about um the cost of this to apply for cap and trade program or credits in the work that this is being done here?

Um, so it will use a lot of energy, so probably not on cap and trade.

Uh we are with the feasibility study uh getting ready to be able to apply for grants from US Bureau of Reclamation.

Okay, thank you for that.

And I also noted um that our um community members uh over the age of 50 need some more encouragement to get on board with this, and so I I would recommend leaning into talking about the future.

I mean, many folks in this age demographic may be parents, they may be grandparents, and so we know that our natural resources are limited in nature, and this is an opportunity to make sure that the people they care about, both present and future, actually have a strong opportunity to continue calling San Jose, Santa Clara County home.

Um, and so I I recognize that they're um, you know that whatever it takes to make sure that folks are aware of how great of an opportunity this is and leaning into what we know will help motivate them, I think could be um in asset and a tool.

So thank you again.

Thank you.

Thanks, council member.

We turn to council member Casey.

Oh, that was Director Bellard.

All right.

Hello, okay.

Um, thank you, and I wanted to underscore what uh council member Kamei said and thank staff as well.

This is super exciting, and also I wanted to um piggyback on what Councilmember Campo was campus was saying about um the need, I mean I know we all recognize it, and and Kirsten, you said that the state recognizes it as well.

We need to be reducing our um reliance on imported water, and so this is one of the ways that we can do that, and so that's part of why this is so exciting.

Um, and so on that, and you've heard me ask this before.

I mean, when I look at the timeline, and even Councilmember Kamei was like, we were talking about this way back then, you know, and she's like, Maybe I'll see it in my lifetime.

Um, but I'd love to I'd love to hear stuff.

I know you've heard me ask this before, but like, what are the ways that we can shortcut some of this?

How can we speed up the process?

You know, the planning itself, when you look at that part, I remember sitting in on a recycled water committee meeting in the city of San Jose, and they were like, it's gonna take two years to get all the agreements in place, and I was like, Whoa, that's a long time to get agreements in place.

Um so that would be my first question is are there are there ways we can be speeding up the process?

Yeah, thank you.

Um we we've definitely optimized our schedule for speed, even though 10 years doesn't look speedy, it it is um as fast.

I mean, we we did optimize it for speed.

One of the ways is to do this pilot first, and then the demonstration facility.

Uh, to really get so these are new regulations they just came into effect uh last October.

Um so the regulators here in Northern California, we are the first project even starting.

So they're learning how to implement their own regulations alongside us.

Um, and so and just the regulations themselves take a long time.

Uh very lengthy studies.

Nobody wants to make a mistake on this type of project and or be the first to make a mistake.

So our schedule is really the agreements may take some time, but that is not really the limiting factor.

It's all all the studies we have to do uh to make sure we can apply for a permit and then have a full-scale facility.

In terms of um the agreements, we could probably do them a little faster, but um again, it it's not the limit on why it takes so long.

Um it really takes this long because before we even want to start on the that full-scale facility, we want to make sure that we can get the permits to run it and not invest, you know, one, you know, nearly two billion dollars into something that we then can't use.

And then another question they have is the and I'm not on the recycled water committee, so this stuff is not something I've been focused on.

Um, but the reference to SFPUC, I kind of intuitively understand that Valley Water and the City of San Jose, you know, we have a lot in common.

You know, our success is dependent on their success, their success is dependent on our success.

We have a lot of mutually beneficial and just a lot of commonalities in what we're trying to achieve.

And so I understand as partners, you know, the things that we we want to be doing together and why um SFPUC, I'm a little less um like intuitively under I don't intuitively understand why like what are their interests and why would they?

I know about 10% of our water is supplied by us as a PUC, mainly in um Palo Alto and Mountain View, but I'd love to understand what their motivations are and how that meshes with ours, you know.

We'll ask Jeff to help answer that question.

Good afternoon, Jeff.

Oh, thank you.

Good afternoon, Jeff Provinzano, director of environmental services department uh for San Jose, part of North San Jose and Santa Clara and uh water supply into the county here is served by San Francisco.

Uh both cities in our northern portions are considered temporary and interruptible.

And here in North San Jose, we have a water supply that's under our control, uh wastewater that we can use for drinking water purposes and non-potable, and so when uh we engaged uh when we started engaging with Valley Water and San Francisco, we um were talking to both wholesalers at the same time, trying to find out what type of project would work best with an eye on providing uh long-term water supplies to these regions, at least to uh shore up these temporary and interruptible supplies, or how it could help uh lead us further down that conversation of gaining permanent water supplies, and so really that's that focus.

Here is we're gonna with Valley Water, partnering with Valley Water and City of Santa Clara build this project.

How can we wrap in all these pieces to provide um long-term water supply strategies?

Not only for ourselves, but to really lock in that water supply for the county too.

Thank you.

Thanks, Director.

Let's go to council member Ortiz.

All right, thank you, Mayor.

First, I just want to thank the leadership of city staff and of course water district staff for doing the groundwork to bring us here today.

Uh I also just want to thank our our water district uh directors, especially uh Chair Spermera and Vice Chair Santos for essentially laying the foundation of this project.

I think you guys are both gonna be terming out fairly soon.

So it's an it's a great opportunity for me as a uh young legislator to be able to, you know, have some input on which was gonna be your your uh legacy projects.

So thank you so much.

And also it's uh it's exciting to me to be here with uh former state senator Jim Bell.

Uh it's he's been one of my mentors and never thought I'd be able to sit on a dice with him, so just wanted to say that and just thank him for his leadership.

Um that being said, uh, you know, I just wanted to ask.

I know that we're gonna be uh entering into uh hopefully an exclusive negotiation agreement as well as a project charter.

Um, whether it's city or district staff, either of you guys could answer that.

Is there any potential or perceived barriers that we are expecting that may prevent us from coming to an agreement?

Likely not the exclusive negotiation agreement.

I I don't think so.

Uh, as Eric said, that um we expect that hopefully before the end of the year, and we've been exchanging drafts.

I we we don't see any obstacles.

Okay, and um the charter, as Eric said, is basically our work plan to get to the full-scale agreements.

We will have a lot of issues that we will be discussing that are difficult and where we have to make sure, you know, we find those win-win solutions.

Um, but uh for the charter itself, I I think we have a complete list of things that need to be discussed, and maybe Eric wants to add.

Um I don't I don't foresee any huge barriers other than maybe some of the difficult technical studies and and uh navigating through these new regulations.

I don't view those as maybe barriers that would stop the project, but they may cause um delays that we're hoping we can avoid.

So that's why we're doing the charter and the sort of planning work up front.

Um, and then in terms of the exclusive negotiation agreement, I don't I don't see that as an issue, but that is a sort of a precursor to a lot of this other work to give give the project some certainty that the significant amount of work and the dollars that are going to need to be expended um won't be spent for naught.

Great, thank you.

Thank you so much.

It's always I'm always happy to hear that there won't be uh perceived barriers, or at least big barriers.

Uh, next I wanted to just comment in regards to the public outreach and education programs.

Um could you speak to a little bit about you know what you have in uh planned in order to do this outreach?

And uh I know that several of us represent very diverse districts, so we'll look like you know, reaching out to whether it's a Latino or Vietnamese or Chinese communities in various in multiple of our districts.

Yeah, we'll refer that question to Kristen Yasukawa.

Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon.

Uh Board of Directors and City Council.

My name is Kristen Yasikawa, and I'm our C Civic Engagement Manager at Valley Water.

So I oversee our water supply outreach program, and uh we reach about two thousand people visitors um that come to our current purification center, and we're constantly staying up to date with industry trends with our water reuse uh founding uh water reuse association as well as a Bay Area Collaborative as well.

We are doing a monthly outreach collaboration with uh City of San Jose Environmental Services Department staff to ensure that we're working really closely and um really pushing a partnership message in our outreach as well.

And um one thing that is new on the forefront is the DPR, a use of purified water.

So we are actually at the forefront on an outreach um capacity, talking about that with the community.

So we're really relying on the polling that we do every year to test our messages.

Great.

One one follow-up question.

Thank you so much for that overview.

Will there ever be, and I know that I've taken a tour there, and I know Councilmember Campos just mentioned that.

Will there ever be like an open house day where we can maybe invite like trusted messengers of the community?

What I'm thinking like La Rasa Roundtable, you know, Aki or VAR, like community leaders to come, just I guess have a tour, at least talk to people who are working on the project.

Yes, we would uh definitely invite uh groups to come take a tour, or we've even had other people hold meetings um at our visitor center.

Do you have to say there's a lot of happening in that area right now with construction with San Jose's facility across the street, and we have some upcoming moves planned, but we'll always do our best to accommodate.

Okay, great.

And just the double check translation.

How many languages is the outreach going to be translated in, or you know, flyers or any sort of media uh concept?

So uh just as a general um outreach approach that we take is we have to try to have all of our printed materials in four different languages, so English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Mandarin.

Um we uh have limited capacity at the moment to provide tours in different languages, but we are looking into different technologies, such as what they use at museums where we could have some pre-recorded and pre-translated tours available.

So that's in the works.

Thank you.

That's all my questions for that item.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And then one more final item, and this is in regards to the regulatory uh somebody's reaching out to me, they want me to ask this question.

I guess microplastics and nanoplastics are becoming a growing regulatory issue.

And so, how how will this facility test for the presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in both source water and treated water?

Well, the source water will definitely have it.

Um the water that is treated um and then drinkable will not.

We've already done some of these studies about microplastics, but uh the issue that we then have to address is what happens to the reverse osmosis concentrate where it will all be concentrated.

Um, and so yeah, the these are these, you know, when when you have um discharge into the ocean, uh you get a lot more dilution than you get in the South San Francisco Bay, which is very sensitive environment, and um so so we need to work through those issues.

Um, but the water that people will drink will not have it in it.

All right, thank you so much.

Thanks, council member.

We go to is it director Eisenberg next?

Yes, director.

Okay, thank you.

So, um, as most of you know, I've huge fan, passionate fan of water recycling, and I am very grateful, as others have said, to the progress that we've made.

Um, however, you know, I do think I don't think we've done enough, and I do think that since you asked, I think there are some things that um the city of San Jose can do to help us.

Um but first I want to offer just a little bit more background about why this is so urgent.

Um, right now we're actually utilizing just a tiny fraction of the available wastewater that we could be recycling.

Um, you know, that wastewater, like just like imported water, is not in our possession.

You know, neither is important if it's imported water, but the wastewater is far more local than the imported water.

And you know, maybe it's because I am from the private sector for 30 years and from startups and I where we did commercial deals all the time without much drama or hassle.

Like I don't think it's complicated to do deals with wastewater providers.

Should be pretty easy.

I volunteer to help you.

It's a it's a commercial contract, and I do think we could be stepping it up.

I think that the numbers are something like what, five percent of available um wastewater that we're recycling.

Imagine we could we could actually have 20 times 20 times as much recycled water, and again, this is a local source.

Another thing that's really important to keep in mind is are the byproducts of what of the process of water recycling versus the process of water treatment.

You know, very often, and you know, with just actually implied here, we think of that only recycled water goes through any purification process.

But the truth is is that imported water comes in and has been coming in more and more contaminated and toxic over time.

And what we have right now, I mean, Valley Water has fantastic water treatment centers.

It's true for imported water and does a great job.

But when I visited both times, I was really concerned because the byproduct of the water treatment centers for imported water are truly toxic, hazardous materials, and we are having employees be exposed to that.

We're also um the byproduct after this water has been treated, is toxic and needs to be disposed of in an even more complicated way.

More plastic, you know, more fertilizers.

This stuff has not slowed down, in part because, you know, in my opinion, the legislature hasn't been doing its job of actually stopping pollution at its source or making polluters pay.

But regardless, the water, the imported water comes in really, really toxic, and we clean it up.

Workers deal with that, and we have to we have to put it lord knows where with seawater rise, all of that will be in our front, you know, in the in our the lakes in front of our house in the future, right?

Uh meanwhile, the byproduct of water recycling is compost, which can be and is offered.

Palo Alto has been doing this for a long time, offered to our community gardens.

I love the shared community gardens.

I'm sure you have some around here too, and to local individuals who have their own, who are lucky to have yards and have their own gardens.

You know, my grandmother made all these vegetables grow in a postage card, post-stamp sized yard in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and many people are doing the same out here, and they get to grow all year round, unlike in Wisconsin.

And this compost is good, and they're saving money.

They're not buying soil.

They're using compost, and it's helpful to people.

Is there some toxic byproducts from the use of recycling?

Yes, but all that toxic waste is waste that comes in through the drinking water.

What recycled water is drinking water plus the waste that we put in it in our households.

And if we're going to do the thing of having drinking water in our toilets, I it's it's I think it's just a shame to not actually just take this the much easier step of removing the waste creating compost.

You know, and with that in mind, with that in mind too, there's another use of recycling that we really haven't even begun to really utilize here that around the world is being done.

You know, in Israel, a hundred percent of agriculture is watered by recycled water, and that's non-potable recycled water.

We have no immediate plans to do any non potable recycled water, even though that is by far the most affordable use of wastewater, and you know, not just in Israel, Australia, Germany, you know, Orange County.

It's it is easier, it is less expensive, and it allows us, and therefore you to fulfill our obligation or statutory requirement of delivering clean water in an affordable way.

Now, what can you do?

We need, I think we need help with our contracts with the wastewater providers.

I think whenever I asked about the use of non-potable wastewater, I've been told that Valley Water doesn't do that, that we don't do purple pipes.

Now here we are with you.

You do, you actually can have zoning requirements and building requirements, you know, that required that all new developments come, you know, ready to use recycled water, you know, including purple pipe water.

And you know, we don't have the right to have those zoning, but you guys do.

Another thing you can do for us, you know, I think is to really work on, you know, and there's some proposed ordinances about that.

Director, I'm just talking later.

So anyway, for five minutes, I did want to just let you finish that one.

So, yeah, is it so similar?

Okay, last thing I want to say is that I think that there are ample examples about how people over 50 are fine with recycled water.

Orange County, which has an older population than us, actually uses utilizes a lot more recycled water than we do.

People don't know where their water comes from, and they like it when it's more affordable.

That's all.

Thank you.

Good points, thank you for sharing all that.

Let me turn now to Councilmember Cohen.

Yeah, thank you.

First, I just really want to thank the staffs of Old Valley Water and the city for getting us to this point.

It's kind of phase two now.

We're past the discussion point and into the implementation phase.

I I want to uh thank also um Director Bal Ballard for bringing up the timeline.

Obviously, I'm I've expressed this before, and I'll just say it again quickly.

I'm frustrated by the fact that we even have to do the demonstration facility.

We're not we're certainly not the first place to be proposing purified water, potable purified water, not even in the state of California, let alone in the world.

I mean, this is known technology, and it's frustrating that there's so much uncertainty and questions about it, but we've kind of moved past that point.

We're being required to do it.

Um but obviously any kind of ways of overlapping timeline and moving into next phases without having to stage gate so much can help us get there.

Certainly we have enough wastewater that if we close the loop on that wastewater, we would not be at the mercy of rainfall and and dams and everything else that we're at the mercy of because there's all the water we use can be reused.

Now I understand there's also questions about um about the uh osmos reverse osmosis waste and other things about what the levels are and how much we can use and we need to have that conversation, but I encourage us to be thinking as bold as possible at about the um how much, you know, getting as as far as possible with capacity as we can go, because this is really important.

Um and I also was just going to comment about the importance of our of our work with SFPUC as a as a San Jose's representative on the Bay Area Water Conservation Supply Agency.

Um we you know we we're aware of the interdependence we have with um the Hechechi water supply comes from SFPUC, my district, North San Jose, as well as Santa Clara relies on that water.

And as was pointed out, unlike the other 20 or so jurisdictions, they we're not we're not guaranteed.

We they can cut us off at any time.

The other cities like Palo Alto have a permanent supply, but this kind of an arrangement where we can supply some recycled water into their system um can help guarantee that supply and therefore lessen the potential need for Valley Water to step in and fill a void.

So I think we all need to be thinking about as much as we can get so that we can enhance our our supply, but also enhance SFPUC's supply so that we can all have a robust water system.

But thank you for helping us get to this phase.

Great points.

Thanks, Councilmember.

I don't see any other hands.

Did anyone else want to speak on this item?

I'm not seeing any.

Okay, I'll just uh echo the thanks to all the great staff work on both the Valley Water and City side.

Love the idea of having a learning center where people can come through and really experience it.

Um and obviously have a lot of educational work to do, but I think as you're hearing from everybody, it's really important that we drive full steam ahead to expand this uh source of uh water.

Um also, Councilmember Ortiz, to your point.

Uh it it is surreal to sit on the dais with the guy who was my boss 25 years ago.

I think that's probably true for Councilmember Condelas as well.

Did you did anybody else report to Jim on this uh dais?

No, okay.

Um yeah, we're gonna do that.

Well, mayor, uh Director Bell's showing us the high school pictures of like when you enter.

Oh boy, let's put those away.

As long as he doesn't give them to the AV guys, we're good.

Um, so uh Chair Estramara, on the city side, I would recommend for our purposes that we take a motion and a vote on just accepting the staff report.

I don't know what your process is.

Would you like to do the same?

Or is it okay?

So um why don't we take care of that quickly on the city side if we can?

And uh I see, let's see, is that Councilmember Kamei?

Yeah, okay.

I'd like to move that we accept the report.

Second, okay, great.

Thank you.

I don't see any other hands.

So Tony, we'll vote on the city side.

Are we able to do that on our screens?

Okay.

Great.

Oh, that is the wrong item.

Do you want to replace that?

Oh, yeah.

Sorry.

We're on 6.2.

Sorry about that.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

Motion passes unanimously.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

I'll turn to Chair Stromer.

Thank you.

I was gonna vote there, but okay.

Uh may I I'll just have a few a few minutes uh comments very quickly.

First of all, uh to thank the city of San Jose for uh preparing uh our um lead uh our lead person uh Kirsten Struvey.

You know, we stole her from the City of San Jose, and uh she's been a fantastic person.

The reason why we've moved this far this quick ahead where we are today is mostly because of her and her team.

So I definitely want to let everybody know who's responsible for where we are, but I also wanted to point out how complex these uh these systems are the largest water district in the country met barely now doing what we did 2020 years ago.

Our Purification Center just you know, we just celebrated our 10th anniversary this past year, and uh some of these big big organizations are just barely catching up to where we were 10 years ago.

That's where we really are, and I I you know I've more than most of you who have been at this for quite a while, have always been very frustrated, especially with the regulators, but um, you know, kudos to us because this is how far we are today.

Um we begged, we fought, we pushed, we beat up the state water department, the border board to get these regulations for the last 15 years.

We've been pushing.

The second, you know, in 2008, the second uh uh project in the country that got funded under Obama's uh reinvestment act was our water purification center.

That's so we've always been in the forefront of these efforts, and I think you know we have to recognize that, we have to take credit for it.

Uh I I recall in 2007 I was chair and uh councilwoman Kamei was vice chair.

We went and met with the mayor of the time, you know, Mayor Reed.

Uh and we formed a water committee between two council folks, the mayor, the mayor of Santa Clara, and three of our and three of our board members, and we continue to have that committee which is leading this effort.

In fact, just last year at the beginning of talking about this project, getting this project to a fast track.

We had we had Councilman Cohen and Councilman Ortiz on that committee, who insisted with the rest of our members, um our vice chair Santos, and also of course um uh Jim Bell, that we get this project off the ground as soon as possible, and here we are.

This is the fastest that we've ever moved on a huge uh two billion dollar project.

So kudos to us.

I think it's important that uh we recognize how tough these things are and how we are meeting the challenge.

So thank you, mayor, and I'll uh accept uh uh I'll entertain a motion to receive that report.

So I'm gonna second, motion is second.

Director Ballard.

Director Bell, Director Eisenberg.

Aye, Director Shewa, Vice Chair Santos, Director Varela, Chair Estramera.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Okay, we uh will now move on to item 6.1.

This is the status report on the Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit Project, Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project and Collaborative Encampment Outreach and Cleanup.

This was agendized on the Valley Water Agenda's item 2.2.

We have a staff presentation.

We'll give staff a minute to transition and get started.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

So we know this was this was stubborn.

Yes, yeah, two years old, I don't remember.

I remember if we had it.

All right.

Good afternoon, mayor, council members, chair, and board of directors of Alley Water.

I'm Ryan McCarter.

I'm the deputy operating officer of our dam safety and capital delivery division.

So wanted to give a presentation today on all the progress we've made on the Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit Project, as well as the Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project and some of the encampment work that's been going on related to those projects.

So that's quite a bit of things, some of our most high priority things that we're working on at Valley Water, along with the collaboration with the city of San Jose.

So I'll try to make this pretty short so we can engage in some good discussion after, but I do have some some photos and some slides to share here.

So this is a kind of the title slide, but it shows a nice aerial view of Anderson Dam during the construction that's going on now.

You can see the barge there at the bottom of the screen in the reservoir.

So that's the reservoir at our dead pool, which is the lowest level that we can get it at, and it's been that way for about five years now.

And so that's a major kind of problem with our water supply, not being able to utilize the full volume of this reservoir like we have in the past.

So then you can see uh the city of Morgan Hill is there on the left on the upper right of the screen that moves you north up into the city of San Jose area of the county.

So just to give some perspective on the geography there.

Okay, so just real quick on what the Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project is.

So there's some major components, the center of the screen there is a gold kind of highlighted image of the embankment from a bird's eye view.

So we'll be replacing the dam as part of the retrofit, so taking out all the liquefiable materials and making it safe for future seismic events that will most likely happen.

And then also another major component is the high level outlet works and low-level outlet works.

So this is the piping system that moves the water from the reservoir out into Coyote Creek.

So we're really going to be improving from the existing four-foot diameter pipe we have now, the only pipe we have to move water in and out of the reservoir in a controlled fashion into two actually three different pipes that we can control the releases and make larger releases and uh drain down the reservoir quickly in the event of an emergency.

And so that's another major portion of it.

And then we also have the emergency spillway up there at the top.

That spillway will also be removed and replaced with a larger spillway that can convey larger flows in the event of a full reservoir and spilling into the emergency spillway.

And then we're also extending the length of it to manage those flows in a safer way.

So those are kind of the big main components, and there's a lot of other small features of the project, of course, that go into the final completion.

Okay, so this is the Anderson Dam Tunnel project.

So this is what we're working on right now.

So we kicked this off in 2021 as part of the FERC emergency order.

And so we've made a lot of great progress on this project so far, kind of going from the right side to the left side, the intake trash rack foundation is done, as well as the microtunnel boring machine lake tap.

So that was an eight-foot diameter microtunnel boring machine that bored through the last section to build the lake tap and really drilled right into the water about 30 feet below the surface.

So that was a pretty major engineering feat that we completed.

Uh the red portion is the main tunnel that's all been excavated.

We're working on the final lining now, and I'll talk about that in a bit.

The outlet structure, which dissipates the energy of the flows that will go through the tunnel, is complete.

And then we also have completed uh the opening of the north channel as well as the the weir that will be used to dissipate the flows.

A second time coming out of the tunnel.

So what this tunnel does is allows us to divert the flows during construction of the retrofit project.

So when we take that dam down, we need to move that water safely that comes into the watershed naturally around to Coyote Creek.

So that this does about five times more volume as we can currently do with our four foot pipe.

So here's another snapshot kind of showing the section of the tunnel and the different pieces within it that I just went over, but just showing kind of the different pieces that we have for the final lining.

And one really important part is this red zone here.

We call them articulating segments.

So we have these major structural concrete sections that I'll show a picture of on the next slide that uh kind of articulate like slices of bread along the length of the tunnel.

They're spaced at either five or ten feet apart, and there's an unreinforced gap in between so that if the ground moves during any kind of fault activity, the tunnel won't collapse.

So this the tunnel will remain open as these segments can kind of articulate independent of each other.

So that's a major seismic feature for this new tunnel that we're building.

And then the yellow section there, that's going to be a 13-foot diameter steel pipe that leads out into the diversion outlet structure to manage these diversion flows.

So I could talk about the engineering of this all day long, but I'll try to make it quick.

We've got lots and lots of really exciting work happening out there.

So a little bit on the progress, the top photo there shows what the site looked like from an aerial view in September 2021, just a couple months after we got started with the grading and building the portal for the tunnel.

And then just last November, we completed the north channel portion of the work, and you can see the difference there, all of that gray rock that we brought in to protect that channel from eroding during these large releases that we'll make out of that diversion outlet structure that you can see there with the purple highlight around it.

And then you can see the gray portal work there.

That's a giant retaining wall to hold back that slope in the event of any earthquakes or large rainfall.

And so just really is highlighting all the progress we've made on the tunnel project here.

This is showing those articulating segments that I was just talking about.

I just wanted to share this this one slide about the construction photos.

These are my favorite, but this is a really cool thing.

But the reason this is important, this has delayed the project pretty significantly and increased the cost.

We had some issues with the design since we did enter into this contract without an approved design due to the emergency nature of it.

And we made several changes on the that steel reinforcement bar that you can see on the left there.

And so there was a lot of changes that the contractor had to make in their sequencing and how they put this work together, and so that resulted in some some pretty significant schedule delays and cost increases.

But we are pouring the concrete.

The photo on the right there is from July, and we have moved forward to start building those concrete segments.

So that's going along pretty well now.

So we're really happy that uh that's that's moving along and the project's coming to a near completion.

This is the overall schedule of the Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project.

This is a lot of information here, but I'll try to go through it in a meaningful way.

Starting at the top here, you can see our design on the Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project.

It's been going on for quite some time, but we are wrapping up that phase right now as we speak.

We're we're reviewing the 100% design documents.

So we've got a plan here, and we are gonna be advertising for bids for this very large construction contract here in the next couple months, and then giving uh notice to proceed or NTP to the contractor in the middle of 2026, and they'll start working on their administrative pieces for the project, and then jump right in in 2027, start prepping the site for the dam reconstruction, and then you see the dam construction period there going out to 2033 in the completion, and so below that working our way down.

Meanwhile, we've been working on all the environmental review with both CEQA and EPA, state and federal requirements, as well as the permitting that goes along with those, and that's underway.

We've received several of our state permits, and we're we're getting close on a lot of our federal permits.

The next bar down, you can see procurement that I just described our our bid process that we're going through, but we did really start that back at the end of 2024 when we did do a pre-qualification for the contractors, which was completed earlier this year.

So looking forward to moving forward with that.

And then you've got some bars here showing the stage one diversion and the stage two diversion.

So I will explain what those are.

The stage one diversion is what we're building right now for the tunnel project that's that we allows us to divert those flows, and then we actually do an upgrade to that system to release even more water and make sure that we can divert the flows that come in in the winter.

And we call that the stage two diversion.

So that's a small tunnel that will open up what we did in the tunnel project to a larger diameter, and so that will be completed in early in the project and then 2028, and that'll allow us to start removing the dam safely and able to divert those flows.

So tying into that stage one and stage two diversion is where we really have the nexus with the Coyote Creek flood protection project.

So you can see a couple bars down.

I'll skip over the Anderson Dam Tunnel schedule.

It's pretty straightforward.

We'll be completing that next year.

And then we have the Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project there, and we have a phase one there, and that's what we've been working on for the past year or two years, and that is complete now.

All those flood walls are in place for that portion, and that allows us to make those stage one releases for the beginning of the Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project after the tunnels complete.

So we're on track there.

That's great that that's done now, and we're getting into the phase two of that project, which also is in the city of San Jose to allow for those stage two diversion flows.

So we're looking to start construction on that in 2026 and complete that in 2028 ahead of the need for the stage two diversion releases into Coyote Creek.

And here's an overview of the Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project.

This is probably an image familiar to most, but you can see the difference here.

The yellow hatch pattern is the phase one project or the Coyote Creek flood mitigation measures project, and then the other reaches shown there with the purple or the purple and yellow is the second phase where additional flood walls will be put into place to manage those large diversion flows that we'll be putting into Coyote Creek down to Anderson Dam.

So then you've got some some bullets there on the right side, just kind of giving the history of the dates of the major milestones here, just focusing in on the final EIR for the Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project was certified this year in March, and then as I mentioned, the construction will start in mid-2026.

So really excited to get that going.

And here's another schedule breaking down the Coyote Creek Flood Protection Project into a couple different activities here, just showing the history of the design and the construction and how those tie into the Anderson Dam operations.

As I mentioned, that star for the Anderson Dam tunnel operation that won't be until 2026, but the point was that we needed to complete the first phase ahead of that date, and we have done that.

So that's that's good news.

And just one slide of the images of the work that's been done on the Coyote Creek flood mitigation measures project or phase one.

So you can see the before picture on the left there, and then the after picture, and just seeing those taller flood walls that we put in with the sheet piler, really successful project there, getting those all in pretty good schedule time.

So in order to build the Coyote Creek projects, we've had to do quite a bit of coordination with the city of San Jose and some encampment relocations.

This was a major major part of the project to allow us to really get started and do this project and make these these creeks safe for the construction and for the community surrounding them.

So you can see the uh the kind of the trash pile up there in two different locations that was before the project started along Coyote Creek.

The next slide, there's a few images from the quarry court area, both before and after, before on the left and after on the right.

So you can see all the cleanup work that went into that, and that was a pretty successful effort working with the city to get all that done in time to move forward with the project.

And here's just a breakdown of the data, and this is all in the agenda memo.

There's lots and lots of facts and numbers in there that have been shared with us with the city of San Jose and our efforts with our encampment team.

So I mean just kind of going through the numbers there.

You can see it was a pretty large number of people living in the creeks and a pretty large effort to get them out.

So I'd say great success working together.

And as the last slide, this is the map of the no encampment zones of the city of San Jose, and you can see in the upper portion of the screen there, the Coyote Creek section along there, where we do have no encampment zones and and just kind of the work on establishing those and the connection to the encampment cleanups that's gone on there.

Okay, and I stand for questions, and we've got other people on the Valley Water team that can help with some of the topics if they are the pleasure of the council or board to ask about them.

Great.

Thank you very much.

As Tony noted, we are uh just taking questions on the valley water side.

Is that correct?

Tony, do you want to reiterate your point and tell us if we have any public comment?

Yeah, so we are taking public comments only on the agendized items for the water district, and then for open form at the end, that is only a water district forum.

The city council meeting already ended.

This is a separate meeting.

Um, so those people who have submitted cards on city business, you can talk to me after the meeting or you can leave now, but I'm not gonna call city business open forum for this meeting, and I have no cards for this item.

Okay, is that true for the clerk on the Valley Water?

Okay, great.

Okay, then we'll come back to joint body here.

Um I don't see any hands.

Chair, did you actually you have your mic on?

Did you want to comment first, Chair?

Um, well, I again I want to point out um once again that um one of the reasons why uh we're able to move so quickly now uh on our schedule, stick to the schedule on Anderson, uh, which which all of us know is extremely important both because of cost and safety uh is because of the work that we did together to prepare on the project that we just described on Coyote Creek.

If we hadn't done that, uh, you know, we would have put out the schedule uh every year the hundred million bucks.

So that that's once again.

You know, we have to um uh we have to let people know what it is that we're doing, and when we're successful, uh we've got to acknowledge that.

So if we would have lasted, uh we would have taken six months, 50 million bucks, a year, 100 million dollars.

That's what it would have been.

So working together once again, that's why I say this has been our most productive year together because of because of where we are, and that's why we have these issues on the agenda because we want to let our mutual constituents know that this is what we've been up to together.

Uh if there's any comments, uh, and take them now.

And I'll just I'll just add the thanks on uh all the collaboration.

I know uh I think all my colleagues are probably aware, but uh Valley Water contributed resources to help with the abatement efforts along the waterways, including for outreach, the uh some of the housing costs, and then the abatement and cleanup efforts and we appreciate that collaboration.

It's a shared responsibility, it's a tough job, but we appreciate you helping uh with the project.

Um I did want to just ask, and then I see we've inspired a few hands, so I'll be quick.

Um, how are we coordinating?

Can you just share a little more about how we're coordinating for the next phase of work and in specifically the encampments that need to be resolved and the estimate of what needs to be done next?

Thank you for the question, Mayor Olympia Williams, deputy director of the community services division.

We have cleared about 23 miles of the creek area that's in the project area that um Valley Water is currently working in.

We have one um encampment that we'll be addressing in the spring of 2026, but we're working closely with Valley Water so we can make sure that our timeline is in alignment with their timeline as well.

Okay, and I saw the ratio there.

Looks like maybe maybe two-thirds of folks are accepting a housing solution.

And um, are we working to prevent re-encampment in the area?

The 23 miles, what's the status of those 23 miles?

Because we spend a lot of time cleaning up, offering housing, and then often we're back six months later, and it's a very expensive proposition to do it all over again.

Definitely.

So those 23 miles will be designated as a no encampment zones.

Signs have already started to go out, and there's some final areas where signage will be installed over the next few months.

We have a team that goes through those areas daily, and anyone that may re-encamp in that area, we educate them on that as a no encampment zone.

We're sure to connect them with our housing department outreach team so they can get connected to housing resources, and then if need be, we abate people and remove them from those no encampment zone areas.

Got it.

And then for that remaining encampment or others who are there, is our agreement still in operation and do we have additional housing resources for those individuals?

Yes, we are coordinating with the housing department so that as we abate that encampment, folks will be able to shift into housing.

Okay, great.

And then uh, I don't know, it seems relevant to this item, but if Valley Water could just share a little bit about the water resources protection zones ordinance, if there are any outcomes related to enforcement or how how that's going.

Good afternoon, uh council and Valley Water Board.

Mark Billski, assistant officer in watersheds operations and maintenance.

Uh I oversee the good neighborhood program at Valley Water.

And as far as our water resources protection zones ordinance, this is an ordinance that our board passed last year uh that essentially prohibits encampments and certain encampment-related activities on all Valley Water property.

Uh we're working through implementation of the ordinance uh via uh an ordinance implementation plan that categorizes encampments uh in into two priority levels.

Uh those that are in the high priority level for enforcement of the ordinance are addressed immediately.

Those would be encampments that pose the most uh serious uh environmental safety or operations issues, those are addressed immediately by our staff.

Um and then any other encampment that's not in that high priority category can be considered low priority as long as uh the people living there are following what we call our encampment condition guidelines, which is a set of uh ground rules and best practices for camping that uh, for instance, uh limit the encampment size, uh prohibit weapons, prohibit violence, things like that.

Uh those those encampments will be considered low priority as Valley Water's resources allow us to eventually uh enforce the ordinance everywhere, and and I think that will work in uh in in step with City of San Jose and other jurisdictions increasing the amount of housing available to people.

So as housing rises, Valley Water's ability to enforce our ordinance uh will will rise as well.

Great.

Well, we appreciate Valley Water's contribution to interim uh housing and other solutions in the past, and hope you'll consider continuing that for our shared goal of getting folks out of the waterways and into a safer, uh more managed and supportive environment.

When you are doing when you do begin implementing, it sounds like that's still being something you're working through.

Will that always be a call to municipal police after outreach?

I mean, I assume it's outreach first, then is it municipal police?

Is County Sheriff uh a resource for you all, or how how do you actually do implementation?

Yeah, participation participation from law enforcement is not always necessary, uh it's really outcome-based.

We're looking for people to remove themselves from the situation that has put them in the high priority category.

Our staff do employ in the city of San Jose employ uh officers in from the secondary employment unit.

That's for staff safety.

Uh, they're not there necessarily to assist with abatement work, but in the case when um people become violent or or when threats happen, sometimes the officers have to intervene.

Right.

And and Valley Water uh pays for the services of those officers.

So SEU, that's what I was curious about.

Yeah, got it.

Okay.

Um makes sense, and we have a similar code of conduct and prioritization system, and so sounds very aligned.

Okay, let me thank you.

Let me turn to colleagues.

Uh let me go to council member compost first.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you again to staff for this report.

Um, I I definitely wanted to uplift um a little bit of the last statement that you made with um improved uh supply of affordable housing, uh decreasing the amount of encampments and thus the amount of abatement work that uh is being done.

So, you know, through lessons learned because we've been dealing with this crisis for decades, if not generations now, uh what process improvements has the city adopted to make it easier and faster to permit uh affordable housing in addressing this issue?

I'm not sure if we have the staff.

Yeah, John, did you want to answer that?

I don't think I'm not sure we have anyone from housing that could answer that question accurately.

I don't see anybody.

Okay, well, some food for thought, something for us to consider because we know that that's um key in addressing this.

But I do want to bring it back to water because my understanding is that the water district does offer rebates for businesses and residences to change their landscaping and adopt water efficient technologies on existing buildings.

I know from my past experience working in facilities that there may be more savings if we came in during the planning and design phase with uh these opportunities for water efficient technologies and drought tolerant landscaping.

So what else can the city do in this current regulatory environment to make sure that as new existing, to make sure that existing and new buildings coming online are water-wise, I'll take it.

Thank you for the question again, Jeff Provenzano, director of environmental services department.

Um we have a variety of well within our municipal code, we have a variety of water efficient standards that are kind of built in there.

Um we also um we don't take a we don't take an approach of directing uh new developments to do it.

We really encourage behavior.

So we do a lot of outreach on programs that are available, uh, rebates that are available, perhaps like through Valley Water, landscape replacement programs, um, the benefits of drought tolerant landscape.

Um, and we do here in the city have um it is a state law, it's um well o it's a water efficient landscape ordinance.

So we do have our own water efficient landscape ordinance.

So new developments when they're coming in need to follow uh state guidelines, and uh we did a lot of work um back when we implemented that maybe three years ago with that definitely with the developer and stakeholder communities on the benefits of that, and it was already a practice that was becoming well established, and so that is to not put in uh non-recreational, sorry, too many negatives there, to uh only install uh turf for recreational purposes, and other than that, uh not to install turf for non-functional purposes, so a lot of drought landscape and a lot of benefits around drought tolerant landscape.

Um, other than that, um we do a lot of outreach, uh we have a uh water conservation goals, and so while we don't uh tell new developments what they have to do, we do encourage water use practices and and uh moving forward as a water retailer, we'll continue with that outreach strategy to uh to educate um both residents and businesses on on water efficient practices.

Thank you, Jeff.

I'm glad to hear that there is robust uh engagement and outreach, but I'm I'm still curious as to why.

Is the reason why we don't have these um why why we don't have stronger suggestions?

Is it because we don't have council policy that directs um more water efficient water-wise development?

Um not necessarily, it is um uh we have um objectives to reach on reducing water usage, both indoor and outdoor, and for uh San Jose Municipal Water System, the water um the city's water retailer and the other two water companies serving San Jose, we've already reached our targets for for now.

We do need to reduce by about another 25% over the next 10 years.

Um so at that point, there may be needs for um for uh different measures to be put in place.

But one of the techniques that we are looking at versus telling someone to do something is we're implementing automated metering infrastructure.

This will give both us and every property owner a tool on their phone to be able to see real-time daily water usage and be able to make adjustments in their schedules, how they compare with their neighbors, and it'll provide a platform for us to communicate almost real time on uh water saving techniques.

So we're really looking at changing use behavior versus telling someone they have to do something.

We want to lead with education first, and again, backing up here, and it's really because we we are on target right now with meeting all of our water conservation goals.

Our residents and businesses have done a phenomenal job on saving water over the past eight years, and uh so really in a definitely in an education phase right now.

Thank you.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Let's go to Councilmember Condelas.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I just um you know I I want to start off by thanking staff for your presentation and your work on on the work.

Um I see a lot of familiar faces, not just in the box but in the stance, uh given my time at Valley Water.

Um and so I I appreciate the opportunity to share some comments.

Um one, I'm gonna talk a little bit about the um Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project.

Um shout out to the OGR office uh who who did a water walk tour earlier this year, and I encourage my colleagues if you have not done that, super educational, even as as an elected now to actually see the the infrastructure and see some of these projects in person because they're a lot bigger uh in person than on the on the pictures and the slides, just say.

Um so you know uh with regards to that project, uh I I the the first phase for first I guess it's for Valley Water stuff.

Uh I think it's the second slide.

The the first phase basically of the of the tunnel project is is mandated under federal regulations or federal regulators, correct?

That's why all those things happened before the actual seismic retrofit itself.

Yes, thanks for the question.

That's correct.

Okay.

And so originally the diversion tunnel was going to be part of the Anderson Dam seismic retrofit project all in one package.

And in 2020, when the the fur quarter was given to us to to first drain the reservoir down to Deadpool for safety, it was also to advance the construction of the diversion tunnel.

So we had to kind of tear that package out of the retrofit project and fast track that design to complete that construction.

Yeah, no, and and no, and I totally recognize the the importance and the need to be able to you know have the bare bones down before you actually start building up.

So that's that's important.

Um because I know I've heard some some folks talk about costs, but you know that's what happens when uh regulations are are placed upon projects that make it a lot more expensive to build.

Um, you know, shifting gears real quick, I want to talk a little bit about the encampment outreach and cleanup efforts along along this the the not just Coyote Creek but along adjacent properties.

Um, you know, I I appreciate the collaborative approach.

Um it's it's important to managing encampments without spreading people to other areas inadvertently.

Um and but we are dealing with people.

Um and so, you know, one of the one of the things that I've seen is especially along Thompson Creek, uh, that's adjacent to the Coyote Creek um area is is you know folks moving upstream um or moving other in in other parts of the city.

And so I I guess I have some concerns based on you know some of our actions.

So I I guess I'd like to hear from staff on what our thoughts are with regards to you know collaborating with Valley Waters in those, you know, adjacent to their resource protection zones, and you know, how are we collaborating with with them specifically in those areas?

And selfishly speaking, along Thompson Creek.

Thank you for the question, John Susrelli Director of Parks Rec.

Um, so the main thing we try to do when we think there's gonna be impact upstream or downstream from the work we do is we will proactively post other areas.

Um so council Mokahi's going through this right now with Columbus Park where we close down parking in other streets around the area, might not even be anybody there.

We're just anticipating movement.

But the further you get away from the actual abatement, the less we're gonna do that, right?

We're not we can't cover the whole city.

Right.

So that's really the one of the main tools we use to try to prevent nearby relocating.

But as you saw in the numbers, we don't really have any situation where 100% of people say, yes, I'm coming inside, we're all ready to go.

So there's always gonna be some percentage that's gonna float around.

We do try to have if it's a particularly large encampment, we do have like to have a heightened awareness about that.

So if the immediate neighborhood is being impacted, we're patrolling around trying to keep people moving.

But that doesn't solve where they're gonna live or where they're gonna land.

It's just an immediate short-term response to not let people just go right around the corner and resettle.

Great.

No, thank you, John.

Um now, with regards to like the intervals of like when Valley Water goes out and you know abates Thompson Creek.

Do we know and uh can you maybe share a little insight into that into that level of collaboration that let that that communication and what that looks like?

Yeah.

So we coordinate on all of all these water abatements.

We're always talking to each other.

We had a recent one on Autumn Parkway, you might remember.

Um there was a shooting there, we had to sort of do a quick abatement.

That was both of us working together doing that, because that's not all our land.

These these waterways are just a mosaic of ownership and and we are just trading parcels as you go along uh the waterways.

So we we're uh if for no other reason we're forced to work together cooperatively and make sure that each other's letting the other know.

Because we can also create a lot of work for each other, right?

If we're not coordinating, right?

They'll just shift on to their land instead of ours, those kind of things.

Right.

No, and and and I'm glad you you you you say that because you know when we have an area that's you know labeled or or designated as as a water resource protection zone, um, it would make sense to if there's a parcel, a city owned parcel or uh an area where it's obviously gonna be re-encamped and it's happened several times, it might be worth considering creating a no encampment zone there to match the Valley Waters the districts uh enforcement if you will.

So it's not just oh we we have a uh an in a no uh water resource protection zone here, folks know okay, it's okay, we're gonna go right across the way on the city owned strip, and we're safe, and they'll be they'll be gone.

And so that's that's what I'm hearing, and so it's my hope that we can uh be a little bit coordinated.

It's specifically in areas that are outside of um, you know, uh outside of the map that I saw that would make sense without creating an undue burden on staff.

Um so, anyways, that being said, keep up the great work and keep collaborating.

I appreciate the the uh outcomes.

Thanks, council member.

All right, and is this uh Councilmember Kamei or yes, Councilmember Kameh.

Uh thank you so much.

Uh you know, uh many many years ago when we did the tunnel over at Lexington Dam, uh I thought, oh, that this is phenomenal.

But after having seen the structural tunnel lining, I thought, oh my gosh, this is really incredible.

So as someone who's not an engineer but saw so many different projects over my 17 years.

Um this is really incredible that you're um at this point at this time, because I know that it takes a lot to be able to do this, and it's never such a straight line.

Uh so you know, the adjustments and all of that, but but certainly it is um uh quite a feat.

So congratulations up to this point, and I wish you a lot of success in future.

Um so thank you very much.

Uh on the encampments, I I did have a question on uh your slide, I think it's like 14, regarding um uh the uh number number of individuals provided outreach services.

I was wondering how the 178 total individuals are counted, because according to the graphic, only 120 of the 204 individuals were moved to either Guadalupe EIH or to a shelter or some other kind of interim housing.

So I was just curious as to how the counting was done.

Well, the counting the county is just done ahead of the abatements, and so typically when we have larger abatements like this, we uh we count, then we count again, and then right before you count again, and you're you're creating lists of people that you know are there when you're trying to line up housing like this.

So many of those people that took housing by the day of abatement, we would have known who those people are, and they would have started moving uh into housing.

But as you can see, not everybody opts to do that.

So that's why you have the two different numbers.

Oh, I'm sure if I'm not sure what number two numbers you're comparing then.

Because it says that uh what seventy-eight total individuals provide outreach services.

That's just talking to them and not actually putting them somewhere.

Yeah, so the short math there is 178 minus 120, right?

Yeah, uh let me just chime in real quick.

Mark Mark Dilsky again, assistant officer at Valley Water.

Um, and I know uh we don't have a representative from housing here, but as I understand it, it's not a perfect overlap.

So it's not that 120 out of 178 accepted housing.

That's sort of a separate number, that's why it's represented separately from the from the chart.

And so that's the number of people who accepted outreach services.

So it's a smaller scale.

So it's clear that the 120 are those who accepted housing.

I'm just wondering, is it out of the 178 or just out of the two oh four?

Is it I mean, are they are they totally separate?

It's it's not a number that overlaps with the rest of them.

So the first number is 204 individuals in the project area.

That's reduced by 12 who did not participate at all, who didn't give any in identifying information.

So that gives 192.

Out of the 1927-2 uh did not accept shelter or interim housing, so that leaves the 120.

The 178 is sprinkled in among the 192.

Oh, I see.

You see, so there's not a complete overlap.

Okay, okay, thank you.

I was just a little bit sort of there were several numbers that didn't quite match up, but I can see how they're totally separate.

So thank you very much.

I appreciate it.

And I just want to say I I want to thank uh all of the staff and everyone who really did a lot to collaborate on this.

I know it's a lot of work, it's not easy work.

Uh so I just wanted to say thank you.

And with that, I'd like to uh go ahead and move a staff uh um status report uh accept the status report.

Thanks, council member.

Thank you for the second.

Um still have another hand up.

Is it Councilmember Casey or okay?

Director Ballard.

Thank you.

Um I just wanted to quickly say, uh kind of piggyback on what um Councilmember Candelos and Campos were saying, I think.

Um, and I know we all I my intent is not to preach at folks.

I know we're all um caring individuals who want to make sure that um folks have a place to live.

Um at the same time it feels you know a little bit like leaf blower policy, right?

You know, we're shutting down a particular area here, and then it just moves people to another place, and none of us feel satisfied with that.

Um, and so I wanted my my intent is not to simply complain but to say that I think I want to recognize and and um Chair Stromera might have said this, and maybe he will as well.

But while we up here at the Water District, we're water people, we're also housing people, we care about housing, and we have been talking a lot about it and talking about what is the appropriate role for a water agency, the an agency to be playing in this realm because we are impacted by it.

And so I wanted to acknowledge that and just um uh let folks here know that there are lots of conversations going on behind the scenes as we're struggling to answer that question.

What is the appropriate role for a water agency to play in this?

And you've seen staff come up and talk about the no encampment zone, and they've done a phenomenal job being extremely thoughtful and caring about how it's implemented and rolled out, and so I wanted to acknowledge that and then just say um, you know, to Councilmember Campos's point about there are things that are within our control in terms of how we permit things, and so looking internally, this is both at the water district and at the city about how we can be speeding up the process to get housing built.

Um, and and we all need to be doing that, and we're gonna need more resources.

We simply need more money.

We need more money to build long-term permanent supportive housing.

And so I think I don't want to speak for all my colleagues, but I'm really interested in the water district being a part of a conversation that is pushing forward the notion that we need to be creating more resources in addition to finding efficiencies in how we're building housing.

Thank you.

It's great to hear that the water district is thinking about its role relative to housing.

That's awesome.

Um, okay, we have a motion.

I don't think we have any other hands up on the city side, unless I'm mistaken.

Why don't we take a vote on the city side and then we'll come back and let Chair S.

Tremere do the same.

Motion passes unanimously with fully absent.

Great.

Thank you, Chair.

I'll turn it over to you.

I think mayor.

I just uh just sort of repeat a little bit of the board director.

There you go.

You know, we've we've had a we've had a committee on this issue for a number of years, chaired by our vice chair Santos.

Um we are very committed to uh working with the city and other cities and also of course the county uh to address some of these issues and uh housing issues.

We've always supported uh housing efforts that have been on the ballot consistently uh because again we share the same constituents and when wherever they suffer when they suffer, we want to we want to help and we want to be supportive.

Uh again, you know, this is another productive uh area where in Willow Glen, you know, we were able to provide some uh some relief by providing some of the land and that uh the city was able to provide a project there.

So uh we're still looking at at uh other efforts that we can that we can have, other places where we could do that, uh, and we're committed to continuing to work together uh with the city and like I said, other cities, but specifically especially with the city of San Jose, where we've had such success uh addressing some of these uh homeless issues.

So I'll entertain a motion for receiving the report.

We'll move.

And a second, second.

Uh roll call, please.

Director Ballard, Director Bell, Director Eisenberg, Director Shua, Vice Chair Santos, Director Varela, Chair Estramera.

Hi.

Motion passes.

The eyes have it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

All right, we are, and thank you to staff once again.

We're on to our third and final agendized item, which is item 6.3 status report on the Valley Water Safe, clean water and natural flood protection program.

Hope I got that right.

And we do have a presentation from Valley Water.

Good afternoon, my uh Council Chair and Bob Directors.

I'm Mathieu Mwen, Deputy Director for Papit Works, City of San Jose, and um with me today is Luz Panela Assistant Officer with Valley Water.

Um, City staff has been working with Valley Water in the past and until now on various number of projects in the city to improve the condition of uh our creeks and rivers.

And um this is part of the CEP Clean Water and Flood Protection Program, and we will continue to collaborate with Valley Water to uh discuss future improvements as well as to bring forward projects that will maximize the benefit for the community.

So with that, I'm gonna pass it on to Lou to talk about the SEP clean water and flood protection program and also some of the latest update to the program.

Thank you.

So good afternoon, Chair Stromara, Mayor Mayhan, City Council and Valley Water Board members.

Today I'm going to provide a high-level overview of the Safe Clean Water Natural Flood Protection Program, including how it's structured, how it's monitored, in addition to the change control processes that we uh will be bringing for approval to the board on September 23rd.

So this slide shows the history of Valley Water voter approved measures.

Uh in 2000, two-thirds of county voters approved the Clean Safe Creek and Natural Flood Protection Plan.

In 2012, 74% of voters approved renewal of that plan, creating the Safe Clean water and Natural flood Protection Program with five priorities.

And in 2020, 75% of county voters approved measure S, renewing the safe clean water program with six community identified priorities.

And the current program became effective on July 1st, 2021.

So here you have the six community preferred priorities A through F that shape the current program.

They focus on ensuring reliable water supply, reducing contaminants, protecting against natural disasters, restoring habitats, providing flood protection and supporting community health and safety.

And each year we develop a report that presents progress for each area, highlighting accomplishments and expenditures.

The program includes transparency and accountability elements.

It operates on a 15-year financial planning cycle with five-year implementation plans, annual reports, and independent audits.

The independent monitoring committee appointed by the board reviews each implementation plan and annual report to verify that community priorities are achieved in a cost-effective manner.

The program also includes a formal change control process to address project adjustments, modifications, or non-implementation decisions.

The Valley Water Board of Directors is responsible for approving strategies and budgets, conducting annual program reviews, directing changes to projects, including not implementing them if necessary, initiating independent audits, appointing members to the independent monitoring committee, and every 15 years evaluating whether to continue, modify, or repeal the program.

So each project is tied to key performance indicators or KPIs, which measure success.

These KPIs are performance-based, fiscal-based, or schedule-based.

And while the KPIs are voter approved, the board may modify them through the change control process, and the IMC can recommend modifications as well.

So the change control process ensures transparency and accountability when projects need adjustments.

Adjustments are changes to project text, funding, or schedules that don't affect KPIs.

These are approved in regular public meetings.

Modifications are changes that affect KPIs or funding allocations, and these require a formal public hearing.

Finally, the board may decide not to implement a project, and also those are approved through formal public hearings.

So earlier this year we heard concerns from the public about insufficient notice of funding modifications, limited opportunities for impact input, and a lack of clarity in evaluation criteria.

So these concerns led to proposed improvements to strengthen transparency and engagement.

In response, we developed two new pathways for processing funding modifications: a standard process for typical reallocations and an expeditor process for urgent funding, urgent funding decisions.

Both processes are designed to increase stakeholder engagement and provide clearer evaluation criteria.

The new steps we plan to implement draw from our successful approach used in the groundwater rate setting process.

So the standard process is estimated to take two to three months, and where feasible will align with our CIP draft and budget cycle, typically between November and March, and includes several board meetings as shown in the blue boxes.

The process includes board review of funding shortfalls, setting a time and place for a public hearing, conducting the hearing and allowing continued input, and finally board direction from the hearing after the hearing is closed.

The timeline ensures transparency while allowing more public participation.

The expedited process shortens the timeline to about 1.2 to 2 months and is intended for urgent funding decisions that, if delayed, could impact project delivery timelines.

It follows the same steps as the standard process, but it compresses them to ensure timely decisions without sacrificing transparency.

And our plan is to implement these improvements this fiscal year upon approval from our board.

So finally, these are the guiding principles for funding reallocations.

Funds from a countywide parcel tax, not city-specific.

Funds come from a countywide parcel tax and not city-specific contributions.

The board prioritizes allocations based on overall program goals, and funds must directly support safe clean water projects.

And then new initiatives are considered every 15 years, and then capital project prioritization tools help focus resources on highest value projects when funding is limited.

So to stay informed about the Safe Clean Water Program and upcoming hearings, members of the public can scan the QR code to sign up for Valley Waters e newsletter.

And this concludes my presentation.

Great.

Thank you, Lewis.

Appreciate that presentation.

Let me turn to our clerks to see if we have any public comments.

I have no cards.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

I did have a few questions and comments, and I appreciate the update on what is now Measure S and this work.

Wanted to understand if you are reporting out on expenditures.

So the revenues from Measure S.

Then I assume you're reporting out on expenditures by priority area.

Is that accurate to say?

And I don't want to put you on the spot, but is it possible to understand the expenditures specifically relative to priority B and E?

So that's the reduction of toxins, hazards, contaminants where the city has come under a lot of scrutiny recently on the cleanliness of the waterways, and then priority E, which is flood protection.

Is that a breakdown that is easy for us to understand?

That would be that should be in our uh plan, our annual plan, which we produce every year.

Um our next one is coming up in uh the end of this fiscal year.

Um, okay.

Sorry.

The draft will come out in November.

Got it.

Okay, thank you.

And then I wanted to specifically highlight the issue of what we call trash rafts, where we have an accumulation of sometimes it's um, you know, just biological, but it's just you know, biomatters trees and whatnot.

Other times, um, as is the case in one stretch of coyote right now, where we have 10 vehicles uh down clogged in the waterway and a growing accumulation of trash, and I'm sure as many of you out there myself have fished a lot of shopping carts out of our waterways in the last few years.

Um I want to know what we can do collaboratively to accelerate our effort to get a handle on these trash rafts, get that debris, particularly the toxic hazardous, the plastics metals out of the water faster.

Um I know there's been historically some disagreement over this, and obviously we're in a much better place in our collaboration and doing a lot of great work together, but um I'd like to know how we can accelerate.

Jeff, maybe you could share with us where we are in trying to create a blanket right of entry for Valley Waters.

I know that the act that established Valley Water basically said water supply and flood protection are the are the guiding mandates of the people for this agency.

So on the flood protection front, if we're in the way as a city, can we grant a blanket right of entry?

Can we just remove any legal barrier for our partners at Valley Water to fulfill their duty to reduce flood risk in all of all of the waterways?

Uh great question, uh Mayor.

Thank you.

And don't know if I can answer it directly right now.

We are working on it though.

Um, we have had multiple meetings with Valley Water staff over the past six months, uh, particularly with some other hot spots and areas that popping up, but one of the reoccurring items is access, and so we are looking at that now.

We we just began that legal review process about two weeks ago to see what and how we could structure a blanket uh right of entry to just uh just get that out of the way once and for all.

Like if if we need to get in there together and we need to collaborate together, at least let's remove any barriers to access.

Okay.

I would appreciate that.

I mean, obviously, there's something we can follow up on on the city side.

I just want to make sure on our part we're doing everything we can to eliminate legal barriers, red tape process that might slow down or increase cost for Valley Water to again the mandates in the act are water safe, reliable water supply, and flood protection, flood control.

And if we've got 10 cars clogging up Coyote Creek before the rainy season, that is not a good sign, and we got to make it easier for Valley Water to get in there and uh do their job, fulfill their their mandate.

Um so I'd love to we take it offline, but I'd love to know what else we can do to uh help accelerate that work and want to thank Valley Water for their efforts there in advance.

Um there's a few things is disheartening to seeing giant dams of plastic and metal and shopping carts and cars down in our in our sensitive habitat.

Um let me also just say a couple things on capital projects.

So uh as I understand it, there were a series of projects that we communicated to voters when uh Measure S, when the measure was renewed during the Measure S campaign, and we have priority projects in San Jose that it's been our expectation are going to be fulfilled with these revenues.

Upper Penitencia, Guadalupe, Coyote, which is underway, thank you for that.

Lower Berriesa, and uh there was some mention of of the kind of the public engagement process, but I I would like to know how the city as a governmental body will be engaged in any changes to the prioritization of these capital projects and and just what we can expect from our partners at Valley Water.

Sure.

So the change control process that we're um bringing to the board allows for an extended timeline and it allows for more engagement with the public.

So the idea is for when we bring a recommendation for modification to our board, from that point on, we'll make it um available that we'll have enough time to engage the public, get everyone's opinion, bring that information back to the board, and also explain how we made our modifications or our recommendations for modifications.

So I appreciate that, and I think that's important for public participation.

I'm asking a slightly different question, which is the expectation we have have built into our plans, communicated to our constituents as a government entity, and the expertise we have embedded in many of our city departments.

I want to make sure and hope that I would assume there's a commitment here in the spirit of collaboration that we're not asking our city department experts to stand in line and wait for their one minute of public comment at a community meeting.

I want to make sure we are giving input into what we have now represented in our plans to our constituents is happening as a result of a measure that many people supported.

And I just want to make sure if Upper Penitencia or Lower Berriesa or some of these were going to start shifting, that the city had early notice and that we could weigh in and have our our expert, our staff expertise lend into the conversation and be able to also participate in a fuller way.

Chris Hicks, Chief Operating Officer for Valley Water Watersheds.

Um we actually meet with the city on an annual basis through our capital improvement program distribution where we get feedback on the types of priorities that need to happen.

Uh in terms of the stakeholder outreach that we're currently conducting, uh the thought is as priorities may be available to shift, we engage the city's staff, not just the public, on an ongoing basis through the entire process in order to properly shift resources where necessary.

We've been in touch with um several from both our O and M and our capital staff for the city's priorities this year, and are currently working on interim solutions for upper penitencia and other projects, and we'll continue to do so in the future.

If there's a large shift in the program uh that is outside of the scope of the existing 15 years tranche that we've already adopted, uh, that can't happen until the next 15-year tranche.

So right now we've been discussing things that are already contained within the program and where they would slot in this 15-year cycle.

Um we will continue to talk about those with the city.

We do accept, for lack of a better term, input for the future 15 years on an ongoing basis uh as we go out yearly to all the municipalities uh that are covered through the Safe Clean Water Program.

Okay.

Well, that's I appreciate that, and I I uh I hope our staffs are talking even more regularly than once a year.

But I'm glad we have a formal opportunity.

We certainly want to know.

I think our our staff is best positioned, but you know, if upper penitency doesn't happen, David's gonna get in trouble.

So we we definitely want to know if if any priorities are are shifting.

Um okay, thank you for that.

Let me turn to colleagues.

We have a few other hands up.

Um let me go to Councilmember Mulcahy next.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, first chance to speak today, so thanks to all the staff and all the reports.

Um, this sort of feels like a new norm.

Um, we're kind of rookies here and we've got a joint meeting already.

This is great.

So hopefully this is the new norm um a couple of things um that I'm interested in um you know year plus ago from you know November of 23 as a candidate I would think one of the great mysteries relevant to Santa Clara Valley Water District was what happened to the upper Guadalupe flood protection project and um so I'm I would ask that question today because I'd be interested to know if that's sort of back online but I think it was understood that that was sort of resources were redeployed and I don't know Chris you just talked about the idea that you know there's a lot of communication that happens in that and I really even with directors that I spoke to couldn't get a clear answer of what happened is that related to the board's authorization to be able to move resources around was that a um you know uh a better more urgent need where the resources got deployed sorry introduce yourself I'd love to hear um what that answer is sure bhavani or put to I'm the deputy operating officer overseeing our watershed uh flood protection projects uh at Valley Water um so council member umkay if uh if I may so that the upper Guadalupe project is still a very high priority for the Valley Water Board and the agency it is still part of our CIP it is however led by the Army Corps of engineers so the project is still actively being worked on by the Army Corps of Engineers that is actually developing a conceptual design right now they are going to give us an updated cost estimate probably in the next few months we we know the timeline has shifted a little bit the schedule got extended because of the changes in policies with the Army Corps of Engineers our CIP committee which is uh led by three of our board members has directed staff to look at interim solutions or something that can be implemented in tandem with the Army Corps of Engineers so staff's actively working on that but bottom line it's it's a project that's being led by the Army Corps our schedule is tied to that schedule as far as the overall project prioritization and how funds get moved that's what Luz was talking about on funding for projects so it's not uncommon for us to look at like where the needs are if a project is ready shovel ready and it's ready to be awarded then a project later on and if the funding is not needed right away then those priorities do get moved so that's basically the the uh reasoning for where we are with that but upper upper Guadalupe is uh definitely still an active project that staff's working on so if I if I hear you correctly and you can correct me if I'm wrong you're suggesting that the Army Corps of Engineers work is ongoing which is why there might have been another project that was shovel ready so because the Army Corps of Engineers delay has sort of reshuffled the schedule of which goes first two things you have an two things though at the time when the Army Corps gave us the cost estimate for the project we did not need those additional funding so our cost share portion was met with the funding that we had so the additional funding was reshuffled into the capital program but when we get the additional cost information that'll be the time to look at all of the costs as well so two things.

So where do you think we are in the schedule of beginning work in the upper Guadalupe?

Um we are at least three years out from their design being completed and shovels in the ground on the upper Guadalupe River project per the Army Corps schedule three years from now and do we have a sense of what the duration of the build would be it should be a two and a half year construction project two and a half to three year construction project so best case was 2030 end of this decade.

Yeah, 2030 is what what their schedule is.

But more to come on that on their update and the updated cost estimates and then the timeline.

So as as we progress, we'll certainly keep our partners in the city and and the board updated as well.

So if I may, I'm gonna ask one of the city staff here, Jeff.

I know this predates both of us.

You weren't in the position, but you were in the building.

Did you have a did the did the city have a good uh runway of knowledge of the reshuffling of this project?

I think this project got shuffled to Gilroy, right?

And so Upper Guadalupe delay sort of pushed those resources down there.

Did we have knowledge of that at San Jose that that got delayed?

Uh no, uh there was a meeting between Valley Water.

There was a meeting uh between staff, Valley Water and City of San Jose and our Department of Transportation in June.

And there was a uh discussion on the information that was just provided on the designs continuing, uh the estimates are high.

Where's the money going to come from?

Is it still a priority and the timing of it?

And those are all future, I think future discussions that Valley Waters board will hear at their workshop next week, and then ongoing uh with based on cost and available funding and how does it fit in on priorities.

I think those are future discussions, and that again was conveyed to between Valley Water staff and transportation staff in June a few months ago.

So um, you know, this issue is uh district three, a district six, a district seven, and a district nine concern, all the more reason why in the meantime the mayor's you know plea to make sure that we're keeping our creeks uh clean and and you know without uh barriers is really really important.

I think the only flood watch you know we're doing is at the Alma Bridge, right?

Which is should be taken care of.

Um I have one editorial thing I just want to say before we go.

I feel like the Army Corps of Engineers is going to be like the new PGE, the new one to sort of blame for certain things.

They should probably get somebody to show up now and again to defend themselves.

But this is about Guadalupe River Park generally, from about Discovery Meadow all the way through to um, you know, let's just call it um Columbus Park.

We have an opportunity to improve the aesthetics, and I know that most people would say the natural setting of that waterway is the aesthetic, but we have an opportunity to do more than just have a Guadalupe Creek that or Guadalupe River that runs through downtown.

There's an opportunity to make it more beautiful, more um engaging with the public.

And I've been told a number of times that oh gosh, it's the Army Corps of Engineers that doesn't let us do certain things.

I think it would be great by this joint group if we could say how important that aesthetic is for the downtown.

I'm selfishly saying that it really runs, you know, adjacent to our districts, but this is the city's park, and that is a key feature.

So I just want to implore us to think about how we can do better to make sure that that is as beautiful as it can be, and so I just want to make that editorial plea to board colleagues up here and to staff.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

You're here.

Thanks for that.

Appreciate it.

Uh let's go to Councilmember Ortiz.

One more time.

Okay, thank you, Mayor.

Yeah, uh my comment uh will be short.

Uh I uh want to say that uh I appreciate hearing uh your comment about uh the city's uh involvement in uh clean set creek program.

Whether there's uh there's any changes and and uh get the cities involved and our staff commented on that uh also.

Uh, the piece of information I want to add is that actually that is the primary reason this board, Valley Water Board directed our staff to look at our current change process to make sure that cities uh will have a uh adequate time, adequate information, uh huh, and then adequate discussion with Valley Water, uh, and then present uh cities position to Valley Water's uh Board of Directors on these proposed changes.

So I just want to add that piece of information.

I think Jeff uh mentioned uh similar similar information too.

That uh it it's actually the primary reason that we're looking at uh changing the changing process.

That's helpful context.

Thank you, Director Sue.

Uh let me turn now.

Is it Councilman?

Cohen, I assume.

Yeah.

Thank you.

First, I want to acknowledge the uh challenges that exist in prioritizing all work that should be a high priority.

Um we have limited funding, we have limited staff time, we have to focus um and get things done.

And if we continue to have a long list and with the with a whole bunch of things that are un underfunded, none of them get done.

So I certainly acknowledge that off the bat.

Um it's also important to acknowledge the interdependence of the things that the city and county does with the work that Valley Water is doing on the on the waterways because projects that we're waiting for often are dependent on the work that water district needs to do.

Um and so it I guess I'll just ask a couple questions about our interdependence.

Uh obviously we have projects we've heard about one area, this the Guadalupe uh river, certainly the North Guadalupe River, which is lower Guadalupe River in North San Jose, um which passes under Montague Expressway.

There's a project plan to widen Montague Expressway, but that can't be done until we have the the studies and work done on how we're going to manage the um river.

And the same thing is true in several locations on Penitentia Creek.

I want to thank the mayor for bringing up Penitentiary Creek.

We've been 20 years without a widened bridge on King Road at Penitentia Creek as we wait for the the volume studies of Penitentia Creek and understanding what needs to be done and and how that can work together.

In fact, the only two the most recent flooding that's occurred during the winter has occurred right there at that at that point of Penitentiary Creek just downstream of King Road where the apartment complex next door uh had flooding this past winter.

So we're very concerned about making sure that that is prioritized on Upper Penitentia Creek, uh like Noble Avenue Bridge, potentially has work in the long run.

All these things kind of depend on this time the timeline.

So I guess I want to understand a little bit more about maybe Jeff you can just give a brief answer.

How is the how does the city um qu uh communicate with the water district about the needs that we have in order to do move forward with some of the projects that our DOT and others are waiting to do in some of these locations?

It's a very broad question, I know.

That's a that's a big one.

Uh thank you.

Yeah, there are several of the flood uh protection projects that are that are outlined under safe clean water that have bridges associated with them for different purposes.

Um the design of the bridge, the bridge goes over something.

So usually the design of the water going underneath it, and and then the bridge is usually then in design specifically to span across it.

Um it's like a chicken or the egg.

So um so uh typically on the uh something like this, we partnered with Valley Water to um as they're designing a flood control channel, the movement of the water, um part of that design would be the bridge again to to me to match that design.

Um doing a bridge a little bit sooner than that, you run the risk of it of it not um not having the correct carrying capacity underneath it.

Then you then we end up where we are now with like King Road Bridge, for example, where there's a blockage.

Um, and then you it's costly to kind of change it around.

So they usually go together, the bridge improvements and the creek improvements, and then conveying uh with Valley Water, of course, uh Upper Guad has been on our list for quite a while, especially improvements around uh Montague and a few of the pedestrian bridges there.

Um and then penitentiary, there's King Road and Berriessa and a few other improvements that we need.

They do though go along with again the design of the water, the movement of the water underneath to span across.

And so we're trying to get those projects moving hopefully sooner to get that all done.

I appreciate that.

Is it I'm I'm kind of have been wondering, is there an opportunity for some staging of the work so that we can maybe get some design work done and then have the city do some of the work ahead of time before there's the fun full funding to do the actual uh construction work?

It's something for us to think about.

I don't know if how possible that is.

I know there's still, like I said, a lot of projects we're focused on, but it gets frustrating for people that that are waiting decades for some of this infrastructure improvement.

I don't know if there's I can add that we are going to be coming back to our board in the fall with recommendations and we are going to be enhancing our prioritization process to ensure that we identify the hot spots the um higher risk projects and uh try to move those forward okay appreciate that and I I follow on Councilmember uh Mulkey's comment I I too have heard uh um army corps of engineers blamed for some of the delays on penitentiary creek as well so obviously that it is I do wonder you know how this works together how how we need whether we need to whether they really are just being a scapegoat or whether they really are in the critical path but I I want to understand that better and maybe this is a conversation we can continue appreciate it.

Thanks Councilmember appreciate those thoughtful questions all kind of aligned on the same theme.

Let me ask um I we have Councilmember Kamei still chair that I saw you put on your light did you want to chime in on that specific issue first yeah I wanted a lot of certainly wanted to address the issue of um the Corps of engineers you know Corps of Engine this this is um unfortunately you know constitutionally they're in charge of navigable waters so that this is not made up you know I wish we could be in complete control of our own destiny so that we wouldn't have to deal with them.

And as many of you remember or may recall the issues that we had on on coyote after the um president's uh uh floods a few years ago uh where for a long time we had a project there that we had planned but the corps using their analysis because this was not downtown this was not um you know malls it wasn't banks these were just residential areas they scored very low because they look at they look at what the financial losses and it very narrowly focus well after those floods we had the opportunity to go to Washington DC which you know we go two or three times a year and we convinced the Corps that they needed to look at the other losses that people suffer such as um you know remove removement from from their homes loss of their homes loss of the memor memorandums all the all of the things that they have lost the personal suffering that they go through the emotional distress that these floods sustain on them and uh we were able to convince the Corps to take ten different 10 agencies 10 projects across the country to change and and uh this is this is going to be a pilot project that they did our area was the first pilot project that's why we're moving so much on coyote not because we set it as a low priority but because we were able to convince them that this was a worthy project despite their old uh analysis so this uh was the first of the ten sample projects that they have in the country so we hope that we can do that with Alma Den.

Secondly uh when we had the ability to make local money investments out of this same fund on Alma Den we did there were a couple of reaches that we were able to work on I myself with a couple of us who again go to DC all the time um went to visit the head the the what they call the civil head the assistant secretary of the corps and beg them to accept our contribution we had to beg them to accept the contributions because they didn't have a policy and they have no authorization to accept the money.

They had to go up to the commandant, the general, and then uh to the committee public works committee in Congress to allow the Corps to accept our contribution to two phases on the Guadalupe that we were able to afford.

So we are absolutely committed to all of the projects that are necessary in our in our you know in our county.

That's there's no question.

I just want to assure you that we're always working on meeting our responsibility.

The only thing that we're talking about is sometimes we have to move money around because some projects are ready and while we're waiting for uh permits from different agencies then you know we could take advantage of those projects that are project ready and sometimes we have to move the money around doesn't mean that whether we're cutting a project it means that whatever's ready we should do because if we wait when we're not prepared then costs go up and we have we don't have the ability or the opportunity to take advantage of an opportunity to work on projects that are ready to go.

So that's sort of what we're talking about.

So when when that situation comes up we want to be able to include everybody who's affected in these decisions that's why we modified our our process so that we have public hearings and uh make sure that people are engaged and they they have access to participating in our decisions and and that was the point that we were talking about that we've changed now so that when there's modifications we want to make sure everybody has access to to our decisions.

Yeah I just want to thank you for that explanation and for your advocacy on behalf of the re our residents and I know people appreciate that and especially and the the residents of Betty and gardens will certainly appreciate continuing advocacy I am uh intrigued by the by the categorization of penitentiary creek as navigable waters that yeah oh yeah well exactly yeah maybe occasionally with a rubber ducky um no offense okay thank you uh both for that let me turn to Director Eisenberg next I promised to be briefer this time um I think we're missing the the actual point here I think the point isn't whether the Army Corps is good or bad um sometimes they're they make good decisions like they recently decided to deny support for the Pacheco Dam and Reservoir which I think was the right decision um but sometimes maybe they're not but the point is really should this board and this organization should our discretion supplant the will of the voters the voters in passing Prop one and later was it measure F specifically you know designated projects and I believe the voters are entitled to have their will honored and if we're going to move money that the voters designated I believe we need a serious emergency level reason to do so.

I strongly opposed the defunding of upper quad um on both substance and process reasons.

I wasn't convinced that the Army Corps delay justified take defunding this project you know Valley Water could have looked at a smaller project that could be could have been done sooner that analysis was not done similarly I'm sitting here as representative representative for district seven and we have three projects that are in the process of being defunded three voter designated projects and let me tell you no one in my district is in favor of defunding these and there are very good reasons to keep you know to keep these projects funded on a part you know in addition to the the reason called democracy that this is what voters chose I think that is important.

I don't think we gave adequate notice to anyone who would be impacted by the defunding of upper quad.

Hardly, you know, hardly anyone showed up, although the ones that did were strongly opposed to the defunding I think we should I don't think there was any involvement of stakeholders in the decision.

You know, public meetings should with the community shouldn't be us just telling the community we're right and they're wrong.

It should be allowing the community to participate in the decision.

And that is not what has happened.

And you know, as I said, I don't think that the core's delay was any excuse for us to defund this project in full.

Similarly, I don't think that Valley Water should defund you know the San Francisco Creek project, which also impacts low-income neighborhoods of two of another county, you know, and as well as flood protection areas in Mountain View.

I think that voters are important.

And how can we ever get people to vote for these bond measures if we view our discretion as more important than voter will?

So I think this is actually a systemic problem that requires actual systemic change.

Thank you.

All right, thank you for those comments, Director.

We had a motion on this item, I believe.

Is that right?

Or am I remembering the last one?

Oh, you wanted to respond.

Yes.

Please, I'm sorry I apologize.

Thank you, Mayor Mayhand.

Still, Chris Hakes, Water Sheds Chief for Valley Water.

Um, just a slight clarification, because the term defunded has been thrown around a little bit this afternoon.

Um, no projects have been defunded.

All the projects that were in Safe Clean Water are still currently in Safe Clean Water, specifically the San Francisco Creek Project, the Upper Guadalupe Flood Protection Project, the Upper Penitencia Protection Flood Protection Project, as well as several others.

We have shifted funding for shovel ready projects.

Um the reference was made to the upper Yagas project, which is in Gilroy.

Uh we had a bid on the table from a contractor that we needed to fund in order to go into construction to keep that ever important commitment to the public, which we did do.

We are still working with the Army of Corps Engineers, and their timeline shows that the project is still moving forward, it has not been defunded.

We still have funds in the project.

We have looked at smaller, quicker alternatives, and none of them can be done due to induced flooding in the main stem of the creek.

So just for the record, nothing's been defunded, everything's still in safe clean water.

We do invite participation in the process.

If there are priorities that should be moved up, as we said, perhaps upper pen is more important to San Jose than something else in San Jose.

We will entertain that discussion, but just for the record, no defunding.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um thanks for that.

We, if possible, I'd like to entertain a motion on the city side.

Let me turn to Councilmember Kamei.

Thank you.

Um, I'd like to move acceptance of the status report.

Second.

Thank you.

All right.

Tony, let's vote.

Motion passes unanimously.

Great.

Thank you.

Let me turn to you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just wanted to take a minute before calling for the for the motion uh and um just share with you very quickly, you know, what the perspective of the Corps is.

Um a few years ago, we had uh we had the top general come by to visit us.

Uh it was a big deal because you know, when the commandant uh is first is first assigned, uh, they picked they kind of show where they think priorities are, and so and so he came here as the it's the first visit that he did was to come and tour Guadalupe.

And they we were there and uh we toured him and we went down in the uh uh down in the creek, and as as we as we were describing to to him the the project and and the need for it and so on, he uh uh kind of stepped up into the creek and looked uh one way and another way, and he kept looking around, and then finally he turned to us and he said, You understand I'm from Mississippi.

He was looking for water, and there weren't any.

There wasn't a drop there.

And so, you know, he goes, uh I'm from Mississippi, uh, so I was looking for the water that you guys are talking about.

This wonderful uh, you know, flood control project that you have.

So that's their perspective.

And another time when we went to the Pentagon to visit them, we wanted to finish the park project in downtown.

And they told us, Well, you don't understand.

Now we uh don't we don't do any park projects.

And so we looked around and I pointed out that on the wall they had these pictures, and I said, Well, what are those pictures uh from?

And I said, Oh, that's the San Antonio River Walk.

And we got our project done here in downtown.

So I don't say, Well, that's what we want.

It's a park just like that.

That's how we finished the park downtown.

So that's their perspective, and that's what we're always dealing with.

Um, you know, east of the Mississippi, uh, there's plenty of water, and so they always look at that and they try to compare us with that side.

So that's you know, that's our challenge.

Uh just wanted to share that with you, but I'll entertain a motion to accept the report.

Is it a second?

Roll call, please.

Director Bell, Director Eisenberg, Director Shua, Vice Chair Santos?

Director Varela, Chair Estramera.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Great, thank you.

And Chair, thanks for those comments.

And I'll just say when it comes to Army Corps, uh, the state, others, uh, we are we are here to uh join in uh advocacy with you.

I think aligning our IGR efforts would be smart, and just wanna I know we do that from time to time, but just want to reemphasize that uh the points many of us have made we're in this together, shared success.

So we want to we want to be good partners and advocates alongside you on these issues, if you can bring us in.

Um okay.

Well, I want to thank everybody, the uh Valley Water Board of Directors, my colleagues on the San Jose City Council, our staff most importantly, who do the hard work every day.

Thank you for putting together this joint session.

We did say that we would move open forum to the end here for any items related to Valley Water business that was not on today's agenda.

Was that?

Yes, it's for Valley Water Business only.

I have two speaker cards that are for city business, so I'm not gonna call those two people.

Okay, I have no cards for water business.

Um, the people who submitted cards who want to talk to me about it after the meeting, I will be here.

Great, and we're here just about every Tuesday.

Okay, well, again, want to thank colleagues staff.

I think this was productive.

Have a wonderful evening, everyone, and we are adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Appreciate it, uh