NOTICE OF MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA

Transcription

1 NOTICE OF MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING DATE: Tuesday, September 6, 2016 TIME: 7:30 p.m. LOCATION: MMWD Board Room, 220 Nellen Ave., Corte Madera, CA Posting Date: September 2, Nellen Avenue Corte Madera CA AGENDA ITEM RECOMMENDATION APPROX. START CALL TO ORDER 7:30 p.m. ADOPT AGENDA 7:38 p.m. PUBLIC EXPRESSION* 7:40 p.m. DIRECTORS AND GENERAL MANAGER S ANNOUNCEMENTS 7:50 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS Minutes of August 16, 2016 Approve 2. Consulting agreement for Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek: Misc. Agreement No Consulting agreement for Lagunitas Creek Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP): Phase 2 - Misc. Agreement No Memorandum of Understanding with Marin County re feasibility of combining District s Kentfield Sir Francis Drake Pipeline Replacement Project with County s Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Roadway Rehabilitation Project Approve Approve Approve 7:55 p.m. 5. Financial advisory services contract with Sperry Capital, Inc. (Amendment 4 to MA- 5119) Approve REGULAR CALENDAR 6. Oath of Office: Don Wick, Chief Ranger/Watershed Protection Manager Administer Oath 8:00 p.m. 7. Water Production and Storage Report Information 8:05 p.m. MMWD BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Larry Bragman; Cynthia Koehler; Jack Gibson, Armando Quintero, Larry Russell *Anyone wishing to speak on an item other than those listed on this agenda will be recognized at this time. We ask any person wishing to be heard to come to the podium to address the board and state your name and address for the public record. A 3-minute limit is customary; however the committee chair may adjust the actual time allotted to accommodate the number of speakers. **All matters listed on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by a single action of the board, unless specific items are removed from the consent calendar during adoption of the agenda for separate discussion and action. - over -

2 8. Release of Right of Way: Lyford Drive, Tiburon, CA (APN ) Approve 8:10 p.m. 9. West Peak planning and funding: Amendment #3 to Cooperative Agreement with GGNPC Approve 8:15 p.m. 10. Fill Vacancies: 1) Human Resources Manager 2) Laborer 3) Engineering Technician 4) Watershed Aid Approve Approve Approve Approve 8:20 p.m. 11. Future Agenda Items Information 8:25 p.m. 12. Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel; Existing Litigation - Government Code (a) - State of California Workers Compensation Appeals Board: One Claim: No. ADJ ADA NOTICE AND HEARING IMPAIRED PROVISIONS: The board room is equipped with sound amplifying units for use by the hearing impaired. The units operate in conjunction with the room's sound system. You may request the personal sound amplifier from the Board Secretary for use during meetings. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California Law, it is the policy of the Marin Municipal Water District to offer its public programs, services, and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including those with disabilities. If you are disabled and require a copy of a public hearing notice, an agenda, and/or agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, or if you require other accommodation, please contact Stephanie Eichner-Gross at (415) , at least two days in advance of the meeting. Advance notification within this guideline will enable the district to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * INFORMATION PACKETS ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THE CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY, CORTE MADERA LIBRARY, FAIRFAX LIBRARY, MILL VALLEY LIBRARY, MMWD OFFICE, AND MMWD WEBSITE (MARINWATER.ORG) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * FUTURE BOARD MEETINGS: Tuesday, September 20, 2016, 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, October 4, 2016, 7:30 p.m. MMWD Board Room MMWD Board Room

3 ITEM NO. 1 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: Minutes District Secretary RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes from the August 16, 2016 meeting ATTACHMENTS Minutes

4 ** D R A F T ** MMWD Board of Directors meeting August 16, 2016 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors held on Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 220 Nellen Avenue, Corte Madera, California. Directors present: Larry Bragman, Cynthia Koehler, Armando Quintero and Larry L. Russell (arrived at 7:35 p.m.) Directors absent: John C. Gibson CALL TO ORDER President Koehler called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. AGENDA On motion of Director Quintero, seconded by Director Gibson, the agenda was adopted as presented by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Directors Bragman, Koehler and Quintero None Directors Gibson and Russell None PUBLIC EXPRESSION Eric Morey, San Geronimo Valley, spoke regarding employee compensation and his concerns regarding district management. The following people addressed the Board to express concerns related to fluoride: Dawna Stroeh; Marlena Silby and Kelly Wright. DIRECTORS' AND GENERAL MANAGER S ANNOUNCEMENTS None. 1

5 ** D R A F T ** MMWD Board of Directors meeting August 16, 2016 CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEMS 1-3) On motion of Director Quintero, seconded by Director Russell, the Board approved Consent Calendar Items 1-3 by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 Directors Bragman, Koehler, Quintero and Russell None Director Gibson None Minutes of August 2, 2016 as presented. FFIP Forest Knolls Pipeline Replacement Project: Resolution No awarding Contract No General Manager s Report for July ITEM 4 WATER PRODUCTION, STORAGE, AND DROUGHT RESPONSE REPORT Mike Ban, Environmental and Engineering Services Division Manager, presented the staff report. He said fiscal year water production was 3,900 AF, average daily production was 28 MGD, and water storage was 67,400 AF. He said just over 9 MGD was being released into Lagunitas and Walker creeks to meet instream flow requirements and maintain fish habitat. ITEM 5 TRIENNIAL PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS REPORT Chris Nanney, Water Quality Laboratory Manager, presented and gave an overview of the triennial public health goals report for 2013 through 2015 which was prepared in compliance with State regulations. A brief question and answer period followed. ITEM 6 BIENNIAL REVIEW AND UPDATE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE: RESOLUTION 8417 Mark Williamson, Human Resources Manager, presented the staff report. He said the purpose of the item was to amend the conflict of interest code as required under State law. He noted that 3 new positions were added to list of positions required to file conflict of interest forms. On motion of Director Quintero, seconded by Director Bragman, the Board approved Resolution No amending the Conflict of Interest Code by the following vote: 2

6 ** D R A F T ** MMWD Board of Directors meeting August 16, 2016 Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Directors Bragman, Koehler, Quintero and Russell None Director Gibson None ITEM 7 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Michael Ban, Acting General Manager, presented the staff report listing upcoming items. The Board recessed the meeting at 7:50 p.m. to conduct a meeting of the Marin Municipal Water District Financing Corporation. The Board reconvened the meeting at 7:53 p.m. and adjourned into closed session to discuss the following matter: ITEM 13 CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS - GC SECTION Property: Portion of Lyford Dr., Tiburon, CA (APN ) Agency Negotiators: Krishna Kumar and Michael Ban Negotiating Party: Richardson Bay Land Company Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Payment At 8:00 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session and President Koehler announced that no reportable action was taken during closed session. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting of August 16, 2016, was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ATTEST: President, Board of Directors Secretary 3

7 ITEM NO. 2 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: STAFF REPORT Consulting Agreement for Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek: Misc. Agreement No Gregory Andrew, Fishery Program Manager Facilities and Watershed Management Division RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the General Manager to execute Misc. Agreement No with O Connor Environmental, Inc. for $64,960 for the 2016 Sediment and Streambed Monitoring study. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item was reviewed by the District Operations Committee on August 19, 2016, and is referred to the Board with a recommendation for action as shown above. As mitigation for the fishery impacts of its water supply operations of Kent Lake, the district has been conducting sediment and streambed monitoring studies in Lagunitas Creek since the 1980s and one element of State Water Resources Order WR-9517 required MMWD to develop and implement a sediment and riparian management plan with the goal of reducing sedimentation to provide an appreciable improvement in the fishery habitat within the Lagunitas Creek watershed. This has proven to be an ongoing monitoring effort that was incorporated into the district s Lagunitas Stewardship Plan and is now being conducted in collaboration with the State Water Board s Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan for sediment control (i.e., the Lagunitas Creek Sediment TMDL). The sediment monitoring plan was developed by O Connor Environmental, Inc. and they have been providing high-quality service to the district to implement the monitoring effort. Staff is requesting Board approval for this agreement to implement the monitoring study for FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2017 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $64,960 Operating Fund $64,960 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $64,960 TOTAL SOURCES $64,960

8 Lagunitas Creek Sediment Monitoring Consulting Agreement for Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek: Misc. Agreement No September 6, 2016 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The fiscal year 2017 budget includes sufficient budget for a 2016 sediment and streambed monitoring study in Lagunitas Creek. This is a planned Operating expenditure. BACKGROUND: The district diverts water from the Lagunitas Creek basin to provide water supply for about 190,000 residents in southern and central Marin County. The district operates seven water supply reservoirs in Marin County, five of which are within the Lagunitas Creek watershed. Kent Lake is the most downstream reservoir on the mainstem of Lagunitas Creek. The district s diversions are regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). In its Decision WR95-17, the SWRCB set out an order to MMWD to implement mitigation measures to address the impacts of MMWD water diversions at Kent Lake on Lagunitas Creek and the subsequent deleterious effects to the fishery resources of the creek. Among other elements, the Order instituted an instream flow schedule for Lagunitas Creek that the district must ensure is maintained through releases from Kent Lake. This flow schedule was meant to last for the life of the Kent Lake project. One element of Order WR95-17 required MMWD to develop and implement a ten-year sediment and riparian management plan with the following goals: Reduce sedimentation and provide an appreciable improvement in the fishery habitat within the Lagunitas Creek watershed; and Improve the riparian vegetation and woody debris within the Lagunitas Creek watershed in order to improve habitat for fishery resources. Implement a monitoring program to track the status and trend of the coho salmon, steelhead, and freshwater shrimp populations in Lagunitas Creek. In response to Order WR95-17, the district developed the 1997 Lagunitas Creek Sediment and Riparian Management Plan. That plan included (as appendices) the Streambed Monitoring Protocol and the Aquatic Resources Monitoring Workplan for the Lagunitas Creek Drainage. That plan was approved by the district Board and SWRCB in That plan was established as a ten-year plan. The ten-year milestone was reached in September of While MMWD s role and responsibility for aquatic resource management in Lagunitas Creek did not end in 2007, it marked a time for MMWD to re-establish its actions into the future. Accordingly, the district developed the Lagunitas Creek Stewardship Plan, which was approved in June of The Stewardship Plan lays out those actions to be taken by the district) to manage the habitat of Lagunitas Creek for the benefit of the aquatic resource populations of coho salmon, steelhead, and California freshwater shrimp.

9 Lagunitas Creek Sediment Monitoring Consulting Agreement for Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek: Misc. Agreement No September 6, 2016 Page 3 The Lagunitas Stewardship Plan includes a monitoring component that consists of: Sediment and streambed monitoring; Fish population monitoring (focused on coho and steelhead life histories); California freshwater shrimp population monitoring; Stream habitat monitoring; Water quality monitoring (including water temperature); Stream flow monitoring; and Project site monitoring More recently, in 2014, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan for sediment in Lagunitas Creek (i.e., a Sediment TMDL). The TMDL has established target metrics for sediment and habitat conditions that relate to measurements of streambed conditions and large woody debris (LWD). MMWD has been collaborating with the Water Board to incorporate the TMDL metrics into the sediment and streambed monitoring plan to help the State evaluate effectiveness of the sediment TMDL. The Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan1 for Lagunitas Creek is the sediment and streambed monitoring element of the Lagunitas Stewardship Plan. The district conducted an initial three-year monitoring effort and compilation report for the period between 2012 and The plan established sample sites in distinct reaches through Lagunitas Creek, Devils Gulch, and San Geronimo Creek. The initial sampling effort, in 2012, sampled all site in all reaches. A subset of fewer sites was sampled in With this current scope of work, the district is continuing the monitoring effort in 2016 and will revisit the wider range of sample sites in the study reaches. A summary of the consulting agreement tasks and budget is presented below: Task and Budget Summary Task 1: Systematic Streambed Sampling & Analysis $38,700 Task 2: Supplemental Comparative Data Analysis $10,500 Task 3: Reporting $13,960 Other Costs (Field Expenses & Travel) $ 1,800 TOTAL $64,960 1 O Connor Environmental, Inc Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan for Lagunitas Creek. Prepared by O Connor Environmental and Jack Lewis for Marin Municipal Water District. 35p. 2 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan: Technical Completion Report Stream Conditions 2012 through Prepared by O Connor Environmental, Inc. in association with Jack Lewis for Marin Municipal Water District, September 10, p.

10 Lagunitas Creek Sediment Monitoring Consulting Agreement for Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek: Misc. Agreement No September 6, 2016 Page 4 Staff requests authorizing the General Manager to execute Misc. Agreement No with O Connor Environmental, Inc. to conduct the Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek study in the amount not to exceed $64,960. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s Strategic Plan 4 (Environmental Stewardship), Strategy 1 (Enhance ecosystem resiliency in the face of climate change), Objective 2 (Continue to implement the Lagunitas Stewardship Plan). REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Misc. Agreement No Scope of Work: Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek

11 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF WORK Sediment and Streambed Monitoring in Lagunitas Creek O Connor Environmental, Inc. for the Marin Municipal Water District August 5, Background Information Lagunitas Creek drains much of west central Marin County and is the largest watershed in the county, encompassing 109 square miles of drainage area (see Figure 1). Lagunitas Creek is an important stream for spawning and rearing coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), which is federally listed as endangered, and steelhead trout (O. mykiss), which is federally listed as threatened. The creek also supports an important population of California freshwater shrimp (Syncaris pacifica), another listed endangered species. Extensive and long-term monitoring of the populations of coho, steelhead, and shrimp have been conducted in the watershed, along with repeated habitat typing surveys, streambed monitoring, and targeted sediment studies. Lagunitas Creek originates on Mt. Tamalpais and flows eight miles through four reservoirs operated by the Marin Municipal Water District (district, MMWD). Kent Lake is the fourth reservoir along the main stem of Lagunitas Creek. From Kent Lake, Lagunitas Creek flows about 12 miles before emptying into Tomales Bay. The largest tributary to Lagunitas Creek is Nicasio Creek; MMWD also operates Nicasio Reservoir in this tributary, with about one mile of stream that flows from the dam of Nicasio Reservoir to Lagunitas Creek. Other major tributaries to Lagunitas Creek include: San Geronimo Creek, Devil s Gulch, Cheda Creek, and McIsaac Creek, all of which also support salmonids. Like Olema Creek, in some years San Geronimo Creek and Devil s Gulch can also support significant portions of the coho and steelhead populations. The district diverts water from the Lagunitas Creek basin to provide water supply for about 190,000 residents in southern and central Marin County. The district operates seven water supply reservoirs in Marin County, five of which are within the Lagunitas Creek watershed. Kent Lake is the most downstream reservoir on the mainstem of Lagunitas Creek. The district s diversions are regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). In its Decision WR95-17, the SWRCB set out an order to MMWD to implement mitigation measures to address the impacts of MMWD water diversions at Kent Lake on Lagunitas Creek and the subsequent deleterious effects to the fishery resources of the creek. Among other elements, the Order instituted an instream flow schedule for Lagunitas Creek that the district must ensure is maintained through releases from Kent Lake. This flow schedule was meant to last for the life of the Kent Lake project. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-1

12 One element of Order WR95-17 required MMWD to develop and implement a ten-year sediment and riparian management plan with the following goals: Reduce sedimentation and provide an appreciable improvement in the fishery habitat within the Lagunitas Creek watershed; and Improve the riparian vegetation and woody debris within the Lagunitas Creek watershed in order to improve habitat for fishery resources. Implement a monitoring program to track the status and trend of the coho salmon, steelhead, and freshwater shrimp populations in Lagunitas Creek. In response to Order WR95-17, the district developed the Lagunitas Creek Sediment and Riparian Management Plan. That plan included (as appendices) the Streambed Monitoring Protocol and the Aquatic Resources Monitoring Workplan for the Lagunitas Creek Drainage. That plan was approved by the district Board and SWRCB in That plan was established as a ten-year plan. The ten-year milestone was reached in September of While MMWD s role and responsibility for aquatic resource management in Lagunitas Creek did not end in 2007, it marked a time for MMWD to re-establish its actions into the future. Accordingly, the district developed the Lagunitas Creek Stewardship Plan, which was approved in June of The Stewardship Plan lays out those actions to be taken by the district) to manage the habitat of Lagunitas Creek for the benefit of the aquatic resource populations of coho salmon, steelhead, and California freshwater shrimp. The Lagunitas Stewardship Plan includes a monitoring component that consists of: Sediment and streambed monitoring; Fish population monitoring (focused on coho and steelhead life histories); California freshwater shrimp population monitoring; Stream habitat monitoring; Water quality monitoring (including water temperature); Stream flow monitoring; and Project site monitoring More recently, in 2014, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan for sediment in Lagunitas Creek (i.e., a Sediment TMDL). The TMDL has established target metrics for sediment and habitat conditions that relate to measurement of metric τ * ( tau star ) and large woody debris (LWD). MMWD will be collaborating with the Water Board to incorporate these metrics into the sediment and streambed monitoring plan. The Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan 1 for Lagunitas Creek is the sediment and streambed monitoring element of the Lagunitas Stewardship Plan. The district conducted an 1 O Connor Environmental, Inc Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan for Lagunitas Creek. Prepared by O Connor Environmental and Jack Lewis for Marin Municipal Water District. 35p. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-2

13 initial three-year monitoring effort between 2012 and With this current scope of work, the district is continuing the monitoring effort in Outline and Overview of the Monitoring Plan The Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan (the Plan) describes sediment monitoring goals and how they relate to district fisheries and riparian management plans. Prior monitoring methods are reviewed in relation to proposed future monitoring. The Plan describes monitoring parameters and methods, including details pertaining to sampling methods, sample size and analytical methods. The Plan is suitable for implementation; however, it may be adapted over time. Monitoring Goals The Plan is intended to provide data and analytical methods that can achieve the following goals. Document sediment and streambed conditions in Lagunitas Creek, including its major tributaries San Geronimo Creek and Devils Gulch. Provide a means to evaluate the efficacy of sediment management efforts implemented within the Lagunitas Creek watershed. Integrate hydrologic and geomorphologic characteristics of Lagunitas Creek with its biological components in an attempt to reveal how stream flow, sediment and streambed conditions influence fish and shrimp populations. The monitoring goals above are related to district fisheries management goals in Lagunitas Creek: Reduce the quantity of fine sediment that enters Lagunitas Creek and enhance the streambed habitat conditions of the creek, for the benefit of coho, steelhead, and California freshwater shrimp. Improve and enhance rearing habitat for salmonids and enhance the condition of the riparian corridor to benefit all fishery resources of the Lagunitas Creek watershed. Hypotheses Monitoring data will be used to conduct formal hypothesis testing using appropriate sampling statistics as described in this plan. The principal hypotheses to be tested are: 2 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Sediment and Streambed Monitoring Plan: Technical Completion Report Stream Conditions 2012 through Prepared by O Connor Environmental, Inc. in association with Jack Lewis for Marin Municipal Water District, September 10, p. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-3

14 Sediment size distributions are uniform throughout Lagunitas Creek; alternatively, sediment size distributions vary between stream reaches. Channel gradient and sediment supply, among other factors, are expected to influence sediment size distributions, hence there is reason to believe that sediment size distributions will differ among stream reaches. Sediment size distributions are uniform over time; alternatively, sediment size distributions vary over time. Prior monitoring observations suggest that storm history and proximity to watershed sediment sources affect temporal patterns of change in sediment size. This plan will test whether there are statistically significant time trends in sediment size distribution. This study design is based on prior sampling studies (described below) that focused on surface sediment size distributions. Data from prior studies enabled the development of a sampling design with specified sample size and expected sampling error for surface sediment size distributions. Sediment size distributions will be statistically evaluated in terms of percentiles of the size distribution (e.g. median diameter-d50, d16, d84, etc.) and the proportion of the size distribution considered to be fine sediment (e.g. < 4 mm diameter). Hypothesis testing will be followed by examination of confidence intervals around percentiles and proportions of interest in the sediment size distribution. Additional data relating to size distributions of subsurface sediment, sedimentation processes, large woody debris and fish habitat will be evaluated using descriptive statistics and confidence intervals as well as statistical tests presented in the Plan. These analyses may guide development of additional hypotheses and determination of appropriate sample sizes. Modifications to monitoring specified in the Plan may be considered based on statistical power, sample size requirements, and sampling efficiency. 2.1 Monitoring Plan Overview The Plan includes several discrete monitoring parameters distributed among broadly defined stream reaches in the Lagunitas Creek watershed as summarized below (Figure 1). The Plan is designed to evaluate trends in sediment conditions over time using sampling methods and analytical techniques that can distinguish between statistically-verified trends and random variation. In support of fish habitat monitoring by district biologists, the Plan will also provide quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the quality and quantity of aquatic habitat. Channel Reach Framework for Monitoring Sites Monitoring sites will be distributed within distinct reaches of the Lagunitas Creek mainstem and its tributaries. Three mainstem reaches have been identified (Figure 1) based on data from prior studies (Table 1) pertaining to sediment size, geomorphology and channel slope: Hwy 1 to Tocaloma Bridge (reach M1), Tocaloma Bridge to Devils Gulch (reach M2), and Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-4

15 Devils Gulch to Shafter Bridge (reach M3). Two tributaries will be monitored: Devils Gulch (reach T1) and San Geronimo Creek (reach T2). Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-5

16 Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-6

17 Monitoring data will be collected and analyzed within each of these five reaches as they represent distinctive portions of Lagunitas Creek that have significantly different characteristics such as channel slope and width (Table 1), as well as differences in stream flow and sediment supply controlled by both natural conditions and the effects of Kent Lake 3. Time trend analysis of channel conditions will be made more effective by collecting and analyzing monitoring data in this spatial framework because inherent variability between reaches will not be confused with change over time. Table 1. Summary of reach characteristics and sampled area. Reach Length a (miles) Mean Slope (ft/ft) Typical Bankfull Width (ft) Estimated Total Sample Length e with 4 Sites (ft) Estimated % of Reach Sampled M1: Tocaloma Bridge to Hwy c 40 3, M2: Devils Gl. to Tocaloma Br c 50 4, M3: Shafter Bridge to Devils Gl b 60 4, T1: Devils Gulch d 20 1, T2: San Geronimo Creek b 30 2, Notes: a. Reach lengths from MMWD (2008) Lagunitas Creek Habitat Typing Survey 2006 Analysis, see Table 2. b. Slope estimated from longitudinal profile surveyed by SFBRWQCB. c. Slope estimated from preliminary analysis of 2009 LiDAR data. d. Slope estimated from USGS topographic data. e. Sample length refers to the systematic sampling reaches. See Figure 1 for reach locations. Systematic Streambed Surface Sampling A systematic sampling framework will be used to guide data collection in the field and data analysis. The systematic sampling approach will be used to determine the streambed surface sediment size distribution and other characteristics of interest, such as distribution of habitat types and sediment patches (facies), depth of fine sediment deposits, and large woody debris. A systematic random grid (Figure 2) will be established within the lateral limits of the bankfull channel to conduct this sampling procedure. Transverse transects spaced at intervals of onehalf bankfull width will be sampled at ten equally-spaced points across the transect over a portion of channel twenty bankfull widths in length. 3 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. p Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-7

18 Figure 2. Schematic representation of streambed sampling This sampling grid will yield 400 data points from forty transects; this design provides relatively high accuracy while limiting the extent (and cost) of sampling. Data to be collected using the systematic sampling grid include: the size distribution of sediment on the surface of the streambed, the size distribution of sediment in the subsurface of the streambed, the proportion of the channel bed occupied by fine sediment including characteristic sediment mixtures distributed in patches (sediment facies), proportions of habitat types (pool, run, glide, riffle and cascade) depth and size distribution of fine sediment deposits (this data may be subsampled to improve efficiency based on analysis of preliminary data), and volume and characteristics of large woody debris (measured on grid transects) Systematic Streambed Subsurface Sampling Sampling and analysis of size distributions of the sediment underlying the streambed surface where salmonids are likely to spawn will provide data describing spawning habitat quality and the sedimentation status of the bed. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-8

19 Spawning Gravel Condition A random spawning habitat site within each grid will be selected for subsurface sediment sampling and analysis to determine the size distribution of spawning gravel. Material will be collected in bulk to a depth of about one foot using a McNeil sampler. Only locations where spawning is likely to occur (typically near the transition between a pool and downstream riffle) will be selected for sampling. The sediment size distributions will characterize spawning habitat quality and spatial variability. The data will also be compared to earlier data sets to evaluate changes over time. Sediment Supply and Transport Capacity The q*index Spawning gravel size distributions will simultaneously be used to calculate a geomorphic index representing the relationship between sediment transport capacity and sediment supply (q * ). The size distribution of the streambed surface at the sampling location and local bed shear stress at bankfull flow will also be required. Sediment Patches The distribution of sediment patches (facies) will be systematically sampled on the grid. Sediment facies previously described in the study area include well sorted sand, fine gravel and sand, gravel with pockets of sand, gravel dominant and cobble dominant. Observation and monitoring of sediment facies is expected to provide insights into sedimentation processes, and patch distribution will be evaluated in relation to other sedimentation and habitat monitoring parameters. Habitat Types The distribution of habitat types will be systematically sampled on the grid. Aquatic habitat types previously used for Lagunitas Creek include pool, run, glide, riffle and cascade. Observation and monitoring of habitat types is expected to provide insights regarding sedimentation processes as they relate to fish habitat. Depth of Fine Sediment Patches The depth of fine sediment facies will be subsampled on the grid. In addition, the size distribution of these fine sediment deposits will be subsampled. Observation and monitoring of the depth of fine sediment facies will permit estimation of the quantity of fine sediment and its distribution in Lagunitas Creek. Large Woody Debris (LWD) Systematic random streambed sampling will include measurements of LWD on sample transects established for the sampling grid (Figure 2). LWD is a component of fish habitat that Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-9

20 contributes cover and may interact with streamflow to create pools and depositional features. Prior studies of Lagunitas Creek suggested that streambed sediment sizes tend to be finer in the vicinity of LWD. Observations and monitoring of LWD will help characterize the role of LWD in habitat, and permit evaluation of the effect of LWD on sediment size distributions. Limitations Proposed methods may require modification for the Tocaloma to Hwy. 1 reach (M1) owing to the prevailing depth of water and the prevalence of finer-grained channel substrate. In addition, available sample sites within the San Geronimo Creek reach (T2) may be restricted due to private property access limitations. The final monitoring plan for reaches M1 and T2 will be determined through this current monitoring effort. Feasible alternative methods would be selected as appropriate. The recommended approach to monitoring depth and size distribution of fine sediment deposits is similar to methodology using the metric v * to systematically monitor the volume of pools occupied by fine sediment. 4 The proposed adaptation of the method for use in Lagunitas Creek is feasible but has not been tested to evaluate the expected precision of sampling. The proposed approach is expected to provide quantitative estimates of the volume of fine sediment stored on the channel bed that will be useful for evaluating sedimentation impacts on fish habitat as well as trend analysis related to effectiveness of watershed management to control erosion. Frequency of Monitoring Frequency of monitoring in the Plan is variable (Table 2). Annual sampling of all monitoring sites for all parameters is not recommended. Rather, a fixed minimum sampling frequency is proposed that may be modified by high magnitude flow events in Lagunitas Creek. Sampling at the full complement of systematic streambed monitoring sites would occur at a maximum interval of three years. Sampling would also occur during the summer following a peak flow event exceeding 3,000 cfs at Samuel P. Taylor State Park (USGS gauge ). Sampling would occur again the third summer following, assuming that no additional 3,000 cfs events occur. Based on the period of record , monitoring would have occurred in 13 of 27 years using these criteria. Sampling would have occurred in consecutive years during the intervals 1985 to 1986 (2 consecutive years) and 1995 to 1998 (4 consecutive years). Annual monitoring would be conducted for a limited set of systematic streambed monitoring parameters (size distribution, proportion of fine sediment and patch type, and habitat type) from a subset of sites comprised of one monitoring site in each of the five reaches of Lagunitas Creek. Fine sediment depth would be excluded from annual monitoring. 4 Lisle T and Hilton S (1999). Fine bed material in pools of natural gravel bed channels. Water Resources Research 35(4): and Hilton, S. and Lisle, T.E Measuring the fraction of pool volume filled with fine sediment. Research Note PSW-RN-414, 11 pp. USDA For. Serv., Albany, Calif. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-10

21 For this monitoring effort, sampling will be conducted for three years: 2012, 2013, and Sampling of all monitoring sites for all parameters will be conducted in Over the next two years, 2013 and 2014, the sampling would only be conducted at a subset of sites (one site in each of the five reaches) and only for the limited set of streambed monitoring parameters. Number of Monitoring Sites Methods for grid sampling of surface sediment size distributions and data sets available from O Connor Environmental, Inc. s 2006 study of fine sediment in Lagunitas Creek were used to design the systematic random sampling and McNeil sampling. Details of the monitoring design are described in the following sections. Monitoring site reaches are designed to be approximately twenty bankfull width units in length, so typical monitoring reaches in Lagunitas Creek would likely be on the order of 1,000 ft long (Table 1). Each site would be comprised of thirty sampling transects perpendicular to flow and spaced at intervals of one-half bankfull width (Figure 2). Each transect would contain ten evenly spaced sample points; locations would be subject to a random start in each transect. The Plan includes four monitoring site reaches within each of the five reaches of Lagunitas Creek and its tributaries identified above. Hence, the Plan proposes to establish twenty monitoring site reaches. Sampling to monitor spawning habitat also comprises twenty sampling sites to be co-located with systematic streambed monitoring reaches. Monitoring activities under the Plan are summarized in Table 3. Table 2. Summary of monitoring program sampling frequency (see also Table 3 for expanded list of monitoring tasks within the Systematic Sampling monitoring element, for all sites and all parameters). Monitoring Element Baseline and Major Resampling > 3 years OR after > 3,000 cfs peak flow Frequency of Monitoring Annual Annual Rainy Season (Oct.-April) Systematic Sampling 5 reaches, 4 sites per reach 5 reaches, 1 site per reach n.a. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-11

22 Table 3. Summary of monitoring program sampling, when sampling all sites for all parameters Monitoring Element Systematic Sampling Monitoring Task By Sample Reach M1 M2 M3 T1 T2 Total Surface Sampling X X X X X Sites/Reach Transects/Site Samples/Transect Total Samples Subsurface (McNeil) Sampling X X X X X Sites/Reach Samples/Site Total Samples Large Woody Debris Sampling X X X X X Sites/Reach Transects/Site Total Samples Analyses Sediment Size Analysis Woody Debris Volumes X X X X X X X X X X q* calculations X X X X X Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-12

23 3.0 Overview of Systematic Streambed Sampling 3.1 Study Design for Systematic Streambed Sampling A systematic random grid sampling procedure will be used to collect the following data: the size distribution of sediment on the surface of the streambed, the proportion of the channel bed occupied by fine sediment including characteristic sediment mixtures distributed in patches (sediment facies), proportions of habitat types (pool, run, glide, riffle and cascade) depth and size distribution of fine sediment deposits (this data may be subsampled to improve efficiency based on analysis of preliminary data), and volume and characteristics of large woody debris (measured on grid transects) The design for systematic sampling was guided by sample data from prior studies that used a comparable design. 5 The primary monitoring parameter considered is the size distribution of sediment, and it is upon these parameters that the analysis of sampling design was based. Consideration was given both to sampling objectives and sampling efficiency. The recommended sampling grid for monitoring sites contains transverse transects (oriented perpendicular to flow), spaced at intervals of one-half bankfull width with sample points at ten equally-spaced locations across the transects over a portion of channel fifteen bankfull widths in length. This sampling grid will yield 300 data points from forty transects. A generalized depiction of the distribution of sampling units within a stream reach is shown in Figure 2. Sampling locations would be determined once; these same sample units would be resampled during all successive sampling events. Based on sampling data from 2005 streambed surveys of the bankfull channel width, sampling precision over a range of the number of transects was estimated assuming transects spaced at intervals of one bankfull width. Additional analyses were conducted to evaluate transect spacing greater than one bankfull width, however the efficiency of sampling declines (i.e. the cost of sampling increases) as transect spacing increases hence the analysis presented focuses on an interval of one bankfull width. Sampling precision is evaluated in terms of the mean of the size distribution measured in psi units (sediment size classes based on log 2 units; e.g. 1 mm = 0, 2 mm =1, 4 mm = 2, 8 mm =3 and so on) and in terms of the proportion of the streambed sediment size distribution finer than 4 mm. Figures 3 and 4 summarize these relationships. 5 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-13

24 Half-width of 95% CI for proportion fines < 4mm Half-width of 95% CI for mean particle size (psi units) Number of transects at bankfull spacing (10 measurements per transect) Figure 3. Relationship between number of transects at bankfull width spacing and sampling precision for an estimate of the mean of the sediment size distribution Number of transects at bankfull spacing (10 measurements per transect) Figure 4. Relationship between number of transects at bankfull width spacing and sampling precision for an estimate of the proportion of the sediment size distribution finer than 4 mm. The recommended monitoring approach will have a transect spacing of one-half bankfull width, a scenario that could not be evaluated with the available sample data. The closer spacing of transects is expected to provide improved sampling precision within monitoring sites owing to spatial autocorrelation of sediment sizes, hence the precision estimates portrayed in Figure 3 and 4 are conservative estimates. The recommended monitoring approach specifies sampling of transects at each monitoring site. Figure 3 indicates that the half width of the 95% confidence interval with transects will be about 0.3 phi units. Table 4 provides the confidence interval converted to measurement units of mm over a range of likely values observed in Lagunitas Creek. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-14

25 Table 4. Representative confidence intervals in measurement units for mean sediment diameter. Sediment Diameter (phi units) Sediment Diameter (mm) Lower Bound 95% Confidence Interval (mm) Upper Bound 95% Confidence Interval (mm) With respect to proportion of sediment finer than 4 mm on the streambed, the recommended monitoring approach is expected to produce a 95% confidence interval of +/- 5%. In other words, for a mean estimate of 15% of the streambed occupied by sediment finer than 4 mm it is 95% certain that the true proportion lies between 10 and 20%. Sampling precision with respect to the sediment size distribution may also be conveniently expressed in relation to percentiles of a cumulative size distribution such as that determined by simple random streambed sampling 6. Such a relationship is displayed in Figure 5. The expected precision from the proposed sampling approach is expected to be greater because of spatial autocorrelation of sediment size data in systematic random sampling. Figure 5 therefore represents a conservative estimate of sampling precision. The recommended sample grid within each monitoring site would contain 400 sample points. As shown in Figure 5, for n = 400 the 95% confidence interval around the 5 th and 95 th percentiles of the distribution would about +/- 2.2%. For the 16 th and 84 th percentiles, the confidence interval would be about +/- 4.2%, and for the 50 th percentile (the median), the 95% confidence interval is +/- 5%. In other words, there would be 95% certain that the true median grain size would be between the 45 th and 55 th percentile of the sample distribution. 6 Bunte K. and Abt S Sampling surface and subsurface particle-size distributions in wadable gravel- and cobble-bed streams for analyses in sediment transport, hydraulics and streambed monitoring. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-74. Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 428 p. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-15

26 Sample size D5,D95 D16,D84 D Estimated percentile error Figure 5. Estimated percentile error for specified percentiles of the cumulative sediment size distribution after Bunte and Abt (2001). The relationship between sampling precision and the number of monitoring sites sampled in each monitoring reach of Lagunitas Creek (Table 4) was determined based on sample data from prior monitoring studies 7. This analysis likely overestimates error because it is based on sample variance for sites extending from Shafter Bridge to Nicasio Creek, encompassing monitoring reaches M2, M3 and part of M1. Both surface sediment size distributions (2005 data) and subsurface sediment size distributions (pooled data from 2004 and 2005) were analyzed. Figure 6 presents the estimated standard error for the mean value of various surface and subsurface sediment size parameters of interest. Figure 7 presents the estimated standard error of the mean value of percentage of cumulative sediment size distributions less than particular diameters of interest for both surface and subsurface sediment. The curves represent sampling precision as a function of the number of monitoring sites per reach. Four sites per reach were judged to provide the appropriate balance between sampling precision and sampling efficiency (cost). 7 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-16

27 Standard error of mean (absolute %) Standard error of mean (psi units) Subsurf D16 Subsurf D25 Subsurf D50 Subsurf D84 Surface D50 Surface D84 Surface mean Number of sites in reach Figure 6. Relationship between number of monitoring sites per monitoring reach and sampling precision for an estimate of the mean of various percentiles and the mean of the sediment size distribution. Subsurf < 0.85mm Subsurf < 3.35mm Subsurf < 6.35mm Surface < 1mm Surface < 4mm Surface < 8mm Number of sites in reach Figure 7. Relationship between number of monitoring sites per monitoring reach and sampling precision for an estimate of the mean percentage of cumulative sediment size distributions less than particular diameters of interest for both surface and subsurface sediment size distributions. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-17

28 3.2 Study Design for Systematic Streambed Subsurface Sampling Monitoring of subsurface sediment size distributions and the size distribution and volume of fine sediment deposits will be implemented using the sampling framework developed in the study design for surface sediment sampling. Data were insufficient to develop a similar design for subsurface and fine sediment using statistical power and sampling efficiency concepts. Two elements of the Plan are discussed below. First is the sampling of subsurface sediment in bulk (McNeil samples) at likely spawning sites to monitor spawning gravel quality and the geomorphic metric q * ( q star ); this procedure also provides data that may be used to estimate the geomorphic metric τ * ( tau star ) utilized in the Lagunitas Creek Sediment TMDL adopted in 2014 by the State Water Resources Control Board. Second is a new approach to monitoring fine sediment by measuring the depth and size distribution of pockets or patches (facies) of fine sediment. Sampling subsurface sediment at likely spawning sites has been conducted in Lagunitas Creek with some consistency, and has provided data that can be used to evaluate spawning habitat quality 8. The metric q * is a theoretical fluvial geomorphologic index of the state of sediment supply in relation to sediment transport capacity 9. This metric was analyzed in a prior study in Lagunitas Creek and showed considerable potential interpretative value. 10 It can be computed at all sites where McNeil samples are collected and supplemented by local data for channel slope, cross-section geometry, and surface sediment size distribution. These data are needed to estimate bed shear stress at the sampling location. The channel geometry data will be obtained from topographic survey data collected for this purpose. In addition, local surface sediment median diameter should be measured by conducting a small scale systematic sample of the bed surface size in the immediate vicinity of the McNeil sample site. This additional surface sediment size data would be collected in conjunction with McNeil sample collection. The geomorphic metric τ * used in the TMDL as the sediment condition target concerns only the mobility of the streambed surface and requires measurement of the surface sediment size distribution and the bed shear stress at bankfull flow. In addition, τ * is applied only in locations where an adjacent floodplain is inundated by peak flows that occur on average once every one or two years. This condition can be described by bankfull depth associated with a 1.5-year annual flood recurrence interval where bankfull depth is equivalent to the height of the floodplain above the channel bed. Measurement of depth and size distribution of fine sediment deposits at points on the sampling grid has not been performed in prior studies of Lagunitas Creek, hence there are no estimates of sample size or precision for this portion of the monitoring plan. Based on sample data to be collected during the initial implementation of this monitoring element, a determination 8 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. pp Dietrich WE, Kirchner JW, Ikeda H, and Iseya F Sediment supply and the development of the coarse surface layer in gravel-bedded rivers. Nature 340: O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. pp 24-25, Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-18

29 regarding the number of pools or patches sampled in subsequent monitoring events is to be determined using power analysis for a two-sample t-test, (assuming spatial autocorrelation is not an issue between fine sediment patches). The sediment size range of particular interest is sediment < 4 mm diameter based on prior studies indicating that sediment between about 1 and 4 mm diameter is expected to be retained in temporary storage on the streambed. 11 This size fraction is transported in intermittent suspension, and may be relatively responsive to variations in sediment supply and streamflow. These data will be evaluated regarding potential correlation with measures of streamflow and suspended sediment yield. Fine sediment deposits were sampled and analyzed for size distribution in 2012; this sampling provided insight on fine sediment deposits, but is not expected to be a routine component of the Plan. Although the spatial extent and depth of fine sediment deposits will be sampled in 2016, the size distribution of fine sediment deposits will not be sampled. Field Methods Following is a detailed description of sampling methods to be employed for both systematic sampling of the streambed surface and subsurface, including fine sediment facies. The sampling grid will be established at a random start point within a systematic framework to locate monitoring sites within monitoring reaches. The locations of the random start points will be established relative to a semi-permanent monument established on the floodplain for each monitoring site. The monument will also be located using a GPS receiver. Once established, the random start points and transect locations are to be recorded so that future surveys are repeated allowing two-sample matched-pairs statistical analyses to be employed. During the initial survey, ten bankfull width measurements will be collected at intervals equivalent to twice the bankfull width to establish the nominal bankfull width for transect spacing. (The bankfull width in this context is that associated with flow conditions approximately equal to the 1.5 yr recurrence interval flow as demonstrated in prior studies. 12 ) The start point in each transect will be randomly determined. The location of sample points on transects will be determined by dividing the bankfull width (w) at each transect by 10. A random number between 0 and w/10 will be chosen to establish the location of the first point, with successive points spaced at intervals of w/10. Measurements at individual sample points will include observation of individual sediment grains on transect sample points. Transects will be temporarily located using a flexible fiberglass tape or equivalent. To select a sediment grain for measurement, a sharp-tipped object such as a pencil will be located adjacent to the appropriate point on the flexible tape and then lowered to touch the bed; the sediment grain touched will be picked up for measurement. A sediment measurement template may be used, or a ruler, to determine the width of the intermediate or b-axis of the sediment grain. The measured dimension is equivalent to the 11 IBID. pp O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. p 51. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-19

30 sieve mesh that the grain would catch on. Grain diameters are to be measured at half psi intervals (4, 5.6, 8, 11.2, 16, 22, 32, 45, 64, 90, 128, 180, 256 mm and so on). Sediment finer than 4 mm is classified as < 4 mm. Sediment size distributions are analyzed as the proportion of grain sizes finer than a given diameter. Touches on bedrock or organic material will be recorded as such and excluded from the sediment size analysis. Data are to be recorded so that the spatial relationship of sample points in the grid is preserved. At each sample location on the transect, additional descriptors pertaining to the local sediment facies and channel morphology pertaining to fish habitat will be recorded. Sediment facies previously described include well sorted sand, fine gravel and sand, gravel with pockets of sand, gravel dominant and cobble dominant. 13 Fish habitat morphology at sample points in the wetted channel will be classified as pool, run, glide, riffle and cascade as used by district fisheries biologists. 14 Dry portions of the channel may be classified as either bar or bank as appropriate. Sediment size distributions in spawning gravels will be evaluated using the McNeil sample technique. A modified version of this technique has been tested in Lagunitas Creek and is recommended. 15 Potential sample locations are actual or likely spawning sites in shallow water where the lower edge of an upstream pool transitions to a riffle. The presence of suitable sample locations will be identified in the field at each transect so that a sample site in the reach can be randomly selected. The sample site will be on a transect selected at random from among the population of transects identified as suitable. The precise sample location on the transect will be determined using criteria describing suitability for spawning: evidence of past spawning, sediment size distribution, patch type, and location relative to an upstream pool and downstream riffle crest. These sample sites will be reused in successive surveys to permit analysis of paired samples. If a previously sampled location becomes unsuitable for spawning, it will be replaced by the nearest suitable site. Additional data will be collected at each site to permit calculation of q *, including channel slope, channel cross-section, and local surface sediment median size as per the prior study. For sample locations with surface sediment diameter < 4 mm and sediment facies described as well sorted sand, fine gravel and sand, or gravel with pockets of sand, the depth of fine sediment deposit will be measured. A thin metal rod at least 3 ft long will placed on the bed at the sample location and pushed into the bed with consistent force until firm resistance is encountered. The depth of penetration will be observed and recorded as the depth of the fine deposit. The depth of the water column above the sample point will also be observed and recorded. In addition, a small volume subsample of the fine sediment is to be collected for a portion of sample locations for analysis of grain size distribution. As noted previously, this procedure is similar to that used to measure v *, but is intended here to be used in all wetted channel habitat types. As described for v *, the ratio of sediment depth to the sum of sediment 13 IBID, p. 21; also see photographic examples in Appendix A. 14 MMWD Lagunitas Creek Habitat Typing Survey 2006 Analysis. 15 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. pp Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-20

31 depth and water column depth provides a measure of potential habitat space occupied by fine sediment. This is a direct measure characterizing a relationship between fine sediment and aquatic habitat. Analysis Following is a description of statistical methods to be employed for analysis of streambed monitoring data; these description generally conform to the procedures that have been employed in practice as documented in the Statistical Methods Technical Addendum (November 2015). Systematic streambed sampling is intended to quantitatively estimate various monitoring parameters pertaining to sediment and habitat and their interrelationships. Monitoring data will be used to produce particle size distributions with confidence bands for mean values and percentiles of the distribution. The streambed area occupied by different habitat types and sediment facies will be estimated, along with the proportion of the streambed influenced by LWD. The mean depth and volume of fines will be estimated with confidence intervals. The interrelationships that may exist among streambed monitoring parameters will be evaluated by estimating parameter means or percentiles of subpopulations. Quantitative estimates will be developed for sample reaches (M1, M2, M3, T1 and T2) and individual monitoring sites (comprised of the systematic grid over twenty bankfull widths, forty transects and 400 sample points). Quantitative estimates will also be provided for subpopulations by habitat type and sediment facies type. Data analyses will focus on comparisons of the proportions of fines and particle size percentiles between pairs of surveys. Particle size distributions will be tested for normality using chisquare or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Shifts in distributions may be evaluated using a nonparametric quantile test. The proportion fines (or other size class) may be evaluated using a chisquare contingency table test. Comparison of fines and particle size percentiles among multiple surveys will be conducted. For the proportion fines (or other size class), a chi-square contingency table test may be used. For analysis of trends, Spearman s rho and Kendall s tau statistics may be used. Comparison of the areas of given habitat or sediment facies types among surveys will be conducted. For the proportion of points in each class, a chi-square contingency table test may be used. For subsurface sediment (McNeil samples), the mass of sediment particles will be determined be sieve analysis. Geotechnical laboratories may perform this analysis using ASTM C-136 to produce the required sediment size distributions. The mass of particles will then be derived for half-psi classes. Particle size distributions with confidence bands, mean and percentiles will be produced for each monitoring reach (M1, M2, M3, T1 and T2). Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-21

32 Subsurface sediment analyses will compare percentiles of specified grain diameters of biological significance and particle size percentiles between pairs of surveys. Particle size distributions will be evaluated by chi-square or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Comparisons will be made with paired t-tests. Non-parametric tests will use the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Comparison of the percentiles of specified grain diameters of biological significance and particle size percentiles among multiple survey sites will be conducted with 2-way repeated measures ANOVA. A comparable non-parametric test that can be used is Friedman s test. Trends will be evaluated using Spearman s rho and Kendall s tau tests. Fine sediment depth will be quantified for each monitoring site and for each monitoring reach. Comparisons between surveys can be made with paired t-test. A comparable non-parametric test is the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Comparison of fine sediment depth or volume of fines among multiple surveys will be made using 2-way repeated measures ANOVA or using Friedman s test for non-parametric data. Trends will be determined using Spearman s rho and Kendall s tau. The metric q * will be quantified for each monitoring site and for each monitoring reach. Comparisons between surveys can be made with paired t-test. A comparable non-parametric test is the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Comparison of q * among multiple surveys will be made using 2-way repeated measures ANOVA or using Friedman s test for non-parametric data. Trends will be determined using Spearman s rho and Kendall s tau. 3.3 Study Design for Large Woody Debris Sampling Large woody debris (LWD) is an element of fish habitat that contributes cover and may interact with streamflow to create pools. The Lagunitas Creek TMDL includes LWD loading (volume of LWD per unit area of the stream channel) as the habitat condition target. Prior studies of Lagunitas Creek suggested that streambed sediment sizes tend to be finer in the vicinity of LWD 16. Consequently, systematic streambed sampling will include measurements of LWD on transects in order that the effect of LWD on sediment size can be evaluated further and to provide data for habitat condition per the TMDL. Given this need for LWD observations, it is a relatively simple matter to collect additional data pertaining to LWD so that estimates of LWD volume and other characteristics of interest can be monitored. Prior sampling of LWD in mainstem Lagunitas Creek in 2005 provided sample data that could be used to estimate LWD volume based on measurements of the diameter of LWD pieces intersecting sample transects using line-transect sampling methods. This approach was 16 O Connor Environmental, Inc Lagunitas Creek Fine Sediment Investigation. p 49. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-22

33 used in a study of LWD ecology in a coastal stream in Mendocino County to determine the quantity of LWD, the mechanisms delivering it to streams and its relationship to stream hydraulics and fish habitat. 17 Owing primarily to high natural variability of LWD distribution in streams, the sample data from 2005 produced estimated mean LWD volume with 95% confidence intervals of +/- 70 to 80% of the mean within monitoring reaches with three or four monitoring sites. Because of this high variability, monitoring data are not expected to detect small changes in LWD volume. Some advantage in statistical analysis can be gained by paired sampling where measurements are made on the same sample transects in successive sampling events. In any case, collection of these data will have low marginal cost and will provide quantitative data pertaining to a significant component of the aquatic system contributing to fish habitat. The LWD survey data is expected to provide data on LWD accumulation rates and characteristics that will provide perspective regarding its role in sedimentation processes and fish habitat. The frequency of LWD measurement could be relatively infrequent owing to relatively gradual change associated with LWD recruitment to the channel, but should not be less than twice per ten year period. Field Methods The number of LWD pieces and characteristics of interest will be sampled at each monitoring site using the systematic transects set up for streambed sediment sampling. 18 LWD volume is determined as a function of the diameter of LWD pieces encountered on transect lines. LWD characteristics of interest are not generally quantitative; hence much of the useful monitoring data will be nominal or categorical. These characteristics could include position in the channel (e.g. in the wetted channel, in the bankfull channel, spanning above the channel, proportion of channel cross-section affected, orientation to flow), habitat influence (e.g. pool cover, pool formation), sedimentation influence (bar development or sediment deposition associated with LWD), and association with other LWD pieces (e.g. single piece, accumulation, debris jam). Analysis Quantitative LWD data will be limited to LWD counts and volume estimates. These data may be compared between pairs of surveys using paired t-tests for comparisons over time. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test is an alternative test for non-parametric data. Comparison of LWD counts or volume among multiple surveys will use 2-way repeated measures ANOVA. For nonparametric data, the Friedman test will be used. 17 O Connor M. and Ziemer R Coarse woody debris ecology in a second-growth Sequoia sempervirens forest stream. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-110. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. pp IBID. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-23

34 4.0 Monitoring Tasks for 2016 Task 1: Systematic Streambed Sampling & Analysis In the summer/fall of 2016, field sampling will re-measure all sites within reaches M2, M3, and T2. In addition, McNeil sampling and site topographic surveying for q* analysis will be conducted. Bulk samples from fine facies will not be included in the sampling plan for A systematic random grid sampling procedure will be used at four sample sites within each of the three sample reaches (M2, M3, and T2). Streambed sampling sub-tasks according to existing protocols (described above) in 2016 are as follows: a. the size distribution of sediment on the surface of the streambed, the proportion of the channel bed occupied by fine sediment including characteristic sediment mixtures distributed in patches (sediment facies), depth of fine sediment in fine sediment facies, proportions of habitat types (pool, run, glide, riffle and cascade), and LWD loading b. McNeil samples (subsurface sediment), q * Bed characteristics to be analyzed with respect to space and time are the same as those analyzed in the Technical Completion Report: Stream Conditions 2012 through 2014 (O Connor Environmental, Inc., September 2015) with the exception of sediment size distribution of subsurface sediment in fine sediment facies (this was described in section 5.7 of the Technical Completion Report). The analyses will include: 1. Surface particle size distribution as a whole 2. Surface proportion of fines and 7 percentiles from D5 to D Distribution of habitat types and surface sediment in each habitat 4. Distribution of sediment facies and surface sediment in each facies 5. Depth of fine sediment as a whole and in fine sediment facies 6. Sediment depth as a proportion of the water column, all habitats and pools only 7. Subsurface sediment size distributions from McNeill samples Task 2: Supplemental Comparative Data Analysis When data collection is complete, reach conditions in 2016 will be contrasted using the same methodologies used to contrast reaches in Inferences will not be extended to reaches as a whole because pooling measurements from different sites within a reach is an act of pseudoreplication (i.e. treatment of measurements as independent when they are not). Results can however, be interpreted as applying to the specific subpopulation of sites that were actually sampled in each reach. Inferences to reaches as a whole can be done using nonparametric ANOVA-type analyses that utilize the 4 sampling sites per reach (e.g. Kruskal-Wallis and/or permutation tests), but statistical power will be limited due to the small sample sizes. In addition to the reach contrasts, changes from 2012 to 2016 will be evaluated. Examining Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-24

35 change at individual sites avoids the pseudo-replication issue. Therefore, this analysis will examine the changes in each individual site that is remeasured in Inferences at the reach level will: (1) run paired two-sample tests comparing means of the site statistics (e.g. proportion of fines) within each reach (n=4 per reach), and (2) subjectively evaluate the individual site changes within each reach. Reach contrasts and site changes will employ procedures that were developed and applied in previous years. However, because of the multiplicity of remeasured sites per reach, more automated procedures will be needed and displays will need to be altered. Two-sample and ANOVA-type analyses to compare and contrast reaches will be employed for the first time with the 2016 data set. Task 3: Reporting Reporting will consist of a summary of field activity conducted under Task 1, including descriptive statistics for the 2016 data set. Data will be analyzed as described in Task 2, but formal reporting on that statistical analysis will be deferred until 2017 or later. 5.0 Deliverables The following report will be the deliverable for the 2016 monitoring: Systematic Streambed Sampling Summary 2016 (Task 1) 6.0 Information Provided by the District MMWD will be responsible for arranging any property access to all portions of the project study area. MMWD will assist with collecting information on existing survey control points, as needed. MMWD will provide all existing survey data and reports, as appropriate and available. 7.0 Schedule Project activities will begin in October 2015 and may continue into the winter of The assessment work will occur according to the following project schedule: Sep Nov Nov Mar 2017 Apr 2017 May 2017 Conduct 2016 Systematic Streambed Samling Data Analysis Reporting Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-25

36 8.0 Budget The Tasks described above will be completed on a time & materials, as-needed basis, not to exceed $64,960. A detailed budget is presented in Attachment B. Misc. Agreement #5486 Attachment A Scope of Work A-26

37 ITEM NO. 3 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: STAFF REPORT Consulting Agreement for Lagunitas Creek Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP): Phase 2 - Misc. Agreement No Gregory Andrew, Fishery Program Manager Facilities and Watershed Management Division RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the General Manager to execute Misc. Agreement No with Cramer Fish Sciences for $75,833 to provide services for the grant-funded Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase 2 project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item was reviewed by the District Operations Committee on August 19, 2016, and is referred to the Board with a recommendation for action as shown above. At its regular meeting on May 17, 2016, the Board adopted Resolution No authorizing a budget augmentation and the General Manager to enter into a funding agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for studies under the Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring project (Grant Agreement No. P ). The $105,913 grant is to conduct three years of monitoring surveys and finalize the CMP sample frame for the region. The grant budget consists of about $89,500 for consulting costs - for CMP data analysis and finalizing the CMP sample frame for the region - with the remaining budget consisting of about $13,500 for monitoring equipment and $2,900 for administrative overhead. These costs will be reimbursed to the district by the grant. The grant proposal and agreement names Cramer Fish Sciences (CFS) as a consultant to the district since CFS had previously been a consultant to the district on our Phase 1 CMP grant ( ). Staff is proceeding with developing a consulting agreement with CFS and is requesting Board approval of the agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2017 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $75,833 Operating Fund $75,833 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $75,833 TOTAL SOURCES $75,833

38 Lagunitas Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP) Phase 2 - Consulting Agreement for Lagunitas Creek Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP): Phase 2 - Misc. Agreement No September 6, 2016 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The Board authorized a budget augmentation in the grant amount of $105,913 for Operating expenses in Fiscal Year The consulting services provided by Cramer Fish Sciences for this project will be reimbursed by the State, through the Fisheries Restoration Grant Program grant BACKGROUND: Beginning in 2012, Lagunitas Creek was established as a Life Cycle Monitoring Station under the Coastal Monitoring Plan (CMP). This Phase 2 project continues Life Cycle monitoring in Lagunitas Creek. This project will also enhance the CMP by developing/finalizing the sample frame for the five coho streams in the region between the Russian River and Golden Gate, consisting of Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek (including Olema Creek), Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek (Marin County). Lagunitas Creek is tremendously important for spawning and rearing coho in the Central California Coast ESU, and it also supports steelhead with occassional Chinook and chum salmon. Surveys for coho salmon have been conducted in Lagunitas Creek since the 1970s. In recent years, the monitoring has been conducted by MMWD in collaboration with CDFW, the National Park Service (NPS), the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN), and U.C. Berkeley. This represents one of the longest data sets for coastal streams of California. The CMP has a sampling design based on the random selection of stream segments from a sample frame consisting of all possible reaches within a population of interest. The sample frame is all of the possible sample units that could potentially be selected as data collection sites in an area of interest. A properly constructed sample frame is essential to the overall success of the CMP. The sample frame for the region has not yet been developed. This project will complete that task, considering the region between the Russian River and Golden Gate as the area of interest for this sample frame. The coho frame for this region includes the five streams of Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek. Completing the sample frame is an essential step for the CMP. A summary of the consulting agreement tasks and budget is presented below: Task and Budget Summary Task 1: Life Cycle Monitoring Adult Spawners $24,180 Task 2: Life Cycle Monitoring - Smolts $25,180 Task 3: Diversity Monitoring Carcass Tissue Collections $ 0 Task 4: Adult Counting Station - DIDSON Camera Data Analysis $ 0 Task 5: CMP Regional Sample Frame Development $26,473 TOTAL $75,833

39 Lagunitas Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP) Phase 2 - Consulting Agreement for Lagunitas Creek Coastal Monitoring Program (CMP): Phase 2 - Misc. Agreement No September 6, 2016 Page 3 The overall goal of this project is to continue with the current monitoring for coho salmon in the Lagunitas Creek watershed, consistent with the approaches, methods, and analyses described in the California Coastal Monitoring Plan (CMP). The project will also complete the CMP sample frame for the region thus enhancing the CMP for regional application. Staff requests authorizing the General Manager to execute Misc. Agreement No with Cramer Fish Sciences to provide services for the Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase 2 project in the amount not to exceed $75,833. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s Strategic Plan Goal 2 (Financial Stewardship), Strategy 7 (Maximize the role of State and federal grant funding in MMWD business model and financial planning); and, Goal 4 (Environmental Stewardship), Strategy 1 (Enhance ecosystem resiliency in the face of climate change), Objective 2 (Continue to implement the Lagunitas Stewardship Plan). REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: [IF NONE, STATE NONE] 1. Misc. Agreement No Scope of Work: Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase 2.

40 ATTACHMENT A Scope of Work: LAGUNITAS CREEK CMP SALMON LIFE CYCLE MONITORING - PHASE 2 CRAMER FISH SCIENCES For the MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT in collaboration with the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Fisheries Restoration Grant Program FRGP Grant Agreement #P Background Information Beginning in 2012, Lagunitas Creek was established as a Life Cycle Monitoring Station under the Coastal Monitoring Plan (CMP) and three years of CMP monitoring were conducted by the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD, district). The intial three-years of monitoring ended in This project continues Life Cycle monitoring in Lagunitas Creek. This project will also enhance the CMP by developing/finalizing the sample frame for the five coho streams in the region between the Russian River and Golden Gate, consisting of Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek (including Olema Creek), Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek (Marin County). Lagunitas Creek is tremendously important for spawning and rearing coho in the Central California Coast ESU, and it also supports steelhead with occassional Chinook and chum salmon. Lagunitas Creek drains much of west central Marin County and is the largest watershed in the county, encompassing 109 square miles of drainage area. It originates on Mt. Tamalpais and flows eight miles through four reservoirs operated by the MMWD, then another 14 miles and into Tomles Bay. The major tributaries include: Olema Creek, San Geronimo Creek, Devil s Gulch, Cheda Creek, and McIsaac Creek, all of which also support salmonids, in addition the mile of Nicasio Creek downstream of Nicasio Reservoir. Surveys for coho salmon have been conducted in Lagunitas Creek since the 1970s, initially conducted by MMWD and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). More recently, they have been a collaboration of CDFW, National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA-NMFS), MMWD, the National Park Service (NPS), the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN), and U.C. Berkeley. This represents one of the longest data sets for coho in the coastal streams of California. The purpose of the scientific monitoring in Lagunitas Creek is to answer the following questions: Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-1

41 What are the trends in coho salmon abundance? What are the freshwater and marine survival rates for coho salmon? Is there a relationship between population trends and management efforts? What coho life stage suffers the lowest survival and should be the focus of future management? The CMP has a sampling design based on the random selection of stream segments from a sample frame consisting of all possible reaches within a population of interest. The sample frame is all of the possible sample units that could potentially be selected as data collection sites in an area of interest. A properly constructed and ordered sample frame is essential to the overall success of the CMP. The sample frame for the region that includes Lagunitas Creek has not yet been developed. This project will complete that task. It is logical to consider the region between the Russian River and Golden Gate as the area of interest for this sample frame. The coho frame for this region includes the five streams listed above. Work has been done on Lagunitas Creek, Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek but has not been finalized and no work has begun for Salmon Creek or Walker Creek. Completing the sample frame is an essential step for the CMP. The district developed the Lagunitas Creek Stewardship Plan, which was approved in June of 2011: The Stewardship Plan lays out those actions to be taken by the District to manage the habitat of Lagunitas Creek for the benefit of the aquatic resource populations of coho salmon, steelhead, and California freshwater shrimp. The Lagunitas Stewardship Plan includes a monitoring component that consists of: Sediment and streambed monitoring; Fish population monitoring (focused on coho and steelhead life histories); California freshwater shrimp population monitoring; Stream habitat monitoring; Water quality monitoring (including water temperature); Stream flow monitoring; and Project site monitoring The CMP was developed by the CDFW and NMFS in 2011; see Fish Bulletin 180: The district has received a Fisheries Restoration Grants Program (FRGP) grant to continue fish population monitoring and complete the CMP sample frame for the region. Under the grant, the district will conduct three years of monitoring, between 2016 and As a subcontractor to MMWD, Cramer Fish Sciences will assist with specific tasks. Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-2

42 2.0 Project Statement & Set Up The FRGP grant will support long-term Life Cycle Station salmonid trend monitoring in Lagunitas Creek watershed of Marin County in accordance with the CDFG Fish Bulletin 180, California Coastal Salmonid Monitoring Plan (CMP). This project will conduct coho salmon life cycle monitoring for the Lagunitas Creek watershed, consisting of three years of annual surveys to include adult salmon spawner surveys and outmigrant juvenile (smolt) surveys. The monitoring surveys, data analyses, and reporting will be consistent with the California Coastal Salmon Monitoring Plan (CMP). These surveys will allow for estimates of abundance as well as freshwater and marine survival. In addition, coho carcass tissue samples will be collected during the spawner and smolt surveys, to be provided to CDFW & NOAA/NMFS, for use in CMP diversity monitoring. Another element of the project is to finalize the sample frame for the five coho streams in the region between the Russian River and Golden Gate (lower portion of the Coastal Diversity Strata for Central California Coast (CCC) coho salmon), consisting of Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek (including Olema Creek), Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek (Marin County). This will allow CMP Generalized Random Tessellation Stratified (GRTS) sampling draws and data analyses. Objective(s): The goal of this project is to answer the following questions: What are the trends in coho salmon abundance? What are the freshwater and marine survival rates for coho salmon? Is there a relationship between population trends and management efforts? What coho life stage suffers the lowest survival and should be the focus of future management? To accomplish these goals, the specific objective of this project is for Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD, district) to continue monitoring for coho salmon in the Lagunitas Creek watershed, consistent with the approaches, methods, and analyses described in the California Coastal Monitoring Plan (CMP). The project will also complete the CMP sample frame for the Coastal Diversity Strata outside of the Russian River. This project will be coordinated and conducted in collaboration with the National Park Service (NPS) and Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN), who are conducting similar monitoring surveys within the watershed but in study areas that are distinct from the areas surveyed by MMWD. The monitoring program will maintain Lagunitas Creek as a CMP life cycle monitoring station, for the CCC coho salmon Coastal diversity strata north of the Golden Gate. Developing the sample frame for the region will also be completed in collaboration with the Gold Ridge Resource Conservation District (RCD) and Marin RCD, who have particular knowledge of and associations with landowners in the Salmon Creek and the Walker Creek & Pine Gulch Creek watersheds, respectively. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are implementing the CMP so that there are consistent data standards and protocols applied in a spatially explicit and balanced way across coastal California, providing long-term abundance monitoring, and evaluations of freshwater and marine survival. Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-3

43 Project Location: The project is focused on the Lagunitas Creek watershed which is located in western Marin County, west of Fairfax (NAD 83: , ) and mostly east of Point Reyes Station (NAD 83: , ), California. The sampling universe for CCC coho salmon Coastal Diversity strata outside the Russian River extends from Salmon Creek (NAD 83: , ), Sonoma County in the North to Redwood Creek (NAD 83: , ), Marin County in the south. Salmon Creek is southwestern Sonoma County, draining into the ocean just north of Bodega Bay. Redwood Creek is in southwestern Marin County, draining into the ocean at Muir Beach. Walker Creek and Pine Gulch Creek are in between, to the north and south of Lagunitas Creek, respectively. Location as depicted in Appendix A-1, Project Location Map, which is attached hereto and made part of this agreement by this reference. Project Set Up: The Grantee MMWD will provide the following: MMWD Personnel; Fishery Program Manager; Aquatic Ecologist; Watershed Aide; Grant Program Coordinator, Assistant Finance Manager, and Accountant II. The Fishery Program Manager, Grant Program Coordinator, Assistant Finance Manager, and Accountant II will provide grant oversight and project management including permits, contracting, reporting and invoicing. Aquatic Ecologist and Watershed Aide will be responsible for implementing the data collection, data analysis, QA/QC, summary and reporting. Subcontractor: Cramer Fish Sciences, fisheries consulting firm used on the first phase of the Lagunitas Creek CMP Life Cycle Monitoring project, will deal with the design, data collection, and statistical analysis of the data. Cramer personnel - Principal Scientist, Senior Scientist/Senior Biometrician, GIS Analyst, and Biological Technician. Subcontractor: Gold Ridge Resource Conservation District (RCD), covering Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), will help with getting landowner access and conducting reconnaissance surveys of the Salmon Creek streams of interest. Gold Ridge RCD personnel Lead Scientist and Ecologist. Subcontractor: Watershed Stewards Program (WSP), providing two WSP members for conducting Life Cycle Monitoring surveys in Lagunitas Creek. WSP personnel - WSP members (2). The project will be implemented under the following tasks to be completed by the following entities: Task 1 Life Cycle Monitoring Adult Spawner Surveys MMWD Personnel - Fishery Program Manager, Aquatic Ecologist, Watershed Aide; Subcontractor: WSP personnel - WSP members (2); and Subcontractor: Cramer personnel - Principal Scientist, Senior Scientist/Senior Biometrician, GIS Analyst, and Biological Technician. Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-4

44 Task 2 Life Cycle Monitoring Outmigrant Juvenile Smolt Surveys MMWD Personnel - Fishery Program Manager, Aquatic Ecologist, Watershed Aide; Subcontractor: WSP personnel - WSP members (2); and Subcontractor: Cramer personnel - Principal Scientist, Senior Scientist/Senior Biometrician, GIS Analyst, and Biological Technician. Task 3 Diversity Monitoring Coho Tissue Collections MMWD Personnel - Fishery Program Manager, Aquatic Ecologist, Watershed Aide; and Subcontractor: WSP personnel - WSP members (2). Task 4 Adult Counting Station DIDSON Camera Data Analysis MMWD Personnel Aquatic Ecologist Task 5 CMP Regional Sample Frame Development MMWD Personnel Fishery Program Manager, Aquatic Ecologist, and Watershed Aide; Subcontractor: Gold Ridge RCD personnel Lead Scientist and Ecologist; and Subcontractor: Cramer personnel Principal Scientist, Senior Scientist/Senior Biometrician, GIS Analyst, and Biological Technician. Task 6 Project Management and Administration MMWD Personnel Fishery Program Manager, Grant Program Coordinator, Assistant Finance Manager, and Accountant II. 3.0 Task Descriptions The Grantee (MMWD) will complete the following tasks. At the end of each task description, the Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences Responsibilities for the task are specified and highlighted in shaded, color, bold, italic text Task 1 Life Cycle Monitoring Adult Spawner Surveys A complete redd census of coho salmon spawning reaches will be conducted in the Lagunitas watershed. Spawner surveys will generally be conducted on a weekly basis during the spawning season of early November through mid-march in most years. The areas to be surveyed include the main stem of Lagunitas Creek, the main stem of San Geronimo Creek, and Devil's Gulch (see Project Location Topographic Map). Spawner surveys will be conducted in the following stream sections: Lagunitas Creek Nicasio Creek confluence to Tocaloma Bridge, Tocaloma Bridge to Devil s Gulch, Devil s Gulch to Shafter Bridge, Shafter Bridge to Peters Dam, and Downstream of Nicasio Creek to Point Reyes Station Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-5

45 Note: The two sections downstream of Tocaloma may only be surveyed occasionally, when stream flows and visibility are conducive. San Geronimo Creek Lagunitas Creek confluence to Meadow Way Bridge, and Meadow Way Bridge to Woodacre Creek Devil s Gulch From the Lagunitas Creek confluence to a bedrock cascade, impassable to coho, and An unnamed tributary ( South Fork ) near the upstream end. In most sections, the surveys will be conducted moving from downstream to upstream. Nicasio Creek to Tocaloma section and downstream of Nicasio Creek will be conducted moving downstream using float tubes in deep areas. MMWD spawner surveys will be coordinated with NPS and SPAWN. NPS is expected to continue to survey Cheda Creek, a tributary of Lagunitas Creek, as well as Olema Creek and its tributary, the John West Fork. SPAWN is expected to survey five tributaries to San Geronimo Creek, including Arroyo Creek, Evans Canyon, Larsen Creek, Montezuma Creek, and Woodacre Creek, as well as the headwater section of San Geronimo Creek, upstream of Woodacre Creek. During all surveys MMWD will record observations of redds, live adult salmonids, salmonid carcasses, and test redds (i.e. not complete redds). Live fish will be identified to species, whenever possible, and recorded as male, female, jack, or unknown. Their behavior, condition (color, wear marks, hooked jaw, etc.), and their location in relation to landmarks such as tributaries, bridges, or habitat enhancement structures will be noted. Any observed spawning activity will also be recorded (females digging, males quivering, release of milt, etc.). MMWD will record the sex and length of recovered carcasses and collect tissue samples from each for subsequent genetic analyses by the National Marine Fisheries Service s (NMFS s) Santa Cruz lab (Dr. Carlos Garza). MMWD may also collect the otoliths from carcasses for analysis by U.C. Berkeley (Dr. Stephanie Carlson), for the study of salmonid life history variations and survival. MMWD will attempt to determine if female salmonids had spawned by inspecting for retained eggs. Other information recorded during each survey will include the survey start and stop times, weather conditions, and qualitative observations of stream flow and water visibility. MMWD will take a GPS coordinate reading at each redd. Redds will be classified as having been constructed by coho, steelhead, Chinook, chum, lamprey or unknown. Redds will be considered to have been conclusively built by one of these species when an identified fish is observed on the redd, or when only one species is present in the creek (e.g., steelhead after January). When fish are not present, redds will be classified based on their area, shape, depth, substrate, location and/or time of year. When coho are present in the creek, large redds with wide pits will generally be classified as coho redds. Smaller redds with deep pits and sharp margins will generally be classified as steelhead redds after the first live steelhead are observed. Unoccupied redds observed at a time when multiple salmonid species are in the A-6 Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2

46 creek and not displaying obvious distinguishing characteristics will have to be classified as unknown. If a female has made a small test pit and not a redd, the site will be recorded as a digging. Marked redds will be observed on subsequent surveys to collect red history data that can be used to estimate redds between surveys (if storm events should preclude weekly surveys). During the spawning season, MMWD will operate dual PIT tag antennas across Lagunitas Creek and NPS will operate a DIDSON camera. These will be located in lower Lagunitas Creek, approximately 2.1 miles above the Highway 1 Bridge crossing. This equipment will be located in close proximity to where MMWD operates the smolt trap (see Task 2 and Project Location Topographic Map). The PIT tag antennas will be operated to detect previously tagged coho salmon that are returning from the ocean as adults to spawn (these fish will have been tagged as juveniles during MMWD fall juvenile surveys). PIT tag detections will be electronically recorded, on shore. Data Analysis & Reporting MMWD will produce an annual salmon spawner survey report. The spawner survey reports will report on adult coho abundance and marine survival for the Lagunitas Creek watershed. Coho abundance will utilize DIDSON camera adult counts, correlated with the redd counts, to determine an adult/redd ratio. The PIT tag detections will also be correlated with DIDSON camera observations and prior juvenile survey population estimates to estimate marine survival. Salmon spawner data from the field surveys will be compiled and entered into an excel data base. MMWD will coordinate with NPS and SPAWN staff to pool spawner results into a single, watershed-wide data base. MMWD will provide all spawner data to the NPS database, allowing all CMP related data collected on Lagunitas Creek to be easily populated into the CMP database. MMWD will collaborate with the NPS Database for data migration into the CMP database as needed. MMWD will present the spawner survey data, for the entire watershed, from each season. MMWD will report the total observed escapement of coho and other salmonids including bootstrapped confidence intervals based on the variation from the redd to adult spawner ratio, the total number of coho redds and other salmonid redds, the distribution of spawning throughout the watershed (i.e., main stem Lagunitas Creek as well as major and minor tributaries), redd sizes, and superimposition. MMWD will coordinate and collaborate with NPS and SPAWN to help them produce a consistent set of results for the Olema Creek and San Geronimo Creek sub-basins, respectively. MMWD will present information and a discussion of spawning activity in relation to hydrologic events (i.e., rainfall and stream flow). MMWD will also present spawner survey trends over time, dating back to Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences Responsibilities: Cramer will accompany MMWD on at least one spawner survey in Lagunitas Creek, to observe how data collection is conducted. Cramer will review spawner data, each year, Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-7

47 during and at the conclusion of the 2016/2017, 2017/2018, and 2018/2019 spawning seasons. The review will focus on CMP data analysis requirements, with emphasis on adult/redd ratios and marine survival estimates. Cramer will collaborate with MMWD to integrate estimates from the adult spawner surveys with data from other life stages into a quantitative life cycle model for coho salmon in Lagunitas Creek. This model can be used to evaluate how environmental variation, restoration and management actions affect the dynamics of different coho life stages. Also, Cramer will review spawning redd observations in relation to the CMP sample frame developed under Task 5, to determine applicability of using the sample frame during future spawner surveys, if appropriate. Cramer will deliver a web-based application of the model and R code along with a technical memo describing the model structure and use of the application. Task 2 Life Cycle Monitoring Outmigrant Juvenile Smolt Surveys A rotary screw trap (RST) with a five-foot diameter drum will be installed in lower Lagunitas Creek approximately 2.1 miles above the Highway 1 Bridge crossing (see Project Location Topographic Map). The trap will be situated in a pool directly downstream of a small bedrock cascade, and will be in the same location as has been used since The bedrock cascade concentrates enough flow to operate the RST in the otherwise low gradient reach of the creek. The trap will be installed in mid-march (depending on flows) and removed in early June. Trap function will be visually inspected each day to ensure proper operation. The rotation speed of the trap drum will be recorded daily. The trap will occasionally be moved either toward or away from the cascade to maintain drum speeds of between three and ten revolutions per minute (RPM). Debris will be removed from the trap drum and live box daily. Each day, captured fish will be removed from the trap and identified to species. Salmonid smolts and parr will be checked for marks such as fin clips and visually inspected for signs of smoltification, measured, weighed, allowed to recover, and released downstream of the point of capture. All coho will also be scanned with a hand held PIT tag reader to detect any previously PIT tag coho (these fish will have been tagged as juveniles during MMWD fall juvenile surveys). Fish displaying characteristics intermediate between smolts and fry (e.g. some loss of scales, some silver color, fading parr marks, etc.) will be classified as transitional. Transitional coho will most likely be emigrating to the ocean and lumped with smolts while transitional steelhead cannot be assumed to be emigrating and will not be included in the smolt estimate. Downstream migrating fry will be tallied into five millimeter (mm) length bins but not weighed. Scales will be collected from at least ten coho and ten steelhead smolts daily in order to determine the age-class of downstream migrants. All adult steelhead will be immediately released. A metal screen with ½ mesh will be installed in the trap live box to allow salmonid fry to escape from larger fish, particularly sculpin. Later in the smolt season when these fry become large enough to become stuck in the screen, the screen will be removed. Efficiency of the RST will be determined from the recapture of a known number of previously marked fish. Up to ten smolts per species per day will be given a fin clip unique to the week and Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-8

48 location of capture and released approximately 500 m upstream. Some of these fish will subsequently be recovered at the trap a second time and will serve as the basis for calculating trap efficiencies. Marking of fish will be coordinated with a simultaneous trapping effort conducted by SPAWN on San Geronimo Creek, a tributary to Lagunitas Creek upstream of the MMWD trap location. Each monitoring effort will use distinct fin clips to avoid duplicate marks from the two trapping locations. All marks on recaptured fish will be recorded, but only those marked at the MMWD trap will be used to estimate trap efficiency. Trap efficiency and smolt movement will also be monitored through the use of two PIT tag antenna arrays, installed in Lagunitas Creek upstream of the RST. The antenna will record fish PIT tagged during the fall juvenile surveys. Data Analysis & Reporting MMWD will produce an annual smolt survey report. The smolt survey reports will report on smolt outmigration estimates and freshwater survival for the Lagunitas Creek watershed. MMWD will calculate the total production of coho and steelhead smolts from the watershed along with confidence intervals using DARR (Darroch Analysis with Rank Reduction) software. The PIT tag detections will also be correlated with spawner survey redd counts, egg production, and juvenile survey population estimates to estimate freshwater survival. MMWD will coordinate with NPS and SPAWN staff to pool smolt results into a single, watershed-wide data set. The report will present the smolt survey data, for the entire watershed, from each season. MMWD will report the total numbers of coho smolts captured, the calculated total production of coho smolts, trap efficiency, and distribution of smolts outmigrating from Lagunitas Creek and the subbasins of San Geronimo Creek and Olema Creek. Similar information on steelhead smolt outmigration will also be reported. The report will present information and a discussion of smolt outmigration activity in relation to hydrologic events (i.e., rainfall and stream flow). It will also present smolt production trends over time, dating back to In addition, MMWD will coordinate with CDFW and NMFS staff to present and discuss coho smolt production reported from other streams within the CCC and throughout California. Data will be recorded on a hand held PDA using forms developed as part of CDFW s Aquatic Survey Program. MMWD will provide all smolt data to the NPS database, allowing all CMP related data collected on Lagunitas Creek to be easily populated into the CMP database. MMWD will collaborate with the NPS Database for data migration into the CMP database as needed. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Science Responsibilities: Cramer will visit the smolt trap on at least one occasion, to observe how data collection is conducted. Cramer will review smolt data, each year, during and at the conclusion of the 2017, 2018, and 2019 smolt surveys. The review will focus on CMP data analysis requirements, with emphasis on total smolt outmigration and freshwater survival estimates. Cramer will collaborate with MMWD to integrate estimates from the smolt surveys with data Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-9

49 from other life stages into a quantitative life cycle model for coho salmon in Lagunitas Creek. This model can be used to evaluate how environmental variation, restoration and management actions affect the dynamics of different coho life stages. Also, Cramer will review smolt observations in relation to the CMP sample frame developed under Task 5, to determine applicability of using the sample frame during future spawner surveys, if appropriate. Cramer will deliver a web-based application of the model and R code along with a technical memo describing the model structure and use of the application. Task 3 Diversity Monitoring Coho Tissue Collections The diversity monitoring, as described in the CMP, will entail maintaining genetic data on salmonid runs. This effort is a stepwise process being led by CDFW and NMFS. MMWD will assist this effort by collecting specimens and tissues obtained during the spawner and smolt surveys being conducted under this project. Tissue collection in the field will not require any separate effort and is not included in the budget. MMWD will collect and retain tissue samples from coho carcasses encountered during spawner surveys (Task 1), and any incidental juvenile salmonid mortalities resulting from the smolt surveys (Task 2). The tissue samples will be cataloged then sent to the NMFS research lab (Dr. Carlos Garza) in Santa Cruz, CA. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Science Responsibilities: None Task 4 Adult Counting Station DIDSON Camera Data Analysis NPS is expected to operate a DIDSON fish imager in Lagunitas Creek, to estimate escapement and compare these estimates with MMWD redd counts and develop adult/redd ratios to be used in adult abundance estimates. MMWD will coordinate with NPS on the data generated by this activity, and collaborate if needed and where feasible, but MMWD will not operate an adult counting station. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Science Responsibilities: None Task 5 CMP Regional Sample Frame Development MMWD will lead the effort to develop/finalize the CMP sample frame for coho for Lagunitas Creek and the other coho streams between the Russian River and Golden Gate. The five coho streams of this region include: Salmon Creek (Sonoma County), Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek (including Olema Creek), Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek (Marin County). Developing the sample frame for the region will entail identifying and mapping the extent of anadromy for salmonids in each of the five coho drainages in the region, identifying the upstream barrier to salmonid migration, characterizing any man-made impediments to anadromy, and evaluating landowner access. These data will be used to define sample reaches that can be included in CMP GRTS sample draws. Collaborators in this task will include CDFW, Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-10

50 NMFS, NPS, State Parks, SPAWN, and the Marin and Gold Ridge (Sonoma) Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs). MMWD will first organize meetings of a team consisting of individuals knowledgeable in the extent of anadromy within the sample frame watersheds of interest, a GIS technician, and a biometrician/statistician. A meeting with the Gold Ridge RCD will be conducted to cover Salmon Creek and at least one other meeting with the Marin RCD and other collaborators will be conducted to cover Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, Pine Gulch Creek, and Redwood Creek. During these meetings, watershed maps will be used to discuss and locate salmonid anadromy. These meetings will be followed by field surveys within each watershed to collect GPS way points at the upstream limits of salmonid anadromy. Where field surveys are not possible, GIS analysis will be conducted to determine the most likely upstream limits for salmonids. All data on salmonid anadromy will be compiled onto an excel spreadsheet, with information on stream name, way point(s), barrier type(s), data source(s), manmade impediments to salmonid migration, landowner access, and other relevant notations. These data will then be compiled and used to define and enumerate the sample frame reaches within each watershed and for the region. The sample frame reaches will become the available reaches for a GRTS sample draw. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences Responsibilities: Cramer will prepare the GIS data, maps, and excel spreadsheets for this effort. Cramer will attend the meetings (with Gold Ridge RCD, Marin RCD, and other collaborators. Cramer will define and enumerate the sample frame within each watershed for the region, as available reaches for a GRTS sample draw. Cramer will prepare a CMP Regional Coho Salmon Sample Frame Report, summarizing the Task 5 effort and presenting all sample frame data and analyses. Task 6 Project Management and Administration This task includes all activities associated with managing and administering the grant-funded project, providing annual project status reports and invoicing for grant reimbursements, and writing and submitting a Final Report at the conclusion of the project. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences Responsibilities: Cramer will prepare invoices, for their services, which will include project status updates. Deliverables: The Lagunitas Creek Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Program will produce the following eight reports, presenting all data and results from the survey tasks and grant project: / Salmon Spawner Survey Report; Salmon Smolt Survey Report; CMP Regional Coho Salmon Sample Frame Report Cramer Fish Sciences; / Salmon Spawner Survey Report; Salmon Smolt Survey Report; / Salmon Spawner Survey Report; Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-11

51 Salmon Smolt Survey Report, with life cycle model technical memo and webbased application - Cramer Fish Sciences to produce the technical memo and application); and Grant Project Completion Report. In addition to these technical monitoring reports, MMWD will prepare annual project status reports and invoices. Task 1 Life Cycle Monitoring Adult Spawner Surveys The deliverables for this task include: 2016/ Salmon Spawner Survey Report, 2017/ Salmon Spawner Survey Report, and 2018/ Salmon Spawner Survey Report. Task 2 Life Cycle Monitoring Outmigrant Juvenile Smolt Surveys The deliverables for this task include: Salmon Smolt Survey Report, Salmon Smolt Survey Report, and Salmon Smolt Survey Report, with life cycle model technical memo and webbased application - Cramer Fish Sciences to produce the technical memo and application). Task 3 Diversity Monitoring Coho Tissue Collections This task will not produce specific deliverables as such, however tissue samples collected during the spawner and smolt surveys will be delivered to CDFW or NOAA/NMFS for use in diversity (genetics) analyses. Task 4 Adult Counting Station DIDSON Camera Data Analysis This task will not produce specific deliverables as such, however adult coho counts from the DIDSON camera will be coupled with the spawner surveys to develop coho adult/redd ratios and coho adult abundance estimates. Task 5 CMP Regional Sample Frame Development The deliverables for this task include: CMP Regional Coho Salmon Sample Frame Report Cramer Fish Sciences Task 6 Project Management and Administration The deliverables for this task include: Grant Project Completion (Final) Report, and Annual project status reports and invoices. Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-12

52 4.0 Schedule Project activities will begin in the summer of 2016 and will continue for three years, according to the following schedule: Summer/Fall 2016; Finalize Work Plan and QA/QC Plan. July 2016 June 2017; Conduct 2016/2017 Spawner, and Smolt surveys. Sept July 2017; Develop CMP sample frame for the regional coho streams. July 2017 June 2018; Conduct 2017/2018 Spawner, and Smolt surveys. July 2018 June 2019; Conduct 2018/2019 Spawner, and Smolt surveys. July 2019 Dec. 2019; Final grant project completion report to CDFW. Time frame for each task and due date for each deliverable is detailed below. Task 1 Life Cycle Monitoring Adult Spawner Surveys Implementation time frame: July 1, 2016 June 30, / Salmon Spawner Survey Report August 31, / Salmon Spawner Survey Report August 31, / Salmon Spawner Survey Report August 31, 2019 Task 2 Life Cycle Monitoring Outmigrant Juvenile Smolt Surveys Implementation time frame: July 1, 2016 June 30, Salmon Smolt Survey Report November 30, Salmon Smolt Survey Report November 30, Salmon Smolt Survey Report November 30, 2019 Task 3 Diversity Monitoring Coho Tissue Collections Implementation time frame: July 1, 2016 June 30, This task will not produce specific deliverables as such, however tissue samples collected during the spawner and smolt surveys will be delivered to CDFW or NOAA/NMFS for use in diversity (genetics) analyses. Task 4 Adult Counting Station DIDSON Camera Data Analysis Implementation time frame: July 1, 2016 June 30, This task will not produce specific deliverables as such, however adult coho counts from the DIDSON camera will be coupled with the spawner surveys to develop coho adult/redd ratios and coho adult abundance estimates. Task 5 CMP Regional Sample Frame Development Implementation time frame: Sept 1, 2016 June 30, CMP Regional Coho Salmon Sample Frame Report December 31, 2017 Task 6 Project Management and Administration Implementation time frame: July 1, 2016 December 31, Grant Project Completion (Final) Report December 31, 2019 Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-13

53 Annual project status reports and invoices January 31, 2017, 2018, and Additional Requirements MMWD will: Be the primary contractor (Grantee) and point of contact with CDFW. Be responsible for arranging for property access onto all monitoring survey areas. Provide all monitoring field survey equipment and supplies, except for those specified in the Attachment B budget. Arrange for all monitoring survey data to be available, compiled from surveys conducted by the district and other collaborators (NPS & SPAWN). All equipment and gear will be brushed with a stiff brush prior to leaving each stretch of stream to avoid the transport of aquatic invasive species (AIS). When transporting traps out of the area, each numbered trap will be bagged in its own bag to avoid cross contamination during transport in and out of the work area. All crew members will decontaminate equipment and shoes for AIS according to the standards detailed in the California Department of Fish & Wildlife Aquatic Invasive Species Decontamination Protocol. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences shall acknowledge the participation of the Department of Fish and Game, Fisheries Restoration Grant Program funds on any signs, flyers, or other types of written communication or notice to advertise or explain the project. Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences shall acknowledge the established rights of the auditors of the State of California to examine the records of the subcontractor relative to the services and materials provided under this Agreement (Misc. Agreement No. 5487). 6.0 Budget The task described above as Subcontractor/Cramer Fish Sciences Responsibilities will be completed on a time & materials, as-needed basis, not to exceed $75,833. A detailed budget table is presented in Attachment B. Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-14

54 Appendix A-1 Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase II Project Location Maps Lagunitas Creek Topographic Map CMP Watershed Maps 1. Status of CMP Sampling Frame Development; Streams Between the Russian River and Golden Gate 2. Watersheds Supporting Coho Salmon Between the Russian River and Golden Gate 3. Salmon Creek Watershed 4. Walker Creek Watershed 5. Lagunitas Creek Watershed 6. Pine Gulch Creek Watershed (Bolinas Lagoon Drainage) 7. Redwood Creek Watershed Misc. Agreement No Attachment A Scope of Work Lagunitas Creek CMP Monitoring Phase 2 A-15

55 B ou Nicasio Reservoir Smolt Trap and PIT Tag Antenna Legend! ( Spawner Survey Reaches o asi lley Va or m Dr ncis a r F id g d ake Blv er d Rd Br Nic r tf Pla N i c as i o C Sir ndar y Tocaloma Bridge em Ol De sg vil' ul c h ac La g k ree u n i ta s eronimo Creek San G Woo d ac r. re C 1 ay San Francisco Bay Dixon Weir hw Hi g Pacific Ocean Cre ek Lagunitas Creek Watershed Larse n Cr Scale = 1:60, Shafter Bridge Peters Dam 1 Source: USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles: Inverness, San Geronimo and Bolinas 2 Miles Ke nt ke La Project Location Topographic Map: Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase II. Marin Municipal Water District

56 Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase II CMP Watershed Maps 1. Status of CMP Sampling Frame Development; Streams Between the Russian River and Golden Gate 2. Watersheds Supporting Coho Salmon Between the Russian River and Golden Gate 3. Salmon Creek Watershed 4. Walker Creek Watershed 5. Lagunitas Creek Watershed 6. Pine Gulch Creek Watershed (Bolinas Lagoon Drainage) 7. Redwood Creek Watershed Lagunitas Creek CMP Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring Phase II Marin Municipal Water District

57 OREGON IDAHO Point St George Lower Klamath Redwood Creek Smith Middle Klamath Salmon River Upper Klamath Scott Shasta Coastal Mad Humboldt Bay Lower Eel-Van Duzen Bear River Mattole SouthFork Eel Trinity River Middle Eel North Fork Eel Working Frame (includes field verification) Frame Development in Progress Frame to be Developed Mendocino Upper Eel NEVADA Gualala Salmon Creek Tomales Bay-Bodega Bay Walker Creek Drakes Bay Lagunitas Creek Pine Gulch Creek Redwood Creek - Marin Co. Russian San Pablo Bay Susin Bay San Francisco Bay Coyote Big Basin-San Mateo Pajaro Alisal-Elkhorn Sloughs Carmel River Monterey Coastal Salinas River San Luis Obispo Coastal Sisquoc River Lower Santa Ynez Santa Barbara Coastal Ventura Santa Clara Santa Monica Mountains Mojave Rim BPG Santa Catalina Gulf Feb 2015 Miles MEXICO

58

59

60 Chileno Creek Walker Creek Watershed Hwy 1 Keys Creek Sonoma County Marin County Chileno Cr. mouth Laguna Lake Tributaries T o m a l e s B a y Sonoma County Frink Canyon Ma Walker Creek rshall-petaluma Rd Verde Canyon Salmon Creek Soulejule Reservoir Marin County Pacific Ocean San Francisco Bay 1:100, Miles Source: Pt. Reyes Quad

61 . Legend Public Lands Marin Municipal Water District Marin County Open Space State Lands Federal Lands Tomales Bay Highway 1 Pt Reyes-Petaluma Rd Watershed Boundary Nicasio Reservoir Nicasio Cr Platform Bridge Rd Nicasio Valley Rd Tocaloma Bridge Olema Creek Devil's Gulch Lagun ita s Creek San Geronimo Creek Larse n Cr Dixon Weir Woodacre Cr Highway 1 Sir Francis Drake Blvd Peters Dam Shafter Bridge Kent Lake Highway 1 Lagunitas Creek Watershed Pacific Ocean San Francisco Bay Kilometers Lagunitas Creek Watershed

62 Pine Gulch Creek Watershed (Bolinas Lagoon Drainage)

63

64 ITEM NO. 4 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Memorandum of Understanding Between MMWD and Marin County Regarding the Feasibility of Combining the District s Kentfield Sir Francis Drake Pipeline Replacement Project with the County s Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Roadway Rehabilitation Project Jeffrey Ohmart, Principal Engineer Environmental & Engineering Services Division Authorize the General Manager to negotiate final terms and enter into a memorandum of understanding with the County of Marin to study the feasibility of combining MMWD s Sir Francis Drake Pipeline Replacement Project with the County project to rehabilitate Sir Francis Drake Blvd., with MMWD contributing its share of costs of the study not-to-exceed $150,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item was reviewed by the District Operations Committee on August 19, 2016, and is referred to the Board with a recommendation for action as shown above. The County of Marin is planning a $13 Million project to rehabilitate Sir Francis Drake Boulevard (SFD) from Highway 101 west to the Town of Ross. Planned improvements to SFD include lane reconfiguration, sidewalk and bike lane improvements, intersection reconfigurations, paving and pedestrian crossing improvements. In addition, the County is evaluating funding requirements and proposed improvements of SFD under Highway 101, between the entrance to the Larkspur Ferry Terminal and west to Eliseo Drive. Construction is scheduled beginning in Summer In anticipation of the County work, MMWD is planning the replacement of 5,300 feet of 12-inch cast iron pipe from the 1920s in SFD from Manor Road, adjacent to Bacich Elementary School, west to Ross Terrace (See Map 1, attached). Additionally, MMWD is planning to replace a 14- inch steel pipeline from 1956 located under Highway 101 on Greenbrae Hill, with 2,500 feet of 18-inch pipe under Highway 101 in SFD and Eliseo Drive, between Larkspur Ferry Terminal and Eliseo Drive, located west of 101 (See Map 2, attached). MMWD has proposed combining the replacement of MMWD water facilities with the County improvements of SFD; all being accomplished under one construction contract administered by the County. The purpose of combining the projects is to lessen the impact due to construction on the community by strategically inserting construction of water infrastructure into the SFD improvement project, thereby lessening the impact of traffic disruptions and shortening the overall construction period. MMWD has successfully partnered with the Cities of Larkspur and Mill Valley to accomplish similar projects such as a water main replacement in the Larkspur

65 MOU re District and County Projects on Sir Francis Drake Blvd September 6, 2016 Page 2 Doherty Drive Bridge Replacement and in Miller Avenue, associated with Mill Valley s Miller Avenue Streetscape Project. MMWD and Larkspur are also partnering to replace a waterline in the new Bon Air Bridge reconstruction project slated to bid later this year. County staff would like to evaluate the benefits of combining construction of the waterline replacement with overall improvements to SFD before committing to combining both projects. Evaluation of project combination will include geotechnical studies, including alignment studies, inclusion of the MMWD waterline replacement in the environmental review of the County project, and sequencing studies to evaluate how best to combine projects to lessen traffic impacts during construction. County staff has estimated MMWD s contribution to funding the evaluation of a joint project feasibility analysis at approximately $150,000. Staff is requesting the District Operations Committee forward to the Board its recommendation to authorize the General Manager to negotiate final terms and enter into a memorandum of understanding with the County of Marin to study the feasibility of combining MMWD s Sir Francis Drake Pipeline Replacement Project with the County project to rehabilitate Sir Francis Drake Blvd., with MMWD contributing its share of costs of the study not-to-exceed $150,000. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $150,000 Operating Fund $ Budget Augmentation $ Capital Fund $150,000 Requested $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $150,000 TOTAL SOURCES $150,000 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: Funds are budgeted for this project in the FY Capital Improvement Program in Fund Category A1A02A. PUBLIC OUTREACH EFFORTS: The County plans to construct improvements on Sir Francis Drake over two years, beginning in Summer District public information staff will be working closely with the County to develop messages regarding the proposed improvements and the need to replace aging water infrastructure prior to construction of surface improvements.

66 MOU re District and County Projects on Sir Francis Drake Blvd September 6, 2016 Page 3 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This action aligns with the District s 5-Year Strategic Plan Goal 1 (Water Supply Resiliency) and Strategy 4 (Ensure facilities and equipment are maintained and sufficient to support resiliency, water quality, watershed management and a productive workforce). REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel X NA General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Map 1 2. Map 2 3. Draft MOU

67 per Toyon Dr Ú Del Mesa Pump Station PS-042 Upper Toyon D Arroyo Dr Hill Dr Vista Dr Poplar Dr Palm Ave Wolfe Grade Mann Dr Cypress Ave Manor Rd Sir Francis Drake Blvd McAllister Ave Hill Dr Madrone Ave Poplar Dr Makin Grade Laurel Grove Ave Hanken Dr Quisisana Dr Maple Ave Terrace Ave Ash Ave College Ave College Ave Toussin Ave Kent Ave ³ Ross Terrace Sir Francis Drake Kentfield PRP Installation of 5,300' of 12" welded steel pipe on Sir Francis Drake Manor Road Feet 1 inch = 500 feet Sir Francis Drake Blvd... Kent Ave Hillside Ave Goodhill Rd

68 de Sab «!!!«!!!!!!!«!!«! «!!!!!«7 ur «! ³ «! Barry Way!«Phase II 18-inch welded steel pipe to be constructed as separate contract by MMWD Station Corte Cayuga Shell «!! Coleman & Assoc.!! ( ( Restaurant Drakes Landing Rd Drakes View Cir Feet 1 inch = 200 feet Existing 16-inch welded steel pipe «! «! Eliseo Dr Existing 8-inch cast iron pipe (TBA) «! Del Monte!! «! «!... Via Lerida ( Park Connect to existing 14-inch cast iron pipe Bretano Way Parkside Way......!«!«Phase I 18-inch welded steel pipe to be constructed!«as part of Sir Francis Drake Street Improvement Project 2018 Hwy 101 Ramp... Via la Cumbre Hwy 101 Ramp Marin Municipal Water District Pipeline Replacement Project Eliseo Dr to E. Sir Francis Drake...!!! «! «!!! Via Hermosa Sir Francis Drake Blvd!!«Hwy 101 Ramp Connect to existing 16-inch welded steel pipe! (! DANGER - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC - SEE CORROSION DEPT. BEFORE EXCAVATING NWP RR... Hwy 101 Hwy 101 Redwood Hwy NWP RR

69 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF MARIN AND THE MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY OF COMBINING THE KENTFIELD SIR FRANCIS DRAKE BOULEVARD PIPELINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT (PIPELINE PROJECT) WITH THE SIR FRANCIS DRAKE BOULEVARD ROADWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT (ROADWAY PROJECT) THIS Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU ), made and entered into this day of 2016, by and between the COUNTY OF MARIN, hereinafter referred to as COUNTY, and the MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as MMWD, both in the State of California, collectively the ( PARTIES ); For good and valuable consideration the PARTIES agree as follows: SECTION 1: RECITALS. A. MMWD plans to replace or repair water supply facilities within Sir Francis Drake Boulevard in advance of the final roadway resurfacing associated with the ROADWAY PROJECT. B. MMWD has requested COUNTY combine the PIPELINE PROJECT with the ROADWAY PROJECT resulting in a JOINT PROJECT and that COUNTY manage the bidding, award, and construction of the JOINT PROJECT. C. The COUNTY is in the process of scoping the ROADWAY PROJECT in preparation for the start of the environmental phase. The ROADWAY PROJECT is currently expected to result in a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Should the JOINT PROJECT result in a higher level Environmental Document (EIR), the PARTIES will need to reevaluate the scope of this agreement at that time. D. The PARTIES acknowledge and agree that the sole purpose of this MOU is for the PARTIES to collaborate for the completion of engineering studies to evaluate the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT. The PARTIES also acknowledge that, currently, COUNTY has not committed to any action other than collaborating on the necessary JOINT PROJECT feasibility studies. E. The PARTIES agree that the studies needed to evaluate feasibility include the items listed below and hereinafter will be referred to as STUDIES : 1. Geotechnical engineering study of the PIPELINE PROJECT trench alignment(s) to identify soil conditions and mitigate risk of unsuitable soils. 2. Potholing of existing utilities along the PIPELINE PROJECT trench alignment(s). 3. Environmental document Update project description to include the PIPELINE PROJECT scope of work, cultural resources studies and tribal outreach (potential for archaeological monitoring), update Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program document to include PIPELINE PROJECT

70 Page 2 scope, study potential cumulative impacts of increased duration of construction related to traffic and air impacts. F. The Board of Supervisors and the Board of Directors of MMWD wish to enter into this MOU and collaborate for the completion of engineering studies to evaluate the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT. G. The PARTIES understand and acknowledge that further engineering studies are necessary before the feasibility of a JOINT PROJECT can be determined and any final MMWD or COUNTY decision on the JOINT PROJECT would need to be presented to the MMWD and COUNTY Boards for consideration. H. The PARTIES understand and acknowledge that should the engineering studies determine the JOINT PROJECT is feasible and that it meets the needs and requirements of the PARTIES, additional agreements would be needed between the PARTIES to undertake the full scope of the Project. I. MMWD will reimburse COUNTY for any studies, contract amendments with the ROADWAY PROJECT consultant, and labor costs for work that occurs under this agreement in an amount not to exceed $150,000. SECTION 2: MMWD RESPONSIBILITIES: A. MMWD Shall: 1. Bear all costs associated with and arising from the engineering studies necessary to determine the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT. Should the COUNTY, for any reason, not fully implement the ROADWAY PROJECT, MMWD shall remain fully responsible for all of COUNTY s costs arising out of the feasibility STUDIES for the JOINT PROJECT and its staff and consultant costs. 2. Reimburse COUNTY for all labor costs associated with the STUDIES to evaluate the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT. COUNTY shall prepare and submit invoices for labor and/or consultant costs on a monthly basis which shall be paid promptly by MMWD. 3. Work with COUNTY staff to ensure that MMWD S requirements and concerns regarding JOINT PROJECT feasibility are addressed in the STUDIES. MMWD shall address, to the satisfaction of COUNTY, all comments submitted by COUNTY concerning these STUDIES. MMWD shall review, submit edits, comments, corrections and either accept, require modifications, or reject all engineering studies in a timely manner. 4. MMWD shall indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend COUNTY, its Board of Supervisors, and the officers, agents and employees of the COUNTY from any and all liability, actions, claims, damages, costs or expenses, including attorneys' fees and the costs and expenses of suit which may be asserted by any complainant, arising in any respect, out of the COUNTY s execution of the work and studies undertaken under this M:\16-Projects\Projects\ SFD Corridor Improvements\ MOU MMWD SFD Corridor.docx

71 Page 3 MOU. Notwithstanding anything contained herein, MMWD shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend COUNTY, its Board of Supervisors, officers, agents, employees and attorneys from any and all claims and/or lawsuits arising out of the COUNTY Board of Supervisors approval of this MOU. B. COUNTY Shall: 1. Make available its staff to provide MMWD status updates and other information needed to facilitate completion of the studies needed to evaluate JOINT PROJECT feasibility as described in Section 1.E. 2. Prepare and submit to MMWD invoices for COUNTY labor costs and consultant costs associated with the STUDIES to evaluate the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT on a monthly basis. 3. Work with MMWD to provide all necessary information for the evaluation of the STUDIES, and recommend further studies should they be indicated in order to fully assess the JOINT PROJECT feasibility. Should additional unforeseen studies be identified, this MOU shall be modified accordingly. 4. Communicate with MMWD clearly, early and throughout the process regarding COUNTY s concerns and potential MMWD requirements that could be associated with the JOINT PROJECT implementation should feasibility be indicated as a result of the studies to be conducted under this MOU. 5. COUNTY shall indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend MMWD, its Board of Directors, and the officers, agents and employees of MMWD from any and all liability, actions, claims, damages, costs or expenses, including attorneys' fees and the costs and expenses of suit which may be asserted by any person, arising in any respect, out of the COUNTY s negligent or intentional acts or omissions related to providing support to the MMWD in the execution of the work and studies undertaken under this MOU. C. The Public Works Director is hereby declared to be the authorized COUNTY representative in administering this MOU. The MMWD General Manager is hereby declared to be the authorized MMWD representative in administering this MOU. Either Party may change its designated representative by providing written notice of the same to the other Party. D. Miscellaneous: 1. Agreement Binding: The terms and provisions of this MOU shall extend to and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, and administrators or to any approved successor, as well as to any assignee or legal successor to any party to this MOU. 2. Merger: This writing is intended both as the final expression of the agreement between PARTIES hereto with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section No modification of this agreement shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced by a writing signed by both PARTIES. M:\16-Projects\Projects\ SFD Corridor Improvements\ MOU MMWD SFD Corridor.docx

72 Page 4 3. Cooperation: The PARTIES pledge cooperation during the completion of the STUDIES necessary to evaluate the feasibility of the JOINT PROJECT. 4. No Third Party Beneficiaries: Nothing contained in this agreement shall be construed to create and the PARTIES do not intend to create any rights in third PARTIES. 6. Invalidity of Particular Provisions: If any term, covenant or condition of this MOU or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this MOU or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each term, covenant and condition of this MOU shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 7. No Waiver: The waiver by any Party of any default under this MOU shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this MOU. 8. Time is of the Essence: Time is of the essence with respect to the performance of every provision of this MOU for which time or performance is a factor. 9. Mediation: A. Any dispute or claim in law or equity between the PARTIES arising out of this MOU, if not resolved by informal negotiation between the PARTIES, shall be mediated by the PARTIES. Mediation shall consist of an informal, non-binding conference or conferences between the PARTIES and the mediator jointly, then in separate caucuses wherein the judge will seek to guide the PARTIES to a resolution of the case. The PARTIES shall agree to a mutually acceptable mediator. B. If mediation is unsuccessful, the PARTIES may avail themselves of any other remedies. 10. Applicable Law: This MOU shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 11. No Presumption Regarding Drafter: The PARTIES acknowledge and agree that the terms and provisions of this MOU have been negotiated and discussed between the PARTIES and their attorneys, and this MOU reflects their mutual agreement regarding the same. Because of the nature of the negotiations, and discussions it would be inappropriate to deem any Party to be the drafter of this MOU. Therefore, no presumption for or against validity, or as to any interpretation hereof, based upon the identity of the drafter, shall be applicable in interpreting or enforcing this MOU. 12. Assistance of Counsel: Each Party to this MOU warrants as follows: A. That each Party had the assistance of counsel in the negotiation for, and the execution of, this MOU and all related documents; and B. That each Party has lawfully authorized the execution of this MOU. M:\16-Projects\Projects\ SFD Corridor Improvements\ MOU MMWD SFD Corridor.docx

73 Page Section Headings: The section headings contained in this MOU are for convenience and identification only and shall not be deemed to limit or define the contents of the sections to which they relate. 16. Counterparts: This MOU may be executed in multiple counterparts each of which shall be deemed an original MOU and all of which shall constitute one and the same MOU. 17. Entire Agreement: This MOU contains the entire agreement between the PARTIES regarding MMWD s and the COUNTY s collaboration on the completion of the STUDIES to evaluate the feasibility of combining the PIPELINE PROJECT with the ROADWAY PROJECT resulting in a JOINT PROJECT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding by their duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. MARIN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT President, Board of Supervisors Board President ATTEST: By: Deputy Clerk ATTEST: By: Board Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: County Counsel APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: General Counsel M:\16-Projects\Projects\ SFD Corridor Improvements\ MOU MMWD SFD Corridor.docx

74 ITEM NO. 5 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: STAFF REPORT Financial Advisory Services Contract with Sperry Capital Inc., Amendment No. 4 to Miscellaneous Agreement No Oreen Delgado, Finance Manager, Finance Division For approval with Finance Committee s recommendation to authorize the General Manager to execute Amendment No. 4 to Miscellaneous Agreement No with Sperry Capital Inc. for financial advisory services in the amount $97,500 for completion of a Long Range Finance Plan and the advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item was reviewed by the Finance Committee on August 25, 2016 and was referred to the board with a recommendation to approve. Jim Gibbs and Sperry Capital Inc., the district s financial advisor, are knowledgeable and experienced consultants in the municipal finance arena. They are capable of providing the district with support on collecting and evaluating financial markets information, identifying and assessing factors used by ratings agencies for determining the financial strength of an organization and its ability to borrow and repay funds, and evaluating and recommending optimal reserve requirements, debt loads and other parameters. In conjunction with the review of the five-year Cost of Service Analysis staff is recommending the completion of a Long Range Finance Plan. At the July 28, 2016 Finance Committee meeting, direction was given to staff to initiate the advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds. Financial advisory services are needed to refund the 2010 Revenue Bonds. Staff is requesting the Finance Committee forward to the Board its recommendation to authorize the General Manager to execute Amendment No. 4 to Miscellaneous Agreement No with Sperry Capital Inc. for financial advisory services in the amount of $97,500 for completion of a Long Range Finance Plan and to provide financial and bond issuance services for the advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds. FISCAL IMPACT: YES NO X FISCAL YEAR: 2016/17 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $ 97,500 Operating Fund $ 97,500 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 97,500 TOTAL SOURCES $ 97,500

75 Financial Advisory Services Contract MA 5119 September 6, 2016 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: Funds are budgeted for this work in the 2016/17 Finance Administration operating budget. BACKGROUND: Jim Gibbs and Sperry Capital Inc., the district s financial advisor, are knowledgeable and experienced consultants in the municipal finance arena. They are capable of providing the district with support on collecting and evaluating financial markets information, identifying and assessing factors used by ratings agencies for determining the financial strength of an organization and its ability to borrow and repay funds, and evaluating and recommending optimal reserve requirements, debt loads and other parameters. During the next several months the five-year Cost of Service Analysis (COSA) will be reviewed and updated. Included in the COSA are projections of revenue, expenditures, consumption and recommended rate increases. In coordination with the COSA review, staff is recommending completion of a Long Range Finance Plan to develop policies and objectives related to establishing and maintaining reserve requirements, identifying maximum debt capacity, capital improvement plan funding strategies and bond ratings. Sperry Capital Inc. s efforts will be in conjunction with the work of the rate consultants Carollo Engineering. The fee for the Long Range Finance Plan is in an amount not to exceed $40,000. At the July 28, 2016 Finance Committee meeting, direction was given to staff to initiate the advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds. Refunding most to all of the $31.1 million balance of the 2010 Revenue Bonds may generate up to $5.3 million in annual cash flow savings over the next 25 years. Financial advisory services are needed to refund the 2010 Revenue Bonds. Services include financial analysis and presentation of recommendations to the Finance Committee and Board and bond issuance services for a negotiated bond sale. Bond issuance services include assisting staff in the preparing the bond official statement, obtaining underwriter services for a negotiated bond sale, preparing presentations and meeting with rating agencies, leading the bond pricing negotiation process and providing brokerage services for investment of the escrow funds. The fee for financial advisory and bond issuance services is $57,500. The fees will be paid from the refunding bond proceeds.

76 Financial Advisory Services Contract MA 5119 September 6, 2016 Page 3 The Scope of Services for the Long Range Finance Plan and financial advisory services for refunding the 2010 Revenue Bonds and Amendment No. 4 for Miscellaneous Agreement 5119 are attached. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s strategic plan Goal 2 Financial Stewardship We will prudently manage the public resources entrusted to us; Strategy 1 Ensure financial planning is sufficient to address MMWD needs and risks. REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X General Counsel NA X General Manager X ATTACHMENTS: 1. Scope of Services 2. Amendment No. 4, MA 5119

77 Sperry Capital Inc. Attachment A Scope of Services August 23, 2016 MMWD is currently addressing important financial management issues and policy questions as it confronts the financial impacts of the recent drought and the necessity to borrow for the five-year capital improvement program. These matters are to be addressed in a Long Range Finance Plan. The Plan will document the Board of Director s ( Board ) plan for financing its Capital Improvement Program ( CIP ) including a statement of financial policies, schedule of potential bond financings, plan for revenue and rate adjustments, and other matters of interest to the Board, rate payers and credit analysts. In the realm of District s current debt management, there is an opportunity to create cash flow savings by means of an advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds. This Scope of Services, followed by a description of staffing and compensation, documents the agreement between MMWD (the District ) and Sperry Capital Inc. ( Sperry Capital ) regarding financial advisory services associated with the aforementioned services. Long Range Finance Plan Sperry Capital is hereby engaged to prepare the Long Range Finance Plan, working in conjunction with Carollo Engineers and District staff as, simultaneously, the Cost of Service Analysis dated September, 2015 is updated. Sperry Capital will prepare the Long Range Finance Plan drawing upon the update of the Cost of Service Analysis and avoiding any duplication of effort. The Long Range Finance Plan may address the following topics: 1. Financial Forecast and Water Rate Strategy: Using several scenarios of forecast demographics and future water consumption, precipitation both in the District Watershed and the Russian River Watershed, treatment costs, retiree pension and health plan costs, operation and maintenance expenses, and capital improvement program forecasts identify potential revenue requirements and schedules of potential rate adjustments for the long term. 2. Reserve Requirements: Operating and Capital What is the rationale that supports a particular requirement? Consumption fluctuations? Emergency repairs? What is an appropriate range of reserve amounts considering bond rating agency concerns? 3. Debt Capacity: How is this determined? How does it relate to revenue requirements, water rates, and recent production fluctuations? 4. Pay-as you go: What is the role of pay-as-you-go in District budgeting now and in the foreseeable future? How does it relate to ongoing renewal and replacement and major capital projects? How does it relate to debt ratings, debt service coverage, and cost of borrowing? 5. Interest Rates: They are very low. Should that affect decisions on the size and timing of bond issues? How low are rates relative to history? What is the outlook? 6. The District s Ratings: The District received a down-grade to AA from AA+ by Fitch Ratings. It now has ratings of AA from both Fitch and Standard & Poor s. What is the outlook for the District s debt ratings? What could cause them to change up or down? What are the implications for the cost of debt? How does the District compare with other California AA rated water agencies? Three Harbor Drive, Suite 101 Sausalito, CA Tel: Fax:

78 Sperry Capital Inc. Sperry Capital will submit an outline of the Long Range Finance Plan and, subsequently, a draft plan to District staff and Carollo Engineers, as appropriate, for review and comment to ensure a coordinated and complementary result. Advance Refunding of 2010 Revenue Bonds - Bond Issuance Services If the Board decides to proceed with the advance refunding of the 2010 Revenue Bonds, Sperry Capital is engaged to assist the staff to manage the financing process as it did in 2012 including the following services: 1. Working with Bond and Disclosure Counsel to define matters to be disclosed in the official statement, as an update of the 2012 document. 2. Organize the request-for-proposal-process to select an underwriter including selecting the RFP recipients, drafting the RFP, reviewing proposals, advising on the interview process and offering criteria for the selection decision. 3. Organize the all hands transaction organizing meeting including: a. Preparation of a term sheet to guide the drafting of the legal documents, b. Preparation of a draft financing schedule, and c. Preparation of a draft interested parties list. 4. Prepare the rating presentation for Standard and Poor s and Fitch Ratings and request the ratings. 5. Lead the bond pricing negotiation process. 6. Provide brokerage services for the investment of the refunding escrow fund. 7. Assist in the preparations for closing. 8. Prepare a closing report. Staffing and Compensation The Sperry Capital staff is composed as follows with accompanying billing rates: James Gibbs, Principal Martha Vujovich, Principal Michelle Parra Guedez, Associate $375 per hour $300 per hour $150 per hour Long Range Finance Plan The exact scope of the planning effort is difficult to estimate at this point. These tasks will be billed on an hourly basis with invoices submitted monthly with payment due in 30 days. The total billed amount is capped at $40,000. Out of pocket expenses will be reimbursed subject to District approval. Three Harbor Drive, Suite 101 Sausalito, CA Tel: Fax:

79 Sperry Capital Inc. Negotiated Bond Sale Advisory Services Compensation for bond sale advisory services is contingent on a successful sale and will be paid from bond proceeds at closing. The fee for the negotiated sale of bonds is separate from the brokerage fees for bidding of the refunding escrow securities. The fees are as follows: Negotiated Bond Sale $47,500 Refunding Escrow Portfolio $10,000 In accordance with industry practice, the brokerage fees for the investment of proceeds are paid by the winning provider directly to Sperry Capital at closing. The yield on the investment agreements or pricing of the investment securities is adjusted by the provider to amortize the fees. Broken Deal Fee: If the District terminates this agreement without cause and proceeds to complete the remaining tasks with another party, Sperry will receive a broken deal fee equal to 65% of the fee(s) applicable to the uncompleted tasks at the time of termination. Three Harbor Drive, Suite 101 Sausalito, CA Tel: Fax:

80 FOURTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SPERRY CAPITAL INC. This agreement is entered into by and between Marin Municipal Water District, ( District ) and Sperry Capital Inc. and amends that certain Professional Services Agreement between the District and Sperry Capital Inc. - Miscellaneous Agreement No ( Agreement ). For good and valuable consideration the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals: A. The parties entered into the Agreement in February B. The District now desires to amend that Agreement to include a Scope of Services August 23, 2016 per Attachment A for the completion of a Long Range Finance Plan and Advance Refunding of 2010 Revenue Bonds - Bond Issuance Services including Negotiated Bond Sale Advisory Services. C. Sperry Capital Inc. agrees to provide those services in accordance with the terms articulated below. D. Therefore, the parties agree to enter into this Fourth Amendment to the Agreement ( Fourth Amendment ) to allow the District to engage Sperry Capital Inc. for services as described in Scope of Services August 23, 2016 per Attachment A. Section 2. Terms: A. Fourth Amendment to Agreement: This Fourth Amendment modifies the Agreement. Except for the modifications contained herein, all of the terms of the Agreement remain in full force and effect until the 30 day notice of cancellation. B. Part A (1) entitled Description of Services and Payment of the Agreement is amended to include in the scope of work, services as registered financial advisor. C. In consideration for its services, the District shall pay Sperry Capital Inc. per the fees contained in the Scope of Services August 23, 2016 per Attachment A. SPERRY CAPITAL INC. MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT James Gibbs Krishna Kumar Principal General Manager August, 2016 August, 2016

81 ITEM NO. 6 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Oath of office for New Chief Ranger Don Wick Michael Swezy, Watershed Manager, Facilities and Watershed Division Administer oath of office EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Board President will administer the oath to the new Chief Ranger/Watershed Protection Manager, Don Wick. FISCAL IMPACT: YES NO X FISCAL YEAR: FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: N/A STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: N/A REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager NA X General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: NONE

82 ITEM NO. 7 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Water Production and Storage Report Michael Ban, P.E., Manager Environmental and Engineering Services Division Information EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The District's treated water production for the report period ending August 30, 2016 has averaged mgd. Potable water production for the fiscal year has been 5, acre-feet, which is 13.30% abovefy15/16 and 1% below FY 14/15. District reservoir storage as of this date is 65,667 acre-feet. This is 82.53% of total storage capacity and % of normal storage. Last year on this date, storage was 60,441 acre-feet. Storage on August 9, 2016 (as reported to you at the Board meeting of August 16, 2016) was 68,153 acre-feet and has decreased in the two-week interval by 2,486 acre-feet. As measured from the lip of each spillway, the water surface at Kent is down 7.57 feet; Bon Tempe is down 2.86 feet; Alpine is down feet; Nicasio is down 6.88 feet; Soulajule is down 8.04 feet; Lagunitas is down 0.47 feet; and Phoenix is down 1.97 feet. The stream release from Kent Reservoir is 8.48 cfs (5.48 mgd), and the release from Soulajule is 5.88 cfs (3.80 mgd). ATTACHMENTS: Monthly Potable Water Production Year-to-Date past five years (table) Monthly Total Water Production for the past four years (graph) Running 12-month Potable Water Production for 1987 to present (graph) Total Reservoir Storage for the past three years (graph) Cumulative Precipitation for the past two years (graph)

83 Marin Municipal Water District Monthly Water Production (acre-feet) Water Production and Storage Report September 6, 2016 Page 2 Total Potable Water Production % Change Month FYE 17 FYE 16 FYE 15 FYE 14 FYE 13 FYE17 vs FYE16 July 2,636 2,287 2,690 2,977 3,038 15% Total YTD 2,636 2,287 2,690 2,977 3,038 15% Imported Water Production % Change Month FYE 17 FYE 16 FYE 15 FYE 14 FYE 13 FYE17 vs FYE16 July % Total YTD % Reservoir Water Production % Change Month FYE 17 FYE 16 FYE 15 FYE 14 FYE 13 FYE17 vs FYE16 July 2,246 1,922 1,980 2,460 2,689 17% Total YTD 2,246 1,922 1,980 2,460 2,689 17% Recycled Water Production % Change Month FYE 17 FYE 16 FYE 15 FYE 14 FYE 13 FYE17 vs FYE16 July % Total YTD %

84 3,500 Monthly Total Water Production Water Production and Storage Report September 6, 2016 Page 3 3,000 2,500 Production (acre-feet) 2,000 1,500 1, Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec /11/2016

85 35,000 Running 12-month Potable Water Production Water Production and Storage Report September 6, 2016 Page 4 30,000 Production (acre-feet/year) 25,000 20,000 15,000 8/11/2016

86 90,000 Total Reservoir Storage Water Production and Storage Report September 6, 2016 Page 5 80,000 Maximum Storage = 79,566 AF 70,000 60, Median Storage (acre-feet) 50,000 40,000 30,000 20, Drought 10,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec /31/2016

87 60 Cumulative Precipitation Water Production and Storage Report September 6, 2016 Page 6 Average Rainfall (in) Drought Average Daily Rainfall Drought /31/2016

88 ITEM NO. 8 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Release of a District Right of Way at Lyford Drive, Tiburon, CA APN Michael J. Ban, P.E., Manager Environmental and Engineering Services Division Authorize the General Manager to execute a Quitclaim Deed on an approximately 6,203 square foot water line easement at Lyford Drive, Tiburon, to the Richardson Bay Land Company for $60,000 SUMMARY: The District owns a water line easement (Easement) on and under real property at Lyford Drive (Property) in Tiburon, owned by the Richardson Bay Land Company (Buyer), pursuant to the Indenture dated April 6, Since the District took possession of the Easement, the District has not constructed any water infrastructure or related facilities in or on the Easement. The District has no foreseeable future need for the Easement. The Buyer has asked the District to vacate the Easement so Buyer may proceed with plans for the Property. Buyer is the only potential purchaser of the Easement. Buyer and District have reached agreement for Buyer to purchase the Easement for $60,000. District staff requests the Board authorize the General Manager to execute the Quitclaim Deed for sale of the Easement in the amount of $60,000. Upon receipt of payment from Buyer, the District s General Manager will execute the Quitclaim Deed. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s Strategic Plan Goal 2 (Financial Stewardship), Strategy 3 (Manage MMWD Budget and Assets), and Objective 1 (Evaluate ways to reduce cost to the ratepayer). REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager NA X General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location map 2. Letter from Richardson Bay Land Company 3. Quitclaim Deed

89 LOCATION MAP Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 2

90 Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 3 LETTER FROM RICHARDSON BAY LAND COMPANY For Benefit of Grantee, Standard Recording Fee Documentary Transfer Tax = 0

91 Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 4 Signature of Agent Determining Tax When recorded mail to: Stanley Graham Marin Municipal Water District 220 Nellen Avenue Corte Madera CA Mail Tax Statements to: Richardson Bay Land Company PO Box 761 Belvedere CA APN: QUITCLAIM DEED THIS QUITCLAIM, made as of, by and between the MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, a public corporation, hereinafter called District and RICHARDSON BAY LAND CO., also known as Richardson Bay Land Company, a California corporation, also known as The Richardson Bay Land Company, Incorporated, a California corporation, hereinafter called Grantee. WITNESSETH: That District, for a good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release, and forever quitclaim unto Grantee, their successors and assigns, forever, all of the right, title and interests of the District in and to the following described parcel of land as described in Exhibit A. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed these presents the day and year first written above. SEAL: MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT By ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California County of Marin On before me, Stanley P. Graham, Notary Public, personally appeared Krishna Kumar, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal.

92 Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 5 Signature (Seal) Krishna Kumar, General Manager Attest Stephanie Eichner-Gross, Secretary

93 Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 6

94 Release of a Right of Way September 6, 2016 Page 7

95 ITEM NO. 9 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: STAFF REPORT West Peak Basis of Design Report Project Crystal Yezman, Facilities and Watershed Division Manager Authorize the General Manager to 1) execute Amendment #3 to Marin Municipal Water District (District)/Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy (Conservancy) Cooperative Agreement (MA# 5311) for the West Peak Basis of Design Report Project; 2) apply for two disbursements from the Marin Community Foundation Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund in the amount of $112,500 each in Fiscal Years 2016/17 and 2017/18; and 3) augment FY 2016/17 budget by $112,500. Amendment #3 to the Cooperative Agreement between the Conservancy and the District (attached) regarding execution of the planning efforts and community engagement tasks needed to complete a basis of design report for the restoration of West Peak on Mt. Tamalpais (formerly the Mill Valley Air Force Station) is submitted for the board s consideration. District and Conservancy staff have developed a draft funding arrangement for the planning efforts to complete a West Peak Basis of Design Report wherein the total cost of $450,000 would be funded by a combination of $225,000 from the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund held by the Marin Community Foundation and $225,000 in matching funds provided by the Conservancy under the One Tam initiative. In order to maintain a $150,000 balance in the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund, the District will disburse the $225,000 in two installments over a two year period. Additional fund raising will be conducted to ensure the target balance is maintained. A funding request to the Marin Community Foundation and a request for an augmentation to the FY 2016/17 budget are presented to the Board of Directors to fund half of the District s overall contribution. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2016/17 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $ Operating Fund $ Budget Augmentation Requested $112,500 Capital Fund $

96 West Peak Basis of Design Report Project September 6, 2016 Page 2 $ Other: Mt. Tamalpais $112,500 Watershed Fund/Marin Community Foundation $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $112,500 TOTAL SOURCES $112,500 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The West Peak Basis of Design Report planning efforts will be funded by a combination of $225,000 contributed from the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund held by the Marin Community Foundation and $225,000 in matching funds provided by the Conservancy under the One Tam initiative for a total project cost of $450,000. In order to maintain a $150,000 balance in the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund, the District will disburse the $225,000 in two installments over a two year period. Additional fund raising shall be conducted to ensure the target balance is maintained. A funding request to the Marin Community Foundation and a budget augmentation to the FY 2016/17 budget are presented here. The second disbursement will be included in the 2017/18 budget request. BACKGROUND: Staff has made a series of presentations to the Watershed Committee over the last year in preparation for developing an agreement with the Conservancy to produce a basis of design report for restoration of West Peak. These discussions included a review of working and funding models for similar projects undertaken by the Conservancy with federal and state park partners (September 10, 2015 meeting) and review of potential terms for a West Peak Restoration agreement (December 15, 2015 meeting). District and Conservancy staff have developed a draft funding arrangement for the planning efforts for the West Peak Basis of Design Report wherein the total cost of $450,000 would be funded by a combination of $225,000 from the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund held by the Marin Community Foundation and $225,000 in matching funds provided by the Conservancy under the One Tam initiative. The objective of the West Peak Basis of Design Report is to define a range of alternatives for the restoration and improved trail alignment at West Peak. Through completion of technical studies and an extensive community design & engagement process, the District and OneTam hope to identify a preferred alternative. The initial planning efforts include management of technical services to complete a basis of design report for the West Peak site at Mount Tamalpais. Activities to be completed include but are not limited to:

97 West Peak Basis of Design Report Project September 6, 2016 Page 3 1. A literature review to organize and compile all relevant planning documents and data files; 2. Compilation of a series of technical memoranda detailing current site inventory and analysis with available data; 3. Technical studies to develop a series of design alternatives and associated cost estimates; 4. Preparation of a Basis of Design Report; 5. Development of the project description for the identified preferred design alternatives: 6. Implementation of a community engagement strategy to build project interest and gather input. Staff requests that the board authorize the General Manager to: 1) Execute Amendment #3 to Marin Municipal Water District (District)/Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy (Conservancy) Cooperative Agreement (MA# 5311) for the West Peak Basis of Design Report Project; 2) Apply for two disbursements from the Marin Community Foundation Mt. Tamalpais Watershed Fund in the amount of $112,500 each in Fiscal Years 2016/17 and 2017/18; and 3) Augment FY 2016/17 budget by $112,500 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested actions align with the District s Strategic Plan Goal 4: Environmental Stewardship, Strategy 2 Increase community engagement in stewardship of Mt. Tamalpais as water and community asset: Objective 1 - Develop projects and programs for the Tamalpais Lands Collaborative and Objective 2 - Increase volunteer and education program capacity through public-private and not-for-profit partnerships. REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel X NA General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. Amendment Number 3 to Marin Municipal Water District/Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy Cooperative Agreement (Miscellaneous Agreement No. 5311)

98 Agreement Number MA-5311 AMENDMENT NO. 3 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY AND THE MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT WEST PEAK BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT PROJECT This contract amendment for the West Peak Basis of Design Report and associated Community Engagement ( WEST PEAK PROJECT ) (Amendment No. 3) is entered into by and between Marin Municipal Water District ( District ) and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy ( Conservancy ). For good and valuable consideration the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals: A. District and Conservancy entered into a Cooperative Agreement on January 12, 2015 ( Agreement ). B. The parties desire to enter into an amendment to the Agreement to provide for the West Peak Basis of Design Report Project and associated Community Engagement. Section 2. Terms: A. Amendment to Agreement: This Amendment No. 3 modifies the Agreement. Except for the modifications contained herein, all the terms of the Agreement shall apply. B. This Amendment No. 3 shall remain in effect until June 30, C. Terms: The parties desire to carry out the West Peak Basis of Design Report Project as follows: 1. Project Objective: The objective of the Project as described below shall serve to define a range of alternatives for the restoration and improved trail alignment at West Peak. Through completion of the Technical Studies and an extensive Community Design & Engagement process, the District hopes to identify a preferred alternative. The parties desire to enter into a Project Statement to provide for planning and technical services to complete a Basis of Design Report (BDR) for the West Peak site at Mount Tamalpais, Marin County, CA ( West Peak ). Activities to be completed include but are not limited to: 1. A literature review to organize and compile all relevant planning documents and data files; Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 1 of 10

99 Agreement Number MA Compilation of a series of technical memoranda detailing current site inventory and analysis with available data; 3. Technical studies to develop a series of design alternatives and associated cost estimates; 4. Preparation of a Basis of Design Report; 5. Development of the project description for the identified preferred design alternatives: 6. Implementation of a community engagement strategy to build project interest and gather input. 2. Statement of Work: A. The Conservancy shall: 1. Budget: Provide general services of its existing management staff as defined within the Agreement. In addition, provide funding and support in the amount not exceed $225,000, to include project-based staff support to complete the scope of work as outlined. See Budget & Payment section below for further details. 2. Staff: Provide Conservancy staff to fill the following project roles: Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager, Community Design Specialist, Conservation Management Specialist, and Community Engagement Specialist. 3. Consultant Contracts: Conservancy shall incorporate the following indemnification language into contracts with consultants performing services for this project. (a) MMWD is relying on professional ability and training of the Consultant as a material inducement to enter into this agreement. The Consultant hereby warrants that all its work shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards, as well as the requirements of applicable federal, state and local laws, it being understood that acceptance of the Consultant's work by MMWD shall not operate as a waiver or release. (b) Consultant expressly agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless MMWD, Its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all loss, liability, expense, claims, suits and damages, including attorneys fees, arising out of or pertaining or relating to Consultant s, its associates, employees, sub consultants, or other agents negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct, in the operation and/or performance under this Agreement. (c) With respect to all other than professional services under this agreement, Consultant shall indemnify, hold harmless, release and defend MMWD, its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all actions, claims, damages, disabilities, liabilities and Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 2 of 10

100 Agreement Number MA-5311 expenses, including attorney's and expert fees and witness costs that may be asserted by any person or entity, including the Consultant, arising out of or in connection with this agreement and the activities necessary to perform those services and complete the tasks provided for herein, but excluding liabilities due to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of MMWD. (d) This indemnification is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for the MMWD or its agents under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts or other employee benefit acts. 4. Literature and Data Review: Compile and catalog all relevant planning documents and data files. (a) Review all available files within MMWD s network, NPS archives, and relevant local historical societies to compile all planning documents and data files. (b) Organize all information into a bibliography. (c) Maintain a catalog of project documents. (d) Create an accessible online folder of documents for MMWD and consultant access. 5. Technical Memoranda: Complete a series of technical memoranda detailing current site inventory and analysis utilizing known documents and available data. These shall inform the final scope of the technical studies, (a) Review available documents and data to determine extent of existing site inventory and analysis. (b) Utilize data to develop a series of technical memoranda, to include a. Planning & Compliance; b. Contamination & Remediation; c. Cultural Resources; d. Geotechnical & Natural Resources; e. Leases & Land Uses; f. Utilities; g. Visitor Use, Circulation & Access. (c) Each memorandum to include a. Overview of known data and work performed to date; b. Relevant bibliography and maps; c. Outstanding questions and next steps. 6. Technical Studies and Alternatives Development: Contract with subject matter experts and staff to prepare a series of technical studies stemming from the Technical Memoranda and in support of the BDR. Technical Studies shall focus on development of design alternatives, articulate opportunities and constraints for each alternative, and develop associated cost estimates. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 3 of 10

101 Agreement Number MA-5311 (a) Either prepare Request for Proposal (RFP) or select contractor under approved master agreement for series of technical studies. (b) Review proposals and recommend consultant team. (c) Execute consultant contracts and any required modifications. (d) Manage consultant schedule and deliverables to ensure contract obligations. (e) Technical studies shall include a. Contaminant & Remediation Specialist: i. Conduct thorough review of existing completion reports and sampling history. Propose additional sampling needed/updated, or provide rationale for not undertaking any future sampling. Identify all remaining remediation needs. ii. Provide Class C cost estimate for work/design alternatives. b. Geotechnical & Civil Engineer: i. Quantify materials and structures for removal in coordination with remediation consultant. ii. Identify range of hardscape disposal options and any concerns or requirements associated with recycling and reuse. iii. Coordinate with Conservation Management Specialist staff and Natural Resources consultant to develop a range of restoration alternatives, to include proposed plant palettes and associated physical site restoration (soil type, soil depth, terra forming, etc.). iv. Provide Class C cost estimate for work/design alternatives. c. Natural Resource and Conservation Management Specialist: i. Conduct a vegetation survey to determine general vegetation communities, invasive non-native species, and any presence or potential future presence of rare species. ii. Determine what range of ecological function or habitat could be restored or enhanced through project actions. iii. Determine appropriate plant palettes for revegetation. Identify what site conditions are necessary to support each, in coordination with geotechnical consultant. iv. Identify potential threats to plant establishment and invasive plant species that require management v. Provide Class C cost estimate for work/design alternatives and likely maintenance costs for successful establishment. d. Landscape Architect: i. Further analysis of visitor access, use, and circulation patterns, both within the project site, as well as Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 4 of 10

102 Agreement Number MA-5311 relationship to adjacent sites, such as Middle Peak, East Peak, and Potrero Meadow. Identify any constraints associated with other site uses. ii. Prepare associated cost estimates for each design alternative. e. Cultural Resource Specialist: i. Support review and analysis of remaining site features. ii. Support any necessary compliance actions. f. Constructability Analysis: i. Support review and analysis of alternatives to determine opportunities and constraints for implementation, including anticipated site disturbance and costs. ii. Prepare a Constructability Analysis for the preferred alternative, to include anticipated construction schedule, staging, equipment, and access. 10. Basis of Design Report: Draft a minimum of three design alternatives for agency and public consideration; facilitate development of a preferred alternative; prepare a BDR detailing project design alternatives, opportunities and constraints associated with each, cost estimates, and a project description for the preferred alternative. (a) Report to include a. Overview of work completed in this phase; b. Description of existing site conditions, to include a site plan, inventory of site features, and site images; c. Minimum of three design alternatives, including a minimal action alternative; each alternative to include a narrative project description and diagrammatic site plan; d. Discussion of the relative merits and challenges for each alternative presented in matrix format; e. Class C cost estimate or equivalent for each alternative; f. Summary of comments from Community Engagement relevant to each alternative. g. Description of the preferred alternative and diagrammatic site plan. 11. Community Engagement & Design: Develop and implement a strategy to incorporate community engagement and design into Project. (a) Develop a West Peak project page on the One Tam website, to include a project overview, project schedule, portal for public input, calendar of events, and relevant documents for review. (b) Develop a West Peak project Facebook and Instagram account; manage accounts for event listings and community engagement. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 5 of 10

103 Agreement Number MA-5311 (c) Develop a User Survey to gather baseline data for current West Peak use; ensure public completion of the survey through website portal and public events. (d) Develop additional community engagement activities for use by outreach staff. (e) Organize community events to share project ideas and progress, to include a. Guided hikes; b. Other public and family events; c. Stewardship activities; d. Participation with LINC Tam 2016 and 2017; e. Host two community meetings to present design alternatives. 12. Reporting: Report on performance and expenditure of funds relative to this Project on a quarterly basis or upon specific request, as described in Cooperative Agreement MA-5311 to the District and as specified in section C. Reporting & Payment below. B. The District shall: 1. Budget: Provide funding in the amount not exceed $225,000 to allow for contracted consultant scopes as identified in the estimated project budget (see Table 1). 2. Staff: Assign one MMWD staff as the project lead. MMWD Project Manager to: (a) Identify appropriate MMWD staff to serve on the Project Interdisciplinary Review Team; (b) Work with the Conservancy Project Manager to develop and adopt a project schedule and review process, to include milestones for review and review turnaround times. (c) Ensure compliance with all MMWD policies and procedures. (d) Ensure appropriate review and approval by MMWD staff and Board. (e) Review and approve all Conservancy and Consultant deliverables; provide feedback, to include a. RFPs and list of consultant recipients, prior to release to consultants; b. Consultant proposals; work with Conservancy PM to develop recommended Consultant team for approval; c. Consultant and Conservancy deliverables; d. Community Engagement materials. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 6 of 10

104 Agreement Number MA-5311 C. Reporting & Payment: 1. Invoicing: The Conservancy shall prepare quarterly invoices for review and approval by the District. All invoices shall include billings and support documentation from consultants, as well as: (a) A one-page status report of all deliverables, including percentage complete of each task. (b) Any products developed by consultants and staff during the invoice period. (c) Any discrepancies shall be discussed and addressed by the Conservancy and District Project Managers. 2. Payment Schedule: The following is a proposed budget breakdown for the respective contribution of funds towards this project by the District and Conservancy. A revised budget for the District funds may be prepared as necessary by the Conservancy following completion of the consultant RFP process. At that time, the District Project Manager shall review the final funds allocation and approve. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 7 of 10

105 Agreement Number MA-5311 Table 1. Projected Budget for Tasks by Agency Contribution* Task # 1 2 3a 3b 3c 3d 3e Task Literature & Data Review Technical Memoranda (7) Technical Study: Contamination & Remediation** Technical Study: Geotechnical & Civil Engineering** Technical Study: Natural Resource Evaluation ** Technical Study: Visitor Use & Circulation Technical Study: Cultural Resource Evaluation Consultant/Responsible Party Conservancy Conservancy $18,950 Conservancy $15,700 Contaminant & Remediation Specialist Geotechnical & Civil Engineer Natural Resource Specialist District Funds to support Consultants $75,000 $85,000 $20,000 $65,400 Landscape Architect $10,000 Cultural Resource Specialist $10,000 3f Cost Estimate Cost Estimator $12,500 3g Constructability Analysis Construction Consultant $12,500 4 Draft Design Alternatives Conservancy $25,200 5 Draft Basis of Design Report Conservancy $24,500 6 Final Basis of Design Report Conservancy $27,250 7 Community Engagement & Design Conservancy $48,000 TOTAL: $225,000 $225,000 * Additional indirect costs of 10% shall be donated be the Parks Conservancy. ** See 2.A.5 Technical Studies for more information. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 8 of 10

106 Agreement Number MA-5311 Table 2. Project Schedule TASK # TASK DURATION 1&2 Data Review & Technical Memoranda 2 months 3 Technical Studies & Cost Estimating 12 months 4 Identify Alternatives & Preferred Alternative 6 months 5&6 Draft Basis of Design Report 4 months 7 Manage Community Engagement & Design Program 23 months Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 9 of 10

107 Agreement Number MA-5311 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the Parties hereto have signed their names and executed this Amendment No. 1. Dated: GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL CONSERVANCY By Nicolas Elsishans Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Dated: MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT By Krishna Kumar General Manager Amendment No. 3 to Agreement between MMWD and the GGNPC Page 10 of 10

108 ITEM NO. 10 A MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: STAFF REPORT Authorization to fill the Human Resources Manager position Mark Williamson, Human Resources Manager Authorize General Manager to Recruit and Hire a Human Resources Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Mark Williamson, Human Resources Manager for the last nine years, has announced his retirement, to be effective in early January The Human Resources Manager is responsible for the administration of all human resources functions, including recruiting, benefits administration, compensation and employee/labor relations. The Human Resources department also oversees workers compensation, training and the Safety department. The staff in the Human Resources Department interacts with all of the District s departments and employees. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $84,056 Operating Fund $84,056 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $84,056 TOTAL SOURCES $84,056 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The estimated annual total cost, including salary and benefits for the new Human Resources Manager is between $201,735 and $255,867. Assuming a late-january, 2017, start date at Step 1, the fiscal impact is $84,056 (for 5 months). There are sufficient funds available in the FY operating budget to cover this expenditure. No budget augmentation is required to fill this position. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s Strategic Plan Goal 5 (Workforce), Strategy 5 (Attract and retain a high quality efficient workforce).

109 September 6, 2016 Page 2 REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: 1. None

110 ITEM NO. 10 B MEETING DATE: September 06, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval to fill one Laborer Position Crystal Yezman, Division Manager, F&W Authorize General Manager to recruit and hire one Laborer in the Facilities and Watershed Division. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Lou Leone, a Utility Worker II, has announced his retirement effective August 31, Staff is requesting authorization for the General Manager to recruit and hire one permanent Laborer. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2016/2017 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $61,766 Operating Fund $61,766 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $61,766 TOTAL SOURCES $61,766 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The budgeted amount of $61,766, reflects the starting annual salary, with benefits, based on filling the Laborer position on October 1, Salary and benefits for the Laborer are budgeted in the Facilities and Watershed Division, System Maintenance budget for FY The total annual salary with benefits for a Laborer ranges from a minimum of $82,354 to a maximum of $100,259. Filling this position will not increase the budgeted FTE within the Division.

111 Approval to fill Laborer September 6, 2016 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The Laborer position is necessary to support the Division in the System Maintenance, Facilities Maintenance, and Watershed Departments. The Laborer classification performs a wide variety of unskilled and semi-skilled tasks in the construction, maintenance, repair and landscaping of District facilities and distribution systems. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the District s Strategic Plan Goal 5- Workforce, Strategy 5- attract and retain a high quality efficient workforce to achieve MMWD s strategic goals and Objective 6- ensure that MMWD has sufficient qualified staff to address critical tasks in a timely manner. REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA

112 ITEM NO. 10 C MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval to Fill Engineering Technician Vacancy in the Construction Management Group of Environmental & Engineering Services Division Jeff Ohmart, P.E. Principal Engineer Environmental & Engineering Services Division Authorize General Manager to recruit and hire one permanent Engineering Technician position in the Construction Management Group. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Construction Administration Group has two full-time Engineering Technician positions to manage the administration of construction projects associated with the Capital Improvement Program, Fire Flow Improvement Program and private subdivision projects. One position has been vacated as the incumbent has accepted a position in the District s Planning Department. Staff has reviewed the Construction Administration Group s functions to determine the need for the position. These positions handle a variety of administrative functions including: preparing contract documents and bid packages, reviewing contract documentation, preparing progress payments to contractors, processing change orders, reviewing insurance documentation and administering consultant contracts for soil and concrete testing. These two positions routinely support management of active construction projects at any given time. Due to the nature of construction and contracts, the need to prosecute the work charged to these positions is immediate. Staff requests Board approval for the General Manager to recruit, hire and fill this vacancy. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2016/17 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $75,220 Operating Fund $75,220 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $75,220 TOTAL SOURCES $75,220 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: The total compensation, including salary and benefits, ranges from $100,294 to $120,320. The position is included in the Environmental and Engineering Service Division s operating budget for fiscal year 2016/17. The budgeted amount of $75,220 assumes the vacancy is filled by mid- October 2016.

113 Approval to Fill Engineering Technician Vacancy in the Construction Management Group of Environmental & Engineering Services Division September 6, 2016 Page 2 REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA

114 ITEM NO. 10 D MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval to fill one Watershed Aide position Crystal Yezman, Division Manager, Facilities and Watershed Authorize the General Manager to recruit and hire one Watershed Aid in the Facilities and Watershed Division EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On June 21, 2016 the Board approved a budget augmentation of $27,665 to accept an Emig Mt. Tam Trust grant award to implement improvements at Deer Park Picnic Grounds. Staff is requesting authorization for the General Manager to recruit one five month seasonal Watershed Aide using the awarded grant funds to support the project. FISCAL IMPACT: YES X NO FISCAL YEAR: 2016/2017 EXPENDITURES FUNDING SOURCES Budgeted Amount $15,040 Operating Fund $15,040 Budget Augmentation Requested $ Capital Fund $ $ Other $ $ Operating Reserves $ TOTAL EXPENDITURES $15,040 TOTAL SOURCES $15,040 FISCAL IMPACT NARRATIVE: There is no a no net increase to the operating budget for this request as an augmentation of the funds supporting this project have already been approved by the board. The budgeted amount reflects the cost of filling one Watershed Aide position for five months. BACKGROUND: At the June 21, 2016 meeting of the MMWD Board of Directors approved a FY budget augmentation of $27, 665 dollars from the Emig Mt. Tam Trust in support of the Deer Park Picnic Ground Project. Staff is now requesting that the Board approve the hire of one 5-month term seasonal watershed aide to implement this project. This additional position will insure that staff can complete the project as an addition to the annual program of watershed

115 Approval to fill Watershed Aide September 6, 2016 Page 2 maintenance and repair. Staff plans to allocate $15,040 from the grant budget towards this position. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The requested action aligns with the district s Strategic Plan Goal 4 (Environmental Stewardship), Strategy 4 (Evaluating visitor access), and Objective 2(Improving visitor experiences and safety). REVIEWED BY: Finance Manager X NA General Counsel NA X General Manager X NA ATTACHMENTS: NONE

116 ITEM NO. 11 MEETING DATE: September 6, 2016 MEETING: Board of Directors STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: Future Agenda Items Krishna Kumar, General Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION: Information September Public Release of Draft Biodiversity, Fire and Fuel Integrated Plan ( Watershed Committee meeting) CALENDAR 9-15 Watershed 9-16 DOC 9-20 Board 9-22 Finance 9-23 Resiliency