HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.15.20 FW_ AR 6061 Paradise Community Drinking Water System Options Study - Prop 1 Monthly Stakeholders Meeting
From:Gosselin, Paul
To:Alpert, Bruce;Bennett, Robin;Clerk of the Board;Connelly, Bill;Cook, Holly;Lambert, Steve;Lucero, Debra;
McCracken, Shari;Paulsen, Shaina;Pickett, Andy;Ring, Brian;Ritter, Tami;Rodas, Amalia;Sweeney, Kathleen;
Teeter, Doug
Cc:Pickett, Andy
Subject:FW: AR 6061 Paradise Community Drinking Water System Options Study - Prop 1 Monthly Stakeholders Meeting
Date:Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:27:32 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Stakeholders Group Meeting_ 9.25.20_ Summary.pdf
Paradise Communications Plan.pdf
PID - Factsheet 1 Communication Plan.pdf
Board Members
I am forwarding the materials from the September 25, 2020 Paradise Community Drinking Water
Systems Options Study. They are having the October meeting today.
Regards
Paul
Paul Gosselin, Director
Department of Water and Resource Conservation
308 Nelson Ave
Oroville, CA 95965
530-552-3590 office
From: Marx, Randall E <randy.marx@owp.csus.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 4:38 PM
To: Cross, Nadine M <crossn@csus.edu>; Cross, Nadine M <crossn@csus.edu>; Marx, Randall E
<randy.marx@owp.csus.edu>; Ceppos, David M <dceppos@csus.edu>; Kalman, Orit
<orit.kalman@csus.edu>; Beck, James S <james.beck@owp.csus.edu>;
kphillips@paradiseirrigation.com; dcooper@minasianlaw.com; Gosselin, Paul
<PGosselin@buttecounty.net>; Buck, Christina <CBuck@buttecounty.net>; Lucero, Debra
<DLucero@buttecounty.net>; Teeter, Doug <DTeeter@buttecounty.net>; Lucas, Steve
<SLucas@buttecounty.net>; lgill@townofparadise.com; greg@calltrilogy.com;
scrowder@townofparadise.com; harrimanlaw1@sbcglobal.net; mark.orme@chicoca.gov; Grima,
Curtis <Curtis.Grima@asm.ca.gov>; Colleen Cecil <colleen@buttefarmbureau.com>;
gbarber@calwater.com; corp.ceo@corporatecenter.us; bryan@corporatecenter.us; Mark Mulliner
<mark@lu228.org>; ed.carpetclearance@gmail.com; gtaylorxfg@sbcglobal.net;
jbmerz@sbcglobal.net; Chavez, Ariel@Waterboards <Ariel.Chavez@Waterboards.ca.gov>; Kidwell,
Brian@Waterboards <Brian.Kidwell@waterboards.ca.gov>; Michelle Frederick
<michelle.frederick@waterboards.ca.gov>; Newton, Daniel@Waterboards
<Daniel.Newton@waterboards.ca.gov>; Bean, Jessica@Waterboards
<Jessica.Bean@Waterboards.ca.gov>; Nabiul Afrooz <nabiul.afrooz@waterboards.ca.gov>; Kim Dinh
<kim.dinh@waterboards.ca.gov>; Kim Hanagan <kim.hanagan@waterboards.ca.gov>; Bennett, Robin
<RBennett@buttecounty.net>; janice@corporatecenter.us; smcgovern@calwater.com;
tlando@paradiseirrigation.com; mrich@paradiseirrigation.com
Cc: Phillips, Kevin <KPhillips@townofparadise.com>; Currier, Brian <brian.currier@owp.csus.edu>;
Costa, Shannon <SCosta@buttecounty.net>
Subject: RE: AR 6061 Paradise Community Drinking Water System Options Study - Prop 1 Monthly
Stakeholders Meeting
ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening
..
attachments, clicking on links, or replying.
Hi Paradise Stakeholders,
This is a reminder of our monthly status call tomorrow at 1:30. I’ve copied below my notes from
our last monthly status call on 9/10/20. Also, I’ve attached the following:
1. Orit Kalman’s notes from our focused Stakeholder call on 9/25/20
2. Orit’s revised Communication Plan, 10/14/20, based on input from the 9/25/20 call
3. A proposed draft Fact Sheet, 10/14/20, for this project
Our agenda will be to provide a status of our two Work Plan tasks: 1) Communication Plan, and
2) Request for Proposals. We will also be interesting in obtaining any feedback, comments and
questions from Stakeholders.
Thanks!
Randy
Randy Marx, P.E.
Research Engineer
OWP at Sacramento State
Direct: 916-278-5295 | Cell:
randy.marx@owp.csus.edu
Notes from our last monthly call 9/10/20:
Call Purpose: Second monthly status call with project stakeholders to provide the status of our
Team’s execution of the tasks assigned to us under the project Work Plan (attached), as well as
to receive stakeholder feedback and answer any questions.
Attendees: Those highlighted in yellow on the attached Contact List.
Work Plan: Briefly reviewed the attached Work Plan, the purpose of which is to develop an
Options Study to identify and evaluate options to provide for the long-term sustainability of
water supply for the community of Paradise.
Options Study: Brian Currier, OWP, reviewed the attached “Request for Proposal (RFP)
Overview” document, which provides an overview of the consultant selection process, including
scope, consultant evaluation criteria, selection process and timeline. The selection process
with be held in two stages: 1) Written proposals, followed by, 2) An interview of a short list of
consultants. Stakeholders will be able to review and provide input on the draft RFP, which is
scheduled to be provided by 11/1/20. A final RFP would be issued in late Dec/early Jan, and a
consultant hired around March 2021. (Note: after the call, Orit sent out a meeting notice to all
stakeholders for a 9/25/20, 1 – 2:30 call, which will include a more detailed discussion of the
RFP, including receiving input from stakeholders on the desired consultant evaluation criteria.)
Community Outreach: Orit reviewed the attached Draft Communications Plan Outline
(attached), which outlines the structure and content of the Communications Plan. Stakeholders
will be able to review and provide input on the draft Communications Plan, which is scheduled
to be provided by 10/9/20. (Note: after the call, Orit sent out a meeting notice to all
stakeholders for a 9/25/20, 1 – 2:30 call, which will include a more detailed discussion of the
Draft Communications Plan Outline).
Comments/Questions From Stakeholders:
CommentResponse
Regarding the Communication Plan Outline,Agreed. The attached Work Plan (pg. 2) for
pg. 2, Dustin Cooper requested that thethis project states that the Community of
Paradise Irrigation District (PID) be added toParadise is the recipient of this project
the Work Plan Project Team.assistance, and lists the General Manager of
PID as the contact person representing the
Community, so certainly, PID is a member of
the Project Team.
Dustin Cooper asked whether the scheduleWe will make every effort to expedite the
for the project could be expedited, so that aproject schedule. One suggestion is to have
Options Study can be produced by July 2021.the stakeholders review the “guts” of the
RFP, while the legal language is being worked
on. Additionally, a call has been scheduled
9/25/20, 1 – 2:30 to discuss the RFP in more
detail.
-----Original Appointment-----
From: Cross, Nadine M
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 1:26 PM
To: Cross, Nadine M; Randy Marx; Ceppos, David M; Kalman, Orit; Beck, James S;
kphillips@paradiseirrigation.com; dcooper@minasianlaw.com; pgosselin@buttecounty.net;
cbuck@buttecounty.net; dlucero@buttecounty.net; Teeter, Doug; slucas@buttecounty.net;
lgill@townofparadise.com; greg@calltrilogy.com; scrowder@townofparadise.com;
harrimanlaw1@sbcglobal.net; mark.orme@chicoca.gov; Grima, Curtis; Colleen Cecil;
gbarber@calwater.com; corp.ceo@corporatecenter.us; bryan@corporatecenter.us; Mark Mulliner;
ed.carpetclearance@gmail.com; gtaylorxfg@sbcglobal.net; jbmerz@sbcglobal.net; Chavez,
Ariel@Waterboards; Kidwell, Brian@Waterboards; Michelle Frederick; Newton,
Daniel@Waterboards; Bean, Jessica@Waterboards; Nabiul Afrooz; Kim Dinh; Kim Hanagan;
rbennett@buttecounty.net; janice@corporatecenter.us; smcgovern@calwater.com;
tlando@paradiseirrigation.com; mrich@paradiseirrigation.com
Cc: Phillips, Kevin; Currier, Brian; Costa, Shannon
Subject: AR 6061 Paradise Community Drinking Water System Options Study - Prop 1 Monthly
Stakeholders Meeting
When: Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).
Where: Zoom conference call
Hello All,
On behalf of Randy Marx, you are invited to attend a series of scheduled Zoom meetings.
Topic: AR 6061 Paradise Community Drinking Water System Options Study - Prop 1 Monthly
Stakeholders Meeting
Time: Oct 15, 2020 01:30 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada)
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.
Monthly: https://csus.zoom.us/meeting/tJctdOmvrDwsGNzey4KqehxLaaQqAdICkCAB/ics?
icsToken=98tyKuCrrjgqHdaSthuPRowqAojCc-3zpmZdjY1HmQaxKDFWahvaN-NzI5N7Ofvb
Join Zoom Meeting
https://csus.zoom.us/j/93030727628
Meeting ID: 930 3072 7628
Dial any of the following numbers:
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
Meeting ID: 930 3072 7628
Thank you for your participation!
Nadine Cross
Administrative Services Manager
OWP at Sacramento State
Modoc Hall Suite 1001, 6000 J Street, Sacram
nadine.cross@owp.csus.edu
Prepared by California State University, Sacramento
Consensus and Collaboration Program
October 2020
CONTENTS
I. Introduction and Project Background and Purpose .............................................................. 2
II. Communication Plan Purpose and Guiding Principles........................................................... 2
Guiding Principles of Engagement ............................................................................................... 3
III. Levels of Engagement and Participation ................................................................................ 3
Project Convener ......................................................................................................................... 4
Project Team ................................................................................................................................ 4
Stakeholders Group ..................................................................................................................... 5
Community Members .................................................................................................................. 6
IV. Overview of Communication Tools and Public Participation Opportunities ........................ 7
V. Outreach and Engagement Workplan (ongoing update) ........................................................ 9
Press releases and media ............................................................................................................ 9
Factsheets .................................................................................................................................... 9
Stakeholders Assessment interviews .......................................................................................... 9
Survey .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Listserv and Social Media .......................................................................................................... 10
Project Website ......................................................................................................................... 10
Community Events: informational and workshops ................................................................... 11
Project WorkPlan ....................................................................................................................... 11
Page 1 of 13
I. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
As a result of the Camp Fire in November 2018, Paradise Irrigation District (PID) lost
approximately 90% of its connections, making continued water supply operations unsustainable
until recovery and rebuilding is completed. Therefore, the community needs to perform an
Options Study (Study) to identify and evaluate long-term options for improvements to its water
system infrastructure and finances to ensure the long-term sustainability and resiliency of the
as well as support redevelopment of the community. This Study is
also a mandated requirement to ensure that PID can obtain funding for its drinking water
system improvements from the California State Legislature.
The Study will include a significant outreach and stakeholder component and consider the
community as a whole as well as the overarching potential for future sustainability. To ensure
that all relevant interests and affected communities are involved in the selection of the Study
consultant, and subsequent completion of the Study in a transparent manner, community
outreach and engagement will be conducted using the tools described in this Communications
Plan (Plan).
The Study will:
Identify a range of options to ensure the long-term sustainability and resiliency of water
supply for Paradise.
Evaluate the feasibility of each option evaluation criteria include cost, community
acceptance, environmental permitting, environmental impacts, administrative hurdles,
etc. Costs include upfront capital costs as well as the present worth of long-term (40-50
years) operation and maintenance costs.
Rank options and provide recommendations for consideration by decision makers.
The Study will be prepared by a private consultant, selected through a public competitive
process administered by the Sacramento State, Office of Water Programs (OWP) through a
Technical Assistance Work Plan from the State Water Resources Control Board. The Study
consultant will be selected through the use of a Request for Proposal (RFP) and associated
selection steps administered by OWP as informed through public input.
II. COMMUNICATION PLAN PURPOSE AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
This Plan serves as the roadmap for successful communications throughout the project. The
activities outlined in the Plan are meant to support RFP development, Study consultant
selection and Study implementation by ensuring an open flow of information and opportunities
for input throughout the process. The Plan will be updated regularly to meet the needs of the
Study.
Page 2 of 13
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF ENGAGEMENT
Successful engagement requires adherence to a set of guiding principles. The items listed below
are intended as core components. All outreach and engagement activities and communications
materials will be:
Additive: Recognizing that there are several ongoing engagement efforts as part of the
Town of Paradise rebuilding efforts, outreach and engagement should leverage these other
efforts, build off of previous efforts, and efficiently utilize stakeholders and community
members time and expertise.
Intentional: All engagement opportunities need to be explicit in their purpose and
differentiate between outreach and community engagement to ensure that expectations
for the process are understood.
o Outreach: Provide opportunities to inform the community about the process and
educate on technical issues. Outreach activities promote trust, transparency, and
accountability.
o Engagement: Provide opportunities for stakeholders to learn from each other,
envision together, own the process, give feedback and weigh in on decisions.
Accessible: Ensure that those who wish to engage are part of this effort. Utilize a diverse
suite of outreach tools to engage a broad audience. Consider all variables that can impact a
, including but not limited to event
location, time, language, information format, and economic and physical impediments.
Open and transparent: Provide necessary information about process, timeline, and content.
Be transparent and open about how decisions are made.
COVID-19 Health and Safety Compliant: The process will be consistent with current COVID
health and safety requirements prescribed by State and local governments. Any conflicts
between such requirements will be reconciled by the SWRCB as the funding organization of
this effort.
III. LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
Defining anticipated levels of engagement for all stakeholders involved in the Study is an
essential first step in the outreach and engagement process. This section defines each
anticipated major group involved in the Study development, as well as their expected level of
input in the process. Figure 1 represents the desired nesting of the different levels of
engagement, where information is shared throughout, and decisions are informed by all levels
of engagement.
Page 3 of 13
Figure 1. Levels of Engagement
PROJECT CONVENER
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The project convener, with the support of the project team, is responsible for the
administration of the Study and any related decision making.
MEMBERSHIP
CSUS-OWP is the project convener during the Study development phase and will provide
technical information that others can use to make future decisions related to the water supply
system. The Study will be a public document that will be available to all stakeholders and the
public upon its completion. While it is anticipated that PID will assume the project convener
sustainable post-fire operations, it is the express purpose of the Study that other parties may
also use the results to help further regional water resiliency and partnerships.
PROJECT TEAM
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Project Team is responsible for ongoing management of the study. The Project Team is
expected to develop all communications materials and conduct outreach and engagement
activities.
Page 4 of 13
MEMBERSHIP
Sacramento State, Office of Water Programs (OWP), is under contract with the State Water
Resources Control Board, Division of Financial Assistance (DFA) to provide technical
assistance to disadvantaged communities for planning and design services related to water
system improvements. OWP will manage the Study project to evaluate water system
alternatives for the community of Paradise.
Sacramento State, Consensus and Collaboration Programs (CCP), is responsible for the
development and execution of this Plan in consultation with the Project Team and the
Stakeholders Group.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) administers Proposition 1 funds made
available to support drinking water-related efforts, including this study as administered by
OWP. Divisions of SWRCB involved in the Study include the:
o Division of Drinking Water (DDW)
o Division of Financial Assistance (DFA)
o Other Divisions may be included as needed
Paradise Irrigation District (PID) and Town of Paradise is the Technical Assistance (TA)
recipient.
Study consultant (TBD) is responsible for preparing the Study and for providing information
to support the outreach and engagement throughout the Study development.
STAKEHOLDERS GROUP
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Stakeholders Group works with the Project Team and provides input to define critical
components of the Study. The Stakeholders Group serves as a proxy for public input,
representing a range of key perspectives. Members will be asked to share information and
solicit input from their own networks to inform the Study. The Stakeholders Group will meet
monthly to receive general information about the status of the Study (goals, activities,
timelines, etc.). In addition, special topic sessions will be scheduled to allow sufficient time for
dialogue and solicitation of input. Meeting minutes will be prepared for all monthly meetings.
When possible, the special topic sessions will be scheduled and coordinated with the monthly
status report meetings. At a minimum, the Stakeholders Group will be asked to weigh in,
review, and provide input on the following:
1. RFP development process:
a. Review and provide input on the consultant evaluation criteria
b. Review and provide input on the draft RFP
2. Consultant selection: OWP, with the support of the Project Team, will review
proposals, interview a short list of consultants, and select a project consultant.
Stakeholders Group will be informed throughout the selection process.
3. Study development:
Page 5 of 13
a. Review and provide input on the List of options for consideration
b. Review and provide input on evaluation parameters
c. Review and provide input on draft Study and recommendations
MEMBERSHIP
The stakeholders group includes representation of the following interests:
Technical Assistance (TA) recipient: PID and the Community of Paradise
Local Government representatives: County of Butte, Butte County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo), Town of Paradise, City of Chico, California State Assembly
Local Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) representatives
Local water representatives
Local Union 228 Yuba City
State Water Resource Control Board
TA provider: OWP
Environmental justice groups
COMMUNITY MEMBERS
In addition to the Stakeholders Group, the Project Team will solicit input from and inform the
public in the Town of Paradise and throughout Butte County. Table 1 below provides a
summary of the types of engagement efforts that will be offered throughout the project and
their intended outcome. Specifically, each engagement effort will include suggested guidelines
to inform and involve the public in RFP development and the Study.
Page 6 of 13
Table 1. Outreach and Engagement Tools
Task/Event Inform Gather Discuss/ Provide Deliberate Decision
Input Connect Choices Making
Press release and media
Factsheets
Stakeholder Assessment
Interviews
Survey
Project website
Social media
Community informational
event (remote participation
as per COVID-19
requirements)
Community workshop
(remote participation as per
COVID-19 requirements)
Stakeholders Group
Meetings
Project Team
Project Convener
IV. OVERVIEW OF COMMUNICATION TOOLS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
OPPORTUNITIES
Consistent with terms introduced in Table 1, this section describes specific engagement tools
and methods to be used throughout the project.
Digital Engagement: Digital engagement is an approach that involves online exchange of
information. Information provided through online media can be provided as hardcopies as well
to ensure that information is accessible to all interested stakeholders. As shown in Table 1,
digital engagement may include:
Press Releases and Media: All efforts associated with Paradise rebuilding efforts are
anticipated to attract significant attention from interested stakeholders. Consistent
messaging using press releases and local media to inform all interested stakeholders of
key Study outcomes and events will reach a large audience that may not be directly
involved in specific outreach efforts.
Page 7 of 13
Factsheets: Fact sheets help provide useful overviews of critical Study information and
can be posted to a variety of digital platforms including local media, social media, and
the project website. Factsheets are used to inform interested stakeholders.
Surveys: Surveys are a useful tool for gathering initial feedback on Study components
and concepts. Because they can be easily distributed to a large and diverse audience,
surveys can solicit input from a wide range of sources. However, they do not readily
offer the opportunity for two-way communication and follow up should the need arise.
Project Website: Information about the Study will be available on the PID website. The
project webpage will be regularly updated to ensure that stakeholders are informed
about Study activities. The project webpage will serve as the primary clearinghouse for
all publicly available Study information. Links can be easily shared with any interested
parties.
Social Media: Social media is a useful tool for informing, soliciting feedback from, and
connecting diverse groups of stakeholders with other interested members of the
community. It can be used simultaneously to update stakeholders of important Study
milestones and events and provide a portal for information sharing and surveys.
In-Person Engagement: As noted, all initial outreach and engagement will be conducted
virtually (using Zoom) due to COVID. As conditions improve and change, the tools listed below
can be easily modified from virtual/online events to in person events.
Stakeholder Assessment Interviews: Stakeholder assessments give the Project Team
the opportunity to engage with a representative cross section of interested
stakeholders. They provide an opportunity to tailor early Study concepts and
components to the specific stakeholder needs and concerns based on a targeted set of
questions and give Project Team staff the opportunity to ask follow-up questions.
Community Informational Events: Informational events can take many forms from
o standalone open
houses. The purpose of informational events is primarily to inform interested
stakeholders of Study concepts and components, but they also provide an opportunity
to connect Project Team staff directly with community members.
Community Workshops: Community workshops are structured events to showcase
Study components to interested stakeholders. They are useful in connecting
stakeholders to Project Team staff and creating dialogue between decision makers and
the community.
Stakeholders Group Meetings: Stakeholder group meetings provide targeted discourse
between Project team staff and key stakeholders in the community. These events occur
regularly and offer the highest level of engagement for a pre-determined set of
stakeholders (as defined above) to carefully review Study components and provide
targeted feedback on Study options through deliberative dialogue.
Page 8 of 13
V. OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT WORKPLAN (ONGOING UPDATE)
The Outreach and Engagement Workplan is meant to be a working document that will be
regularly updated per input from the Stakeholders Group to meet project needs and to ensure
a transparent process and ongoing
PRESS RELEASES AND MEDIA
CCP, in coordination with the Project Team, will develop and distribute press releases and
media advisories that correspond with Project milestones. An initial list of media outlets is
provided below.
The Paradise Post: https://www.paradisepost.com/
Town News and Events: https://www.townofparadise.com/
Chico Enterprise Record: https://www.chicoer.com/
Town of Paradise - Butte County: https://buttecountyrecovers.org/
FACTSHEETS
CCP, in coordination with the Project Team, will prepare topical factsheets to be shared
with the Stakeholders Group and the public.
STAKEHOLDERS ASSESSMENT INTERVIEWS
The CSUS team has conducted interviews to gather information and input to inform the Plan
development and subsequent outreach and engagement related to Study preparation.
Interviewees were asked to respond to questions in three key areas: (1) the role and
perspectives of the interviewee regarding the Study and subsequent related activities, (2) PID
water system characteristics prior to the fire and the interviewee vision for PID moving
forward, and (3) public engagement and outreach opportunities and considerations. The
interviewees are a subset of the Stakeholders Group and included representatives of:
State Water Resource Control Board
Community
Miocene Canal Coalition
PID
Butte LAFCo
Butte County Farm Bureau
Cal Water
Butte County Department of Water & Resource Conservation
Butte County Board of Supervisors
SURVEY
CCP may develop and administer surveys to solicit input from the public. Survey links will be
Page 9 of 13
provided through the project webpage on the PID website.
LISTSERV AND SOCIAL MEDIA
CCP will coordinate with PID to share information using
PID Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/PIDWater/)
PID twitter (https://twitter.com/pidwater?lang=en)
PID Nextdoor (https://nextdoor.com/agency-detail/ca/butte-county/paradise-irrigation-
district/)
PID Listserv
Social media and listserv announcements will provide general information about the process
(goals, activities, timelines, etc.) and the status of the Study, current opportunities for
participation, and other timely and important information.
Members of the Stakeholders Group are encouraged to serve as communication partners
and help distribute announcements using their social media and listservs to their members.
PROJECT WEBSITE
CCP will coordinate with PID to post project information on the PID website. The primary
purpose of the project website page is to inform interested stakeholders and provide a
centralized location for information about the Study, related material, progress updates,
and opportunities to engage and provide input. The website page will make information
easily accessible and allow interested parties to track the status and development of the
Study. The website page is not intended to serve as a discussion forum.
Information to be provided on the website includes:
1. General project information
a. Project purpose and scope
b. Timeline and milestones
c. Project convener contact information
2. RFP process
b. RFP with information on how to respond to the RFP
c. Announcement on consultant selection
3. Public Engagement
a. Communication plan and timeline \[to be updated as needed\]
b. Stakeholders Group monthly meeting agendas and summaries
c. Scheduled public engagement opportunities
4. Options study information
a. Relevant information and related reports
b. List of options to be evaluated as part of the Study
c. List of evaluation criteria
d. Study report
Page 10 of 13
COMMUNITY EVENTS: INFORMATIONAL AND WORKSHOPS
CCP, in coordination with the Stakeholders Group, will facilitate community events designed
for informing and engaging non-technical audiences.
The open house meetings/webinars will provide general information about the
Study (background information, goals, activities, timelines, etc.) and its status.
In general, the open houses will solicit public input on the same topics that will be
discussed with the Stakeholders Group. However, materials will be tailored to be
accessible to general audiences.
PROJECT WORKPLAN
As shown in Table 2 below, the Plan is designed to support and link with key milestones of the
RFP development and the Study. Outreach and engagement activities identified in Table 2 will
be updated regularly to ensure ongoing and transparent communication about Study activities.
Table 2. Outreach and Engagement Activities to Support Project Milestones
Anticipated Options Study Stakeholders Group Community Outreach
Completion Milestone Input
Date
Ongoing Pre-Engagement Identify local Media Outlets:
Activities Initial identification of local,
regional, and state media outlets
likely interested in Town of
Paradise water supply issues.
Connect with other engagement
efforts in the Town of Paradise
and surrounding areas as
appropriate.
Identify opportunities for
outreach presentations with
special interests groups (such as
the County Water Commission;
League of Women Voters) to
provide short updates on the
study and encourage
participation.
Page 11 of 13
Anticipated Options Study Stakeholders Group Community Outreach
Completion Milestone Input
Date
Sept 2020 RFP Development Meeting (09/25/20) Website Development in
Meeting Purpose: collaboration with PID.
Clarify and solicit input
on engagement roles,
draft Communication
Plan, and draft RFP
consultant evaluation
criteria.
TBD Finalize and Factsheet: inform community
Advertise RFP members on the RFP scope,
evaluation criteria, and schedule
Social media/Press
release/website: inform
community members on RFP
process and schedule
TBD RFP Response Meeting: Update on
Period responses to the RFP
TBD Consultant Meeting: update on
Selection consultant selection
process
TBD Contract Social media/Press
development and release/website: inform
execution community members of selected
consultant, qualifications, and
Options study process (options
list development and Options
evaluation)
2 months Draft Options List Meeting: Provide Public Forum: (1) Provide
post input on public foundational information on the
contract engagement related PID system (where water comes
execution to options list. from, water rights, operations,
Page 12 of 13
Anticipated Options Study Stakeholders Group Community Outreach
Completion Milestone Input
Date
capacity, etc.); (2) solicit input on
options for consideration.
Press Release
3 months Finalize Options Meeting: Provide Ongoing communication through
post List and input on list of options Social media/Press
contract Description for consideration; release/website
execution options evaluation
Factsheet: Options list and
process
descriptions
Public meeting to provide an
update on options to be
considered
10 months Options Multiple Meetings: Public meeting Open
post Evaluation Progress and input on house/Gallery of options
contract options evaluation
Ongoing communication
execution process; initial findings
through Social media/Press
release/website
12 months Finalize study Meeting: Update on Social media/Press
post Results and study results and release/website
contract Recommendations recommendations
execution
Page 13 of 13
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Friday, September 25, 2020 1:00PM 2:30PM
Meeting Summary
Welcome and Introductions
Orit Kalman, facilitator, Sacramento State Consensus and Collaboration Program
(CCP), welcomed participants to the meeting and reviewed principles of engagement
with the Stakeholders Group.
Randy Marx, project convener, Sacramento State Office of Water Programs (OWP),
welcomed the stakeholders and reminded participants that in addition to more in-
depth input gathering meetings such as this one, he also holds brief monthly meetings
Ms. Kalman reviewed the meeting purpose: to clarify roles and responsibilities at
different engagement levels and solicit input on the Communication Plan and RFP to
prepare it for release.
Participants were asked to respond to a poll about the perspectives represented by the
participating stakeholders. The categories included in the poll were those identified
previously as important to include in the Stakeholders Group. The poll showed that tribal
and environmental perspectives were not represented at this meeting.
For a list of participants, see the Appendix.
Ms. Kalman reviewed the purpose of the options study and presented perspectives on
key considerations for the study, as shared through assessment interviews.
1. Explore multiple options (not limited to the previously studied intertie).
Page 1 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
2. Consider wide range of options that look for ways to consolidate/reorganize
regional resources to achieve goals and support economic development and
growth.
3. Utilize a long range and holistic approach. Consider long term governance for
sustainability and stability.
4. Define and balance economic sustainability and environmental enhancement.
5. Provide clarity on water rights in the region.
6. Keep water localized as much as possible while recognizing opportunities that
water affords.
7. Consider conservation and recycling as they relate to growth and water use.
8. Recognize the impact of this study on other planning efforts (SGMA, power
plant- dam safety, wastewater).
9. This may serve as a springboard to subsequent studies.
Mr. Marx noted that, per the contract with the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB), the project must focus on long-term sustainability and resiliency of drinking
water for the community. He said that many of the considerations shared above will
affect drinking water sustainability and will be kept in mind throughout the study.
Engagement and Decision Making
Ms. Kalman reviewed the roles and levels of engagement for the options study process:
o Project Convener: The convener is the ultimate decision-maker
throughout the study process
The convener will change once the study moves into
implementation.
During Options Study development: Sac State OWP
Options study implementation: Paradise Irrigation District (PID)
o Project team: Provides support and development, and includes:
Sacramento State OWP
Sacramento State CCP
PID (authorized representative)
Town of Paradise (recipient)
SWRCB
Consultant (to be determined)
o Stakeholders Group: Advise and provide input on all project milestones
and decisions and serve as ambassadors to other interests; includes
representatives of the following perspectives:
Local
Regional
State
Tribal
Environmental
Page 2 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
o Public: The public will be kept informed throughout the Options Study
process.
Participants were asked to identify any missing perspectives or details that need to be
clarified. Mr. Marx said that the role of OWP is to provide technical information that
others can use to make decisions and that OWP may not remain part of the project
team during the second part of the project, when PID becomes the convener.
platform if the levels of engagement format is appropriate for the process. Participants
affirmed that it is.
Ms. Kalman said that the intent is to share information consistently across the
engagement levels. Ms. Kalman asked what tools the Stakeholders Group members
need in order to engage as ambassadors to their communities. Dustin Cooper, District
Counsel, PID, said that PID Board-approved feedback will take time due to Brown Act
and other legal limitations it is important to account for organizational structures in
determining the timing of requested feedback.
Two members requested fact sheets to provide succinct, easily shareable information.
Ms. Kalman presented key decision points throughout the options study process and
noted who would be the decision-maker at each of those decision points.
1. Consultant evaluation criteria (OWP as convener and decision-maker)
2. Consultant selection (OWP)
3. List of options for consideration (OWP)
4. Evaluation parameters (OWP)
5. Draft Options study (OWP) \[added based on stakeholders input\]
6. Next steps and implementation (PID)
A participant asked where the RFP fits within these decision points. Mr. Marx said that
the RFP is related to hiring the consultant, which falls under OWP as the decision-maker.
The participant asked whether the Stakeholders Group would be given an opportunity
to review the RFP, as it plays a significant role in defining who the consultant will be. Mr.
Marx confirmed that the Stakeholders Group will be provided an opportunity to review
the RFP. Ms. Kalman said that the evaluation criteria, which the Stakeholders Group
provided feedback on later in the meeting, will inform the RFP language.
A participant asked whether OWP will decide on the list of options for consideration. Mr.
Marx said that OWP, as the convener at this stage in the process, is ultimately the
decision-maker, but will make that decision based on input from stakeholders. The
participant suggested getting input from PID on the list of options for consideration. Mr.
Marx said that the stakeholders will also review the full draft study, and OWP will receive
and respond directly to comments before finalizing the report. Ms. Kalman affirmed this
and said that an additional decision-point will be added to solicit stakeholders input
during the evaluation of options as the draft Options study is developed.
Page 3 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Ms. Kalman said that each of the decision points will be informed by input from the
Stakeholders Group and in some cases also from the general public, per the
Communications Plan. Ms. Kalman reviewed the communications tools included in the
Communications Plan, noting that it specifies what is shared and how and highlights
when communications focus on sharing out information versus gathering input. She
asked participants if there was anything missing from the list of communications tools;
participants did not identify additions for the list.
RFP Development Brian Currier
Brian Currier, Sac State - OWP, presented the RFP scope and deliverables, the proposal
review process and evaluation criteria, and the interview process and final selection.
The scope of work for Task 1 of the work plan includes identifying, evaluating, and
raking options. For each option, evaluation criteria includes feasibility, cost, community
acceptance, environmental permitting, environmental impacts, administrative hurdles,
and potentially other criteria.
Mr. Currier reviewed the study schedule, which covers 12 months in total. As reflected in
the timeline, the Stakeholders Group will review drafts of both reports before they are
finalized.
Deliverable Due date after contract execution
Draft Options Identification Report 2 months
Final Options Identification Report 3 months
Draft Options Study Report 10 months
Final Options Study Report 12 months
Mr. Currier reviewed the proposal review process and asked participants to discuss the
evaluation criteria that will inform selection of the consultant. He noted that the criteria
will eventually be weighted and said that it is important to ensure that nothing is missing
while also keeping the list of criteria short enough so that each criterion remains
meaningful in the final review. He presented nine initial criteria for consideration and
discussion. Participants shared feedback about the criteria and suggested additions,
summarized by criterion below.
1. Qualifications to perform the Scope of Work
Objectivity consider requesting a comprehensive list of projects the firm
has worked on to ensure no conflict of interest
2. Familiarity with regional and local water supply infrastructure and governance
Ensure that this criterion is not written in an overly-limiting way it is
important that the consultant demonstrate they have developed
familiarity with the local context but do not need to know it first-hand
Require understanding of California water law
3. Technical approach and project understanding
Page 4 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Methodology for identifying options
Cost estimation approach
Contribution to public outreach and engagement
4. Public sector references that corroborate the quality of performance on
example projects
Public sector to include water districts not limited to municipalities
5. Organizational capacity and responsiveness
Focus on experience and capacity of project lead and staff working
directly on the project
Key indicators include providing multiple contacts for key personnel
Consider what resources will be devoted to this project (what else the firm
is working on simultaneously vis-à-vis the size of the firm overall)
Project management style and how the project team and stakeholders
group will be kept appraised of progress
Contribution to public outreach and engagement
6. Applicability of example projects (firm experience)
emonstrated ability to work well with outside consultants,
such as the outreach consultants on this project
ensure no conflict of interest
7. Experience of key staff and project manager dedicated to the project and
identification of interviewees
partners, are qualified
Representatives taking part in the interview should be the staff that will be
working directly on the project
Demonstrate effective communication
Ensure no conflict of interest
8. Cost based on technical approach and number of options
Cost per option
OWP to consider the need to specify a number of options in the RFP
Demonstrate how the cost could be scaled up or down if additional
options need to be considered
9. Local presence
Does the firm have or are they willing to establish a local office?
Participants were asked to weigh in on the relative importance (high, medium, and
low) of the criteria discussed by responding to poll questions. See images below for poll
results; the first question represents those considered high importance, the second
question represents medium, and the third represents low.
The criteria order, from high to low, as suggested by poll results is:
1. Qualifications to perform the Scope of Work \[high\]
2. Organizational capacity and responsiveness \[high\]
Page 5 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
3. Experience of key staff and project manager dedicated to the project and
identification of interviewees \[high\]
4. Technical approach and project understanding \[high\]
5. Applicability of example projects (firm experience) \[medium\]
6. Familiarity with regional and local water supply infrastructure and governance
\[medium\]
7. Public sector references that corroborate the quality of performance on
example projects \[medium/low\]
8. Cost based on technical approach and number of options \[medium/low\]
9. Local presence \[low\]
Page 6 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Page 7 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Mr. Currier reviewed the process for consultant interviews and final selection. Based on
the proposals received, a short list of applicants will be identified to participate in
interviews. An interview panel will be convened, consisting of project team members.
The key staff identified in the RFP as those who will be working on the project will be
interviewed. The interview will include a 20-minute presentation by the consultant and a
question-and-answer session. The interview questions are to be determined and will be
confidential. The written proposals and interview performance will each account for
Wrap Up and Next Steps
Mr. Currier reviewed the contracting timeline:
Proposal submissions will be due 30 days after issuance of the RFP
The short list for interviews will decided by 14 days after proposal submission
deadline
Interviews will be conducted within 7 days after the short list has been
determined
The contract will be developed and executed within 30 days after the
contractor has been selected
Page 8 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Mr. Currier said that the RFP is in development and can be forwarded once sent out.
Ms. Kalman reviewed near-term engagement activities:
Finalize the communication plan by October 9, 2020
Develop a website page to be updated with information about the project
Develop a fact sheet about the project
Develop a press release to go out with the release of the RFP
Page 9 of 10
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPTIONS STUDY
Stakeholders Group Meeting
Appendix: Participants
Brian Currier, Sacramento State - Office of Water Programs (OWP)
Brian Kidwell, SWRCB, Division of Drinking Water (DDW)
Christina Buck, Assistant Director Department of Water & Resource Conservation,
County of Butte
Daniel Newton, SWRCB, DDW
Debra Lucero, District 2 Supervisor, County of Butte
Dustin Cooper, District Counsel, Paradise Irrigation District
George Barber, District Manager, California Water Service, Chico
Shannon McGovern, California Water Service, Chico
James Beck, Sacramento State - OWP
Julia Van Horn, Associate Facilitator/Mediator, Sacramento State - Consensus &
Collaboration Program (CCP)
Kevin Phillips, Town Manager, Town of Paradise
Kim Dinh, Senior Engineer, SWRCB, Division of Financial Assistance (DFA)
Michelle Frederick, SWRCB, DDW
Mickey Rich, Paradise Irrigation District
Nabiul Afrooz, Prop 1 Grant Manager, SWRCB, Division of Financial Assistance
(DFA)
Nadine Cross, Administrative Services Manager, Sacramento State - OWP
Orit Kalman, Senior Facilitator/mediator, Sacramento State - CCP
Paul Gosselin, Director Department of Water & Resource Conservation, County
of Butte
Randy Marx, Project Manager, Sacramento State - OWP
Richard Harriman, Local NGO Representative
Steve Lucas, Executive Officer, Butte County LAFCO
Tom Lando, Interim General Manager, Paradise Irrigation District
Page 10 of 10
QBSBEJTF!DPNNVOJUZ!!
ESJOLJOH!XBUFS!TVQQMZ!!DPNNVOJDBUJPO!QMBO
PQUJPOT!TUVEZ
Dpnnvojdbujpo!Qmbo!Qvsqptf;!Tfswf!bt!uif!spbenbq!gps!tvddfttgvm!dpnnvojdbujpot!
uispvhipvu!uif!qspkfdu!jodmvejoh!SGQ!efwfmpqnfou-!Tuvez!dpotvmubou!tfmfdujpo!boe!Tuvez!
jnqmfnfoubujpo/!Fotvsf!bo!pqfo!gmpx!pg!jogpsnbujpo!boe!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!joqvu!uispvhipvu!uif!
qspdftt/!Uif!Qmbo!xjmm!cf!vqebufe!sfhvmbsmz!up!nffu!uif!offet!pg!uif!qspkfdu/
Pqujpot!Tuvez!qvsqptf;!Jefoujgz!boe!fwbmvbuf!mpoh.ufsn!pqujpot!gps!jnqspwfnfout!up!uif!Qbsbejtf!
Jssjhbujpo!Ejtusjdu!)QJE*!xbufs!tztufn!jogsbtusvduvsf!boe!gjobodft!up!fotvsf!uif!mpoh.ufsn!tvtubjobcjmjuz!
boe!sftjmjfodz!pg!uif!xbufs!tztufn)t*!bt!xfmm!bt!tvqqpsu!sfefwfmpqnfou!pg!uif!upxo!pg!Qbsbejtf/!Uijt!
Tuvez!jt!bmtp!b!nboebufe!sfrvjsfnfou!up!fotvsf!uibu!QJE!dbo!pcubjo!gvoejoh!gps!jut!esjoljoh!xbufs!
tztufn!jnqspwfnfout!gspn!uif!Dbmjgpsojb!Tubuf!Mfhjtmbuvsf/!
Hvjejoh!Qsjodjqmft!pg!Fohbhfnfou;!Tvddfttgvm!fohbhfnfou!sfrvjsft!beifsfodf!up!b!tfu!pg!hvjejoh!
qsjodjqmft/!Uif!jufnt!mjtufe!cfmpx!bsf!joufoefe!bt!dpsf!dpnqpofout/!Bmm!pvusfbdi!boe!fohbhfnfou!
bdujwjujft!boe!dpnnvojdbujpot!nbufsjbmt!xjmm!cf;
!Beejujwf;!Sfdphoj{joh!uibu!uifsf!bsf!tfwfsbm!!Bddfttjcmf;!Fotvsf!uibu!uiptf!xip!xjti!
pohpjoh!fohbhfnfou!fggpsut!bt!qbsu!pg!uif!up!fohbhf!bsf!qbsu!pg!uijt!fggpsu/!Vujmj{f!b!
Upxo!pg!Qbsbejtf!sfcvjmejoh!fggpsut-!pvusfbdi!ejwfstf!tvjuf!pg!pvusfbdi!uppmt!up!fohbhf!b!
boe!fohbhfnfou!tipvme!mfwfsbhf!uiftf!puifs!cspbe!bvejfodf/!Dpotjefs!bmm!wbsjbcmft!uibu!
fggpsut-!cvjme!pgg!pg!qsfwjpvt!fggpsut-!boe!dbo!jnqbdu!b!dpnnvojuz!nfncfst!bcjmjuz!
fggjdjfoumz!vujmj{f!tublfipmefst!boe!dpnnvojuz!up!qbsujdjqbuf!jo!uif!fggpsu-!jodmvejoh!cvu!opu!
nfncfst!ujnf!boe!fyqfsujtf/mjnjufe!up!fwfou!mpdbujpo-!ujnf-!mbohvbhf-!
jogpsnbujpo!gpsnbu-!boe!fdpopnjd!boe!
!Joufoujpobm;!Bmm!fohbhfnfou!pqqpsuvojujft!
qiztjdbm!jnqfejnfout/
offe!up!cf!fyqmjdju!jo!uifjs!qvsqptf/!
Ejggfsfoujbuf!cfuxffo!pvusfbdi!boe!!Pqfo!boe!usbotqbsfou;!Qspwjef!ofdfttbsz!
dpnnvojuz!fohbhfnfou!up!fotvsf!uibu!jogpsnbujpo!bcpvu!qspdftt-!ujnfmjof-!boe!
fyqfdubujpot!gps!uif!qspdftt!bsf!voefstuppe/dpoufou/!Cf!usbotqbsfou!boe!pqfo!bcpvu!ipx!
!Pvusfbdi;!Qspwjef!pqqpsuvojujft!up!efdjtjpot!bsf!nbef/
jogpsn!uif!dpnnvojuz!bcpvu!uif!qspdftt!
!DPWJE.2:!Ifbmui!boe!Tbgfuz!Dpnqmjbou;!!
boe!fevdbuf!po!ufdiojdbm!jttvft/!
Uif!qspdftt!xjmm!cf!dpotjtufou!xjui!dvssfou!
Pvusfbdi!bdujwjujft!qspnpuf!usvtu-!
DPWJE!ifbmui!boe!tbgfuz!sfrvjsfnfout!
usbotqbsfodz-!boe!bddpvoubcjmjuz/
qsftdsjcfe!cz!Tubuf!boe!mpdbm!hpwfsonfout/!
!Fohbhfnfou;!Qspwjef!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!
Boz!dpogmjdut!cfuxffo!tvdi!sfrvjsfnfout!xjmm!
tublfipmefst!up!mfbso!gspn!fbdi!puifs-!
cf!sfdpodjmfe!cz!uif!TXSDC!bt!uif!gvoejoh!
fowjtjpo!uphfuifs-!pxo!uif!qspdftt-!hjwf!
pshboj{bujpo!pg!uijt!fggpsu/
gffecbdl!boe!xfjhi!jo!po!efdjtjpot/
QBSBEJTF!DPNNVOJUZ!ESJOLJOH!XBUFS!TVQQMZ!PQUJPOT!TUVEZ
Mfwfmt!pg!Fohbhfnfou!boe!Sftqpotjcjmjujft
2/!Qspkfdu!Dpowfofs!)Efdjtjpo!Nblfs*
b/!Pqujpot!Tuvez!efwfmpqnfou!.!DTVT.PXQ
c/!Pqujpot!Tuvez!jnqmfnfoubujpo!.!QJE
Qvcmjd
3/!Qspkfdu!Ufbn!)Tvqqpsu!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!.!Dpousbdu!
nbobhfnfou-!Esbgut!Pqujpot!Tuvez-!Dpoevdut!pvusfbdi~
b/!DTVT.PXQ
c/!DTVT.DDQ
Tublfipmefst!
d/!QJE.bvuipsj{fe!sfqsftfoubujwf
Hspvq
e/!Upxo!pg!Qbsbejtf!.!sfdjqjfou
f/!Tubuf!Xbufs!Sftpvsdft!Dpouspm!Cpbse!)TXSDC*
g/!Dpotvmubou!.!UCE
Qspkfdu!Ufbn
4/!Tublfipmefst!Hspvq!)Bewjtf!boe!qspwjef!joqvu!po!
bmm!qspkfdu!njmftupoft0efdjtjpot-!tfswf!bt!qspkfdu!
bncbttbepst!up!puifs!joufsftut*
b/!Mpdbm
GMPX!PG!JOGPSNBUJPO
c/!Sfhjpobm
d/!Tubuf
Qspkfdu!!
e/!Fowjsponfoubm
Dpowfofs
5/!Qvcmjd!)Pohpjoh!fohbhfnfou!up!cf!jogpsnfe!pg!uif!
qspkfdu!boe!jut!qsphsftt*
b/!Upxo!pg!Qbsbejtf!sftjefout
c/!Cvuuf!Dpvouz!sftjefout
Pwfswjfx!pg!Dpnnvojdbujpo!Uppmt!boe!Qvcmjd!Qbsujdjqbujpo!Pqqpsuvojujft!
Pvusfbdi!boe!fohbhfnfou!pqqpsuvojujft!bsf!eftjhofe!up!cspbefo!qvcmjd!qbsujdjqbujpo/!Uif!Dpnnvojdbujpo!
Qmbo!pvumjoft!bo!bqqspbdi!up!fotvsf!bo!jogpsnfe!boe!usbotqbsfou!qspdftt!boe!jodmveft!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!
joufsftufe!qbsujft!up!xfjhi!jo!po!uif!Pqujpot!Tuvez!efwfmpqnfou/!Fohbhfnfou!nbz!ublf!uif!gpsn!pg!ejhjubm!ps!
jo.qfstpo!fohbhfnfou/
Ubtl0FwfouJogpsnHbuifs!Ejtdvtt0!Qspwjef!!EfmjcfsbufEfdjtjpo!!
Ejhjubm!Fohbhfnfou;!Ejhjubm!
JoqvuDpoofduDipjdftNbljoh
fohbhfnfou!jt!bo!bqqspbdi!uibu!
Qsftt!sfmfbtf!boe!nfejb
jowpmwft!pomjof!fydibohf!pg!jogpsnbujpo/!
Jogpsnbujpo!qspwjefe!uispvhi!pomjof!
Gbdutiffut
nfejb!dbo!cf!qspwjefe!bt!ibsedpqjft!
Tublfipmefs!Bttfttnfou!
bt!xfmm!up!fotvsf!uibu!jogpsnbujpo!jt!
Joufswjfxt
bddfttjcmf!up!bmm!joufsftufe!tublfipmefst/!
Ejhjubm!fohbhfnfou!nbz!jodmvef!qsftt!
Tvswfz
sfmfbtft!boe!nfejb-!gbdutiffut-!tvswfzt-!
boe!b!qspkfdu!qbhf!po!uif!QJE!xfctjuf/
Qspkfdu!xfctjuf!
Tpdjbm!nfejb
Jo.Qfstpo!Fohbhfnfou;!Bmm!jojujbm!
pvusfbdi!boe!fohbhfnfou!xjmm!cf!
Dpnnvojuz!
dpoevdufe!wjsuvbmmz!)vtjoh!\[ppn*!evf!
jogpsnbujpobm!fwfou+
up!DPWJE/!Bt!dpoejujpot!jnqspwf!boe!
dibohf-!bdujwjujft!dbo!cf!fbtjmz!npejgjfe!
Dpnnvojuz!xpsltipq+
gspn!wjsuvbm0pomjof!fwfout!up!jo!qfstpo!
Tublfipmefst!Hspvq!
fwfout!jodmvejoh!tublfipmefs!bttfttnfou!
Nffujoht!
joufswjfxt-!dpnnvojuz!jogpsnbujpobm!
fwfout-!dpnnvojuz!xpsltipqt-!boe!
Qspkfdu!Ufbn
tublfipmefst!hspvq!nffujoht/
Qspkfdu!Dpowfofs
+Sfnpuf!qbsujdjqbujpo!bt!qfs!DPWJE.2:!sfrvjsfnfout