Members of the Mariposa County Water Agency Advisory Board reviewed quarterly finance notes and pressed county staff for clearer financial detail on a Merced Irrigation District (MID) settlement account and on the county’s water‑supply agreement tied to Lake McClure.

Sam Cerini, public works project lead, told the board he had not yet received documentation from the auditor for a deposit to the construction fund and that the MID settlement budget had not been loaded for the new fiscal year. Cerini said the account balance shown in the packet was $397,000. A staff comment noted the account showed $897,000 as of Jan. 29, 2025, and members observed the account had been transferred out and back in during bookkeeping.

Board members asked who controls the account; Sam Cerini said administration, not public works, controls the MID settlement account and identified Lee Westerlund in administration as the contact for questions about that account.

Discussion moved to an existing county agreement with Merced Irrigation District that several members described in broad terms during the meeting. A board member described the agreement as conveying the county a right of access to 8,000 acre‑feet per year from Lake McClure and said MID provides an annual payment of about $300,000 and contributes a percentage of its power‑generation proceeds (the member said 26%) into escrow, with an upper contribution cap discussed in the meeting. The same speaker said that, if the county does not have a qualifying water project by 2047, the escrow would be split (the board member described the county’s share as roughly half). The transcript shows confusion among members about several large figures raised during the discussion: $18,000,000, $30,000,000 and $50,000,000 were mentioned by different speakers and then questioned.

Board members repeatedly said the sums likely fall well short of the funding that would be required to build and operate a major water‑supply project. “When you talk about projects, pumping water, put in perpetuity, you’re talking enormous numbers of dollars,” the member said in discussion (attribution: board member speaking at the time; meeting transcript did not provide a formal written contract citation for the larger dollar figures referenced).

The board made no formal financial decision but asked staff to provide clearer, digestible financial statements at future meetings and requested budget staff or other financial representatives attend so members can see outstanding obligations and residual balances. The board also agreed to have staff look into administrative controls and to identify the appropriate administration contact for the MID settlement account.

Why it matters: the MID settlement account and the county’s agreement with MID are potential funding sources for county water projects; unclear accounting and conflicting figures in the meeting raised concerns among board members about whether the funds are adequate or correctly tracked.

Next steps: staff was asked to return with a clearer breakdown of deposits, withdrawals, outstanding obligations and the administration contact for the settlement account; the board requested a fiscal representative attend a future meeting.