MINUTES OF THE IMPORTED WATER COMMITTEE
MAY 12, 2005
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Chair Muir called the Imported Water Committee meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.
Committee members present were Chair Muir, Vice Chairs Martin and Saunders,
Directors Bond, Broomell, Parker, Pocklington, and Quist. Committee members
absent were Directors Bowersox, Haddad, Jaeschke, Lewis, Linden, and Representative
Slater-Price. At that time, there was a quorum of the Committee. Also present
were Directors Dailey, Irvin, Knutson, Lewanski, Lewinger, Loveland, Steiner,
Watton, and Williams. Staff present included General Manager Stapleton, General
Counsel Hentschke, Deputy General Manager Lanspery, Assistant General Manager
Cushman, Director of Imported Water Hess, Director of Engineering Economides,
Director of Operations and Maintenance Eaton, and others.
OVERVIEW OF MWD’S INLAND FEEDER AND HISTORY OF WATER AUTHORITY’S
POSITION ON THE PROJECT
Director of Engineering Economides gave an overview of MWD’s Inland
Feeder Project (IFP) over the past 10 years to present day. He reviewed the
Water Authority’s recommended alignment to phase the project that was
proposed to MWD in 1996. Director of Imported Water Hess gave a history of the
Water Authority’s position. He said that the MWD delegates maintained
a position of opposition regarding the IFP’s implementation from 1996-2001.
He said that current MWD board actions on the Inland Feeder project related
to legal and litigation issues regarding construction techniques, and that the
Water Authority had been registering abstention votes since 2001.
Director Quist left the meeting at 2:00 p.m.
Directors discussed the implications of registering abstention votes for IFP
issues and whether the delegates should continue to abstain on IFP issues when
the Water Authority’s opposition was now moot as construction was well
underway. Director Loveland stated that while the delegates did participate
in IFP discussions, abstentions did affect how their comments were viewed. He
said that abstentions did not allow the delegates to be as effective as if they
were to cast a yes or no vote. Director Loveland said that the delegates needed
to be fully engaged in voting on the current issues regarding the IFP’s
construction and that voting on future issues did not reflect a change in the
past positions of the Water Authority, but merely a desire to be more effective
in future discussions. Other Directors voiced their agreement.
Director Pocklington made a motion to enable the delegates to vote yes or
no on future IFP actions. The motion was seconded.
Director Williams asked if there was a Water Authority past Board action that
directed the delegates to abstain on IFP issues.
General Counsel Hentschke stated that a vote could not take place on Director
Pocklington’s motion because the quorum was lost. He said that the delegates
took an action on the IFP that was subsequently supported by the Water Authority
Board, and that for most matters regarding the activities at MWD, the Board
affirmed or gave a sense for what the Delegates should do, but had rarely taken
a formal action to direct the Delegates. He said that there was not a Board
action to direct the delegates to change their vote on IFP issues from a “no
vote” to an “abstention.” Mr. Hentschke said that although
a vote on Director Pocklington’s motion could not take place, the Directors’
discussion was clearly a consensus that provided the delegates with direction.
Director Bond stated that it was important for the delegates to vote together
as a group.
The Directors discussed how to inform MWD Chair Bannister that the delegates
intended to begin voting on IFP issues. Some Directors recommended sending a
letter to let the MWD board know for the record that the Water Authority was
not changing its past position, but intended to begin voting on current IFP
issues. Chairman Bond said he would have a conversation with Chair Bannister
to inform him that the Water Authority’s delegates would not abstain on
future IFP votes.
Chair Muir stated that this was an informational only meeting and that no action
was required. He said that there was a consensus among the Committee members
and other Board members for the Delegates to begin voting as appropriate on
IFP issues in order to help MWD make the best decision possible, given the situation
it was in.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Imported Water Committee,
Chair Muir adjourned the meeting at 2:50 p.m.
______________________________
Mark Muir
Chair, Imported Water Committee
| 
