It is recognized that how reciprocal the plan can be would require meaningful engagements from staff from both the District and the municipalities. Other stakeholder (e.g., the environmental community) interests (e.g., providing historical ecology, longitudinal profiling of stream functions) need to be considered as well.

Through the planning work, District would try to improve accessibility, transparency, and timeliness for providing water resource information; and explore scientific basis for setting riparian corridor width. However, such an effort would be most valuable if the Cities/County’s would commit to engage appropriate planning staff in the Stewardship Planning Process. The areas of engagement may include: being a part of the Stewardship Planning Workgroup, sharing information (keeping each other informed of key activities, sharing appropriate GIS layers), offering assistance in outreach to existing networks, communicating progress through joint reporting to the Board/council. Ms. Draper pointed out that her staff would focus on areas most valuable to their efforts.

Ms. Prevetti pointed out that city staff would share appropriate information with the District, however, any discussions over land use responsibilities remain a politically sensitive issue, which would require the input from the City Council.

District’s Project Manager’s Notes for Contract Negotiation:

• Start building the web-based water resources information for the three watershed areas
• Provide meeting notices/meeting notes/draft documents to city and county planning staff
• Provide periodic executive debriefings through the WRPC

Sarah handed out a draft description of the Water Resources Management Information System (WRMIS). The group pointed out that the reliability of the system is key to the successful applications. he system may contain the following:

Tier 1 Information (i.e., information that is readily available, to be gathered by District Staff)

     1. Inventory water supply sources and monitor water demand (may not be on         watershed-basis?)
     2. Identify flood plains
     3. Inventory rivers, lakes, streams, reservoirs, ground water basins (aquifers),          bays, estuaries
     4. Identify boundaries of watersheds, aquifer recharge areas, and ground          water basins (including depths)
     5. Map the boundaries and describe unique
         water resources (e.g., salt water and fresh water marshes, and sensitive          habitat areas)
     6. Regularly updated Status of District Permits/JUAs
     7. Inventory land ownership

Tier 2 Information (i.e., information that needed some efforts to centralize, to be gathered through SPW):

     8. Existing/planned land use and zoning designations for areas near water          resources Tier 3 Information (i.e., information that needed technical          synthesis of existing information):
     9. Longitudinal profile of stream functions (including riparian vegetation/riparian          habitat and assessment of riparian habitat quality, monitoring data for          health (quality) of the water bodies, water course, and ground water)
   10. Historical extent of riparian function, stream function, floodplain function and          extent, habitat value/distribution for endangered species (e.g., provide          historical perspectives for restoration potentials or opportunities or          constraints on development along the creeks
   11. Delineate the areas of authority and boundaries of responsibilities along the          watershed (using GIS maps), and identify policies/regulations/guidelines          applicable, including identification of sites for joint development/use to          achieve multi-objectives and water bodies or adjacent areas with recreation          potentials
   12. Delineate hot spots and sensitive areas, such as trash, creek-side          encroachment, isolation from floodplain, high water temperatures due to          hydromodifications and degraded riparian corridor, and channel modifications

The following issues were discussed among the participants;

    1. Reliability and access control are important considerations for designing the         system
    2. A lot of Water Resources Information exist within the District (e.g., land         ownership, Thomas Reed, project specific), but difficult to access;
    3. Constraints exist for sharing and disseminating information (e.g., lower         resolution layer for the land ownership info.
    4. Provide the longitudinal profiling of stream functions important

District’s Project Manager’s Notes for Contract Negotiation

• Have a system for clarify reliability issues and access restriction for information specified;
• Provide early wins for improved access to District Water Resources Information (Tier 1 information)
• Have the Consulting Services Contract focus on Gathering (Tier 2 and Tier 3 Information) and integrating the information into the database designed for this project to the extent possible.

Need to conclude contract negotiation within June.