Temecula-Elsinore-Anza-Murrieta Resource Conservation District
Next Meeting
Thursday, May 13, 2021 4:00 pm
Truax Building
41923 Second Street, Fourth Floor
Temecula, CA 92590



Elsinore-Murrieta-Anza Resource Conservation District

Thursday, May 12, 2016 4:00 PM

Truax Building

41923 Second Street, Ste. 401

Temecula, CA 92590


Call to Order-4:00 pm, meeting recorded by Rose Corona

Flag Salute

Roll Call/Establish a Quarum:

Directors Present:  Rose Corona, Carol Lee Brady, Michael Newcomb (arrived late, during speaker’s presentation), Vicki Long

Directors Absent:  Dave Kuhlman

Associate Directors Present: Dave McElroy, Randy Feeney, Rick Neugebauer

Deputy Counsel Present: Melissa Cushman

Bob Hewitt: Absent

Guest Speaker:  Jason Uhley – Riverside County Flood Control (arrived late)

Guest:  Nicolette Jonkhoff, Environmental Manager for the Ramona Band of Cahuilla

Public: None

MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA:  President Corona called for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion to approve the agenda as amended was made by Director Brady. Seconded by Director Long. Call for vote. Motion passed 3-0


President Corona asked for a motion to approve the consent calendar to include all correspondence. Director Brady moved for approval; Director Long seconded the motion. Call for vote. Motion passed 3-0.

III. GUEST SPEAKER – Jason Uhley – Riverside County Flood Control – Working with Riverside County Flood Control and Opportunities

Mr. Uhley had not yet arrived, and President Corona moved on to the action items.


Item #1:  Discussion of Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and potential direction of counsel to prepare resolution for same.

President Corona began to hand out documents for the discussion, and as she did so she invited a guest, Nicolette Jonkhoff, (who had come to the meeting to listen to the presentation of Jason Uhley) to introduce herself and to briefly summarize her position and how it relates to EMARCD.  She also asked Director Long to follow up with any comments on the topic, since she had history with the water study that had been previously performed.

Ms. Jonkhoff introduced herself as the Environmental Manager for the Ramona Band of Cahuilla. There have been some legal issues surrounding the Anza area, now in settlement phase. She said that the Watermaster had an interest in having a groundwater basin study performed to quantify water usage in the area, and she decided to attend the EMARCD meeting to hear Mr. Uhley’s presentation and see if there might be a partnering opportunity for work or funding. 

Director Long said that there had been a water study conducted with test wells to determine existing water levels, and where the water came from. They found two sub-basins in the Watershed and determined that it was historical water - had been there “forever”. There had been talks about putting in retention basins before the lawsuit, with Director Long and former Director Nelson had gone to talk to the Watermaster.

Director Brady asked if the Watermaster is still Chuck Binder, and both Director Long and Ms. Jonkhoff confirmed that he is.

Director Long’s comments affirmed that Mr. Binder was the person with whom they had spoken, and she added that he is in charge of the surface flow  -- and there are no restrictions on ground water out there. She said that the water still has not been quantified and that USGS (United States Geological Survey) could be hired to do the work as a district if EMARCD received a grant.

President Corona noted that there may be some additional funding available that Mr. Uhley could discuss when he arrived, and turned the floor over to General Counsel Melissa Cushman to move on to Agenda Item 2.

Item #2:  Discussion of Bear Creek HOA and Update and general discussion of meeting with Bear Creek Counsel (May 4, 2016 meeting) in addition to direction Board may want to consider going forward as a result of the meeting. Also discussion as to future work EMARCD would like to take with HOAs.

Ms. Cushman began by stating that this item was also going to be discussed in closed session; but as an overview, the meeting with the HOA, their board and their counsel as well as other attendees had not gone well.  Ms. Cushman indicated that they (Bear Creek HOA) do not want to pay; and in response to the litigation demand letter she had sent to them, they responded with a settlement offer (to be discussed in closed session.) She also said the Fairway Estates people were also at this same meeting and “were also not happy” since they had already paid, and had they known that Bear Creek would be trying to get out of their contract they would not have entered into theirs – and paid the full amount.

Work that EMARCD would like to do with HOAs as a general policy discussion was the next topic. President Corona noted that most of the board, with the exception of Director Long, was new. She expressed her opinion that these HOA situations should be looked at case-by-case so parameters are clearly understood, especially to protect EMARCD’s 1600 permit. She asked for directors’ input on whether it was prudent to put energy into HOA work vs. pursuing larger projects. She invited Hugh Wood (SAWA) to provide feedback since he deals with HOA work a lot.

Mr. Wood stated that HOAs are problematic, partially because they consider the work to be “landscaping” and it takes a lot to educate them on the differences, including best business management practices working under regulatory guidelines. They (the guidelines) are very defined requirements, precautions and conditions including set-aside for natural habitat, and preventing people from intruding. Everything is site specific.

There was further discussion including the following exchange regarding the Bear Creek HOA situation.

(Beginning of transcript at this point in the meeting):

Rose Corona: Vicki, what's your feeling on it?

Vicki Long: Well, the reason that we got involved in these two HOAs was that we were asked to by California Department of Fish and Wildlife. They do have easement requirements. Basically, they're supposed to leave them alone.

Hugh Wood: Yeah, that's typically...

Vicki Long: Just let them be.

Hugh Wood: So by letting us go in there or anyone go in there, they have to get like special permission to do that and a very limited amount of work. It's a very fine line between... In this case, they wanted to reduce the fire hazard and reduce the fuel load, while at the same time, leave it pretty much in a natural state. Well, that's a fine thing to try to balance. If it was left up to CDFW, they'd just say, "Leave it as is."

Rick Neugebauer: Leave it alone.

Hugh Wood: "Leave the fire hazard there. Too bad. You got enough clearance coming up the slope that you should be okay." The fire service is gonna look at it and say, "Are you kidding me? If that ever became a tinder box. Boom."

Vicki Long: Let me tell you, what actually happened 'cause this doesn't need to be in closed session and since you're all here today, well, I think Dave heard enough last time. The fire department was there on both these projects and especially the one bigger project for the larger association. And the fire department says, "We're out of it. The clearance is fine, and we're not getting involved. This is between Fish and Wildlife and we're not getting involved." We had extensive meetings out there with regulatory people.

Rose Corona: When you say, "we", you and Jeff Brandt?

Vicki Long: Me and Jeff Brandt.

Rose Corona: From Fish and Wildlife?

Vicki Long: Yeah.

Rose Corona: Okay. Rick, you raised your hand?

Rick Neugebauer: Yeah, I think a lot of this was generated by the homeowners, calling the master association, then calling the fire department saying they had an issue. Because that brush in there, and Hugh and I both know this, really is not an issue. It's where you have a firebreak on the outside of that property is where it could be a problem. If somebody threw a match down inside there and it burned, yeah, it would burn, but it's not a big threat per se. So a lot of this, in my mind, was conjectured by the homeowners that live there and called the fire department and started that process to get us involved.

Vicki Long: But Chief Badger was out there and he looked at the situation and said that there wasn't an issue with him. And irregardless of who tried to cause the issue there wasn't an issue and...

[background conversation]

Vicki Long: It wasn't an issue and so they left it in the hands of Cal Fish and Wildlife and the Property Owners Association and they've been out there on two occasions. One occasion, I was there months earlier and done the same thing. The Property Owners Association, home owners association tried to get their own permit, their 1600 permit, and found it so just...

Rose Corona: Arduous.

Vicki Long: Arduous and time consuming and lots of money. They were gonna have to get some biological surveys done and they found how much it was gonna cost. So Jeff Brandt at that point and time said, "Well you have an RCD, they have a 1600 permit, so maybe you should talk to them." So that's when I got involved from the district. The district board had talked about it and said, "Okay, well, go and find out. Let's see if we wanna do it." And just like this newer board, we're trying to help wherever we can. So that's how it got started. It was easier for them to use our permit than try to and less expensive, so they would've paid a lot more money had they had to get their own permit. And I think Linda Alexander had been working on it for at least a year and still haven't got their permit.

Hugh Wood: Hugh Wood, Vicki, so it wasn't the fire department who was pushing to get that clearance?

Rick Neugebauer: No.

Hugh Wood: Ohhh, that's the impression we got...

Rick Neugebauer: I know.

Hugh Wood: When we talked to them, it was, "Oh, the fire department said we had to do it." I said, "Okay, if they're telling you gotta clear this out, I guess you'd better clear it out." We didn't know it was internally generated by the fears….

Vicki Long: They're basically the same.

Rose Corona: Well...

Rick Neugebauer: …Fear that the property owners sell.

(End of transcript at this point in the meeting):

President Corona then noted that Jason Uhley had just arrived.  She welcomed him as the guest speaker from the Riverside County Flood Control Department.


Mr. Uhley passed out some packets and introduced himself as the acting general manager and chief engineer of the Riverside county Flood Control or water conservation district. He also “wears the hat” as a board member for the upper Santa Margarita region Integrated Regional Water Management Program (IRWM.)  At this time, Director Newcomb also arrived.


Continuing his presentation, Mr. Uhley indicated that he thought EMARD (soon to become TEAM RCD, or Temecula Elsinore Anza Murrieta Resource Conservation District) could potentially have some roles to help some unincorporated or disadvantaged communities through the IRWM program, which provides grants to community groups. These state grant programs require public or quasi-public agencies to take the lead and sponsor the grant. He said had spoken with President Corona about potential opportunities for EMARCD to participate, and came to the meeting to talk about the IRWM program and grant programs.


He explained the background of IRWM, created in 2002, and how the goal was to get water, cities/counties with land-use authority, flood control districts, sewer agencies – all dealing with different aspects of water. The state felt that they needed to work together and so they took the next step to foster collaboration. They identified that in the state grant propositions, like Prop 1, Prop 84, Prop 13 of these big billion dollar bonds there is funding in that goes to IRWM programs; and there is one for the upper Santa Margarita region, which is the watershed that goes out through Anza and comes down through Temecula, Murrieta, parts of Wildomar and a portion of Menifee.


There is a board that helps to interact with the state and pass grant money through individual grant recipients (who then put forth integrated water resource projects) is made up of the Riverside County Flood Control District, the Rancho California Water District – or RCWD -, and the County of Riverside. They are looking for projects having to do with issues such as water supply, recreation, habitat, and various aspects of water resource management. 

Those three agencies, the cities and the region, and the tribes (informally) have been participating in the program, as well as community groups in Anza. Some of the types of projects that are being funded through it include the Vail Lake Stabilization and Conjunctive Use Project (a project through RCWD.)  There’s another Rancho project for agricultural irrigation efficiency and trying to reduce their water use, as well as a Recycled Water and Plant Material Conversion project for HOA common areas. RCWD is working with property owners and associations to change their plant palettes and move to reclaimed water instead of potable water.

There is a round of grant money available for IRWM programs, specifically targeting disadvantaged communities, and Anza is a primary disadvantaged community in this watershed. A groundwater study is the main project with which Mr. Uhley’s board would like to have EMARCD’s assistance as a project lead. EMARCD had previously been involved with the first phase, but it ended up going through RCWD. Mr. Uhley indicated that the Cahuilla Band initiated adjudication through the courts to try to understand the water issues out there, and that is the litigation referenced earlier in the meeting.

As Mr. Uhley explained that there were preliminary steps needed in order for EMARCD to adopt the IRWM plan, Director Long stepped into the discussion and pointed out that there had been a 501 created called the High Country Conservancy, and that group had wanted to work on the project but was denied the grant. This group had been concerned about a quasi-governmental agency such as and RCD (resource conservation district) working on the project because they wanted to control tracking of the funds and also were concerned about quantifying the water because many of them were on private wells.

President Corona then recognized Nicolette Jonkhoff, who added that another organization called the Anza Groundwater Association (AGWA) had formed, and that she was on that board. She thought there has been conversation between the High Country Conservancy and AGWA for AGWA to possibly conduct some of the groundwater studies, and that they currently want to talk with the Watermaster about it.

Director Long expressed concern that at one time the Conservancy had an issue with the RCD being involved with the grant and she felt the current (new) EMARCD board needed to find out if there would be resistance again if we resumed participation in this groundwater study.

President Corona recognized Mr. Uhley, who clarified that he was not requesting an immediate decision by the board – and also that there are actually two issues. One is the groundwater study; and he acknowledged that the Ramona Band or someone directly involved with the litigation may be the right group for that work. The EMARCD board would need to submit an application to perhaps serve as the agency to run the grant. The second is the longer-term and broader issue of other grant opportunities moving forward, in Temecula, Murrieta and all the parts of unincorporated county, all of which have “lots of good work to be done.” He said that his main purpose for speaking to the board was to make them aware of the opportunities available to partner with other entities for grant money and projects.

President Corona noted that the board would have to adopt the IRWM plan in order to even be placed in a position to get the grants.

Director Long stated that EMARCD had already done that, and President Corona said that she had checked and nothing was in place. Mr. Uhley mentioned that the plan was updated in 2014, but that the original EMARCD plan had not been approved. Director Long said that it was EMARCD had been the organization that helped in getting the funding into the area in the first place with Department of Water Resources. She then returned to the topic of the study and the pushback against “outsiders coming in.”

President Corona recognized Ms. Jonkhoff and asked for her feeling since she belonged to two of the entities being discussed. Ms. Jonkhoff acknowledged that there was still some hesitation to bring outside people in; and also a concern about governmental taxing or monitoring how much water can be used. But AGWA has been initiating new outreach.

President Corona recognized Associate Director Neugebauer, who asked if there are currently any well monitoring programs in place for the Anza region. Ms. Jonkhoff said that she knows the Ramona has a monitoring program and AGWA is interested in moving forward with that.

Associate Director Neugebauer asked if the biggest concern of the local Anza residents and farmers is they think that that once wells are metered, they’d be adjudicating their water rights. Mr. Uhley said that he thought the adjudication was here, and Ms. Jonkhoff noted that it might be inevitable.

Mr. Uhley went on to say that the goal of the program is not to force anything on anybody who doesn’t want something done; that the real goal is to address and understand water supply issues, especially in disadvantaged communities. As an option, he was approaching the board to see if this particular grant application (which does that) was something they would like to consider as an option to take the lead. The Watermaster had also approached the Ramona Tribe as well.

President Corona addressed Ms. Jonkhoff and said that she felt that since Ms. Jonkhoff is a member of the two organizations she would like to stay in contact with her and with Mr. Uhley to ensure that the “heartbeat of how people are feeling” is communicated, and that EMARCD “is here for you, but only if they want to open the door.”

There was continued discussion regarding phases and timelines for the process, steps toward applying and receiving funding, and other clarifications and questions from Directors Newcomb and Brady. Director Long, General Counsel Cushman, and Associate Directors Neugebauer and McElroy also discussed the length of time for grant cycles. Further detail can be found in the transcript posted on the EMARCD website.

Director Newcomb and Associate Director McElroy both noted that this was important work to protect the resource, and President Corona agreed that applying for participating in the process may be something to place on the agenda for consideration and a vote.

After some further discussion, Mr. Uhley thanked the board and said that he is glad to see that the board is moving forward in new ways, and that there are opportunities for EMARCD to partner and collaborate to do good things in this watershed – he is looking forward to finding those opportunities and working with EMARCD in the future.

President Corona moved to item 3, and as she showed Mr. Uhley to the door, she asked Director Brady to introduce the item.

Item #3:  Discussion and possible approval to direct Counsel to draft ongoing MOUs with other RCDs in our area (Inland Empire, San Jacinto, Antelope Valley etc.) and potentially the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) in order to maximize our relationships and ability to help our communities and forge future partnerships. Update on approval of MOU with Mission RCD.

Director Brady asked if General Counsel had any input on the item, and Ms. Cushman answered in the affirmative. She began her update with the RCA topic, since she used to work with the Best Best and Krieger Counsel (Steve Anderson and Ward Simmons) who did most of the legal work for RCA.  Mr. Simmons had mentioned to her that he had been speaking with RCA about the possibility of entering into an MOU with EMARCD, specifically in order to be able to use the lands that EMARCD either owns, has an easement etc., so there can be credit under the Western Riverside County multiple species habitat conservation plan. He said that they had partnered with several other agencies with success. Ms. Cushman asked if the board would like someone from RCA to come and discuss it; or to have a director go discuss it with them and collect more information, those were a couple of good options. She then provided samples of MOUs with two other RCDs.

President Corona noted that it may be a good idea to expand relationships with other entities through MOUs, especially since EMARCD does not currently have staff like other RCDs have.

Associate Director Neugebauer inquired about timing to get them completed and signed. Ms. Cushman said she could probably draft them by the next board meeting or possibly the next one, and then suggested having a board member meet with RCA regarding scope, returning to her for a draft, and then authorizing General Counsel and the EMARCD President to sign – so three months would be feasible.

Director Brady and Associate Director Neugebauer agreed this was a recommended plan moving forward. President Corona suggested taking the opportunity at the upcoming area meeting to advise CARCD that this is the direction EMARCD is moving toward.

Ms. Cushman suggested reaching out to them first and then getting the scope of what the RCD wants from the MOU and coming up with the design so she can put it into a legal format. President Corona agreed to contact the various entities. After further discussion, Director Newcomb moved to talk to RCD in broad terms about working with EMARCD, and to give General Counsel direction to create MOUs using Mission as a template. Director Brady seconded the motion.  President Corona called for a vote. Motion passed, 4-0.

General Counsel requested clarification to the vote since the motion only addressed the RCD and not the RCA. After some discussion, it was decided that they should have a draft proposal that could be addressed at the next meeting.

President Corona moved on to the next item.

Item #4:  Discussion and potential approval of request for RFPs for monitoring requirements for Greer Ranch, Adeline Farms and Clinton Keith Properties. Suggested deadline for receiving RFP’s – 7/1/16.

President Corona briefly outlined the idea of putting out an RFP to get organizations (biologists) to bid monitoring and reports. She suggested a motion to send out RFPs for monitoring requirements for the various easements such as Greer Ranch, Adeline Farms and Clinton Keith properties.

President Corona made the motion and Director Long seconded. Motion passed, 4-0.


Item #1: Update for Spring Area Meeting

Director Newcomb and Director Brady provided an update regarding donations for the event, including wineries and local businesses. There was discussion regarding efforts to obtain donations as well as planning for the event. Details including venue, agenda/planning, and participating entities can be obtained through the transcribed text available online.

President Corona moved on to item 2.

Item #2:  Update on list of Developer Deposits

Discussion between President Corona and Director Long regarding historic developer deposits can be found in detail in the transcript on record. They agreed that historic documentation was necessary as well as a “rolling calendar”, to ensure that ongoing tasks and monitoring of incoming/outgoing funds, is needed.

Following is the transcription from this point in the meeting:

Vicki Long: Well, I just wrote down in a spreadsheet here, just what we've done and what we have. So if you look at it, it's just the funds that we received in the non-wasting endowment for Greer Ranch was $125,000, Adeline Farm was $75,000, and the Clinton Keith Mitigation, which is in Wells Fargo, is $90,000. So we kept non-wasting. So anything over that, the interest that you've made off of that money can go in the interest column. I didn't put it in there. I don't know how you want to track that, but I put that interest column in there so that everybody would know you can't do the... And maybe for the bookkeeper.

Rose Corona: I'm gonna give it to Cathryn.

Vicki Long: Yeah, you'll have to talk to her and see how she wants to do that.

Rose Corona: Yeah, she said she'll make individual accounts for each. She can do sub-accounts for each individual one and then split it up...

Vicki Long: Because the interest is the funds that are available to do the work and then the site evaluation is done on a yearly basis. And I put in September because I think we did September for the property, but I don't remember. And I know that we went out, Rick and I did in July, for Greer Ranch and Adeline Farm for the site visit. And then the cost of the report you can put in there. You can do whatever you want with this but I just sorta plated a spreadsheet just with the things that I think you'll need to have on a spreadsheet but then the bookkeeper may want to come up with... That's a thumb drive with this on there. So anyway, that's that. And anything else that you think you might need on there you could add or you can delete whatever you want. And then the reports are due yearly. So you know how we were talking last time, you need to kinda have a timeframe of when you do stuff...

Rose Corona: A rolling calendar.

Vicki Long: I thought I'd just incorporated it in this for you.

Rose Corona: Okay and that is on the rolling calendar, these are?

Vicki Long: Yeah.

Rose Corona: Okay. So moving on...

Vicki Long: And then the next page...

Rose Corona: Oh, sorry.

Vicki Long: And then the next page is the contact for Greer Ranch, they have a gate there and so the association numbers there and then the contact is Billy Smith. So I...

Rose Corona: Is that who you talked to when you went out there in July?

Vicki Long: No, they've got a new management company and the management company changes almost yearly.

Rose Corona: So this is not...

Vicki Long: So this is another person that you would need to contact before you go out there to do the evaluations. So whomever we get, we're gonna have to contact and say, "So-and-so's coming on such-and-such a day to do the site evaluation." I wanted that for you guys. And then to the best of my ability, I have come up with a status on the properties. So the status on the auto dealer Casino Drive is... The project is not built yet. It has a 1600 permit on it, and that's the 1600 permit number for you to check on but... And the last known contacts for me or the ones that I have on there.

Rose Corona: Brookfield, you talked about in the last meeting.

Vicki Long: Yeah. So that one, we've got that. And I really don't have anybody to contact on that. And Greystone Crown Hill is closed. The city took that over and the only contact, my last contact, was what I have on the page. And the remaining amount there is 7,000. And then Morgan Hill is Anne Lopez and I believe I sent all information to you on Anne Lopez.

Rose Corona: Yes. What is the difference between Morgan? You've got Morgan Hill and Country Road? So there's two files in there.

Vicki Long: Right.

Rose Corona: Two different projects or are they the same project?

Vicki Long: Well, no. Do I not have a Country Roads in here?

Rose Corona: Yes, you do.

Vicki Long: I do, somewhere?

Rose Corona: It says Morgan Hill from Country Road. It says here.

Vicki Long: Yeah, but where's my Country Roads? Do you guys have a Country Roads anywhere?

Rick Neugebauer: Uh-uh.

Rose Corona: No.

Vicki Long: Okay. So there is on that thumb drive, a Country Roads. If there is not, get a hold of me. It should be on there. Country Roads was a project that Fish and Wildlife wanted to... Federal Fish and Wildlife wanted us to do weed management on an HOA property. So we went out and gave them a bid, and it was... And the developers were still involved and it was DR Horton. And they did up a maintenance contract, we approved it as a board. And then it was supposed to kick into gear and everything didn't happen with the HOA and the developer. And so, it's in limbo basically and we still have a deposit, which I'm sorry I don't have that in here. I thought I did.

Rose Corona: I believe it's $10,000.

Vicki Long: No. We spent a little bit on there and then...

Rose Corona: Well, I mean that's what's the deposit was.

Vicki Long: The deposit was and then what happened was the same developer said, "Well, okay, we've gotten that done 'cause we did most of the work as the developer on that contract so we didn't have to deduct. Can we possibly, for Morgan Hill, the next project that we're working on, transfer a $5,000 deposit for Morgan Hill?" So the board said, "Okay, we can do that, since we're really not gonna need any from Country Roads or much for Country Roads." And so that deposit, we started working off of that and there's the balance, and then Anne is the contact on that.

Rose Corona: And then you've got to Temecula Creek...

Vicki Long: And that's just flat out closed. Okay, so now I gonna get that over to you. Can you plug this in and see if I've got Country Roads on it?

Michael Newcomb: This does not have a USB.

Rose Corona: It's okay Vicki. If I can't find it, I'll...

Vicki Long: Alright.

(End of Transcript at this point in the meeting)

Item #3:  Update on TEAM RCD name change

General Counsel Cushman briefly discussed the name change from EMARCD to TEAMRCD. The name change had been approved by the board of supervisors in December, and the certified resolution had been sent. Ms. Cushman did not hear from them, so she researched how to move along the process. She discovered that there was a requirement to submit $1.00 to obtain notification/full approval of the change, and she sent it off (along with a self addressed stamped envelope) and is now awaiting notification of full approval.

Item #4: Water audit updates

Associate Director McElroy reported that there was a pre-audit scheduled for the day following the meeting, and the gentleman had an audit performed two years prior. He said he had sent his bills to RCWD but had not heard from them; however RCWD had no record of having received them. Mr. McElroy will report back results of the post audit.

Item #5 and #6: Update, discussion and potential approval on additional content for Website, Update, discussion and potential approval on potential projects for High School volunteer hours

Director Newcomb stated that these items were going to be tabled till next month and General Counsel concurred.

Item #7:  Discussion and possible approval of rolling calendar and deadline dates to meet ongoing EMARCD easement, monitoring and financial responsibilities

President Corona briefly outlined the calendar and said that she was including major items such as milestones reported as necessary by Director Long. There are also standard items to be included such as LSA reports due by April 1st, form 700 submittals, etc. She asked Counsel if formal approval of the rolling calendar was required, and Ms. Cushman said that it was not.

Item #8: Discussion and update of Morgan Heights project

President Corona suggested moving on.


Item #1:  Riverside Flood control and potential future projects – see “speaker

Riverside County Flood Control had already presented earlier in the meeting and so President Corona moved on.


President Corona then asked for oral or written reports. There were no reports from Directors, Associate Directors, SAWA or District Counsel.


President Corona noted that the future was generalized and it was time to move to closed session.


ITEM #1:  Conference with legal counsel – anticipated litigation. Potential initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (d)(4) of Government Code Section 549569: one potential case.

Director Long moved to adjourned open session; President Corona seconded. General Counsel noted that there were no reportable items expected after the closed session. Motion passed, 4-0.


The board finished close session, and General Counsel stated that there would be no reportable action.  Meeting had previously been adjourned.


Dave Kuhlman-Secretary/Treasurer Date