WILL. THIS MEETING TO ORDER
WELCOME. ASSEMBLY MEMBER BENNETT
HAVE A SEAT. SO NICE TO SEE YOU.
OK? SO UM, WELCOME, EVERYBODY.
WE'RE GLAD TO SEE YOU. AND
WELCOME TO THIS INFORMATIONAL
HEARING WHERE THERE WILL BE NÓ
VOTES. UM I JUST HAVE A FEW
OPENING REMARKS, AND THEN I WILL
DEFER TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER BENNETT
FOR SOME OPENING REMARKS. UM SO
IT'S BEEN NEARLY 10 YEARS SINCE,
UH, SIGMA WAS ADOPTED, AND, UM,
WE STILL HAVE EXTREME WEATHERS.
AND SO I THINK THE IMPORTANCE OF
MANAGING OUR GROUNDWATER IS
BECOME, UH, EVEN MORE IMPORTANT
THAN IT WAS PROBABLY 10 YEARS
AGO, SO WE SORT OF AT A PIVOTAL
POINT. UM UH, WE'RE AT A
CRITICAL JUNCTURE IN THAT, UM Dð
WR HAS DONE ITS ASSESSMENTS. AND
UM, FOR BOTH THE HIGH AND MEDIUM
PRIORITY BASINS. AND WITH THESE
INITIAL ASSESSMENTS COMPLETE, WE
ARE IN FULL IMPLEMENTATION MODE,
AND I THINK THAT'S A LARGE
REASON WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE
THIS JOINT HEARING SO THAT WE
CAN TAKE A LOOK AND SEE HOW THE
IMPLEMENTATION IS GONNA TAKE
SHAPE AFTER THE PLANS HAVE BEEN
SUBMITTED AND WHERE THE STATE
MAY BE HELPFUL AND USEFUL IN
THAT IMPLEMENTATION. UM SO I
APPRECIATE THE LARGE TASK THAT
THE Dð WR AND THE STATE WATER
BOARD AND LOCAL AGENCIES HAVE
DONE AND WORKING AND WE WILL
WORK COLLABORATIVELY AS WE GO
FORWARD. I THINK IT'S ALSO THAT
WE, UH UH, IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE
ENSURE THAT ALL GROUNDWATER
USERS ARE CONSIDERED AS WE MOVE
FORWARD. I WANNA THANK IN
ADVANCE MY COLLEAGUES FOR MAKING
THE TIME TO BE HERE. UM AND I
THINK THAT FOR THE WITNESSES WHO
ARE ABOUT TO ENGAGE IN THIS
IMPORTANT DISCUSSION, AND WITH
THAT I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO
SOME MEMBER BENNETT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. E. UH,
THANK THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH,
CO-CHAIR PAPPAN. I GUESS I WOULD
SAY FOR CO HOSTS. UH UH, THIS
WITH THE BUDGET OF FOR, UH,
COMMITTEE, UH, AS, UH AS, UH,
CHIN WAS, UH, TALKING ABOUT, UH,
SIGMA HAS HAD ITS 10 YEAR SORT
OF IMPLEMENTATION PHASE AND THIS
IS REALLY THE APPROPRIATE TIME
FOR US TO STOP AND START TO ASK
THESE QUESTIONS, PARTICULARLY AS
Dð WR. UH HAS IT BEEN PRODUCING
A REPORT? FOR US TO TRY TO
ANALYZE THE IMPACT SO FAR OF
THIS GREAT SIGMA EFFORT THAT'S
OUT THERE. SO, UM, WITH THAT, I
WON'T REPEAT, UH, SOME OF THE
OTHER THINGS THAT SHE TALKED
ABOUT IN TERMS OF JUST BEING
APPROPRIATE, BUT, UH, I DO WANT
TO EMPHASIZE THAT, UH, THIS
THESE GROUNDWATER AGENCIES HAVE
A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO
THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE LEAST
ADVANTAGES AND THE LEAST ABILITY
TO TRY TO DEAL WITH THE IMPACTS
OF DEPLETION OF OUR GROUND
WATER. AND THE OVERDRAFTING.
THAT'S OUT THERE, SO THE
THOUSANDS OF DOMESTIC WELLS THAT
GO DRY, UM CAUSING FARM WORKERS
AND LOW INCOME PEOPLE TO BE
DISADVANTAGED IS A PARTICULAR
CONCERN OF MINE AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA HAS INVESTED MILLIONS
AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT SIGMA
WORKS IN THE GROUNDWATER
FUNCTION PROPERLY. UH AND WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING
A GOOD INVESTMENT FOR THOSE
DOLLARS, AND THAT'S THE BUDGET
SUB FOR APPROACH THAT I WERE
MOST INTERESTED IN. SO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. UM CO-CHAIR PATMAN.
THANK YOU. SO, BENNETT ANY OTHER
OPENING REMARKS. OK WITH THAT.
LET'S HAVE THE FIRST A PANEL
COME FORWARD. AND WHEN YOU, UH
BEGIN IF YOU COULD TELL US YOUR
NAME WHERE YOU'RE FROM, AND JUST
GIVE ME ONE SENTENCE ABOUT WHAT
YOU'RE GONNA TESTIFY TO, BECAUSE
I THINK THAT WILL HELP AS WE GO
FORWARD.
GO AHEAD. WHO'S GONNA GO FIRST?
SONIA OK, WELCOME. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. I'M SONIA PET
FROM THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYSTS
OFFICE, AND I'VE BEEN ASKED, UM,
TODAY TO PROVIDE A BRIEF
OVERVIEW OF SIGMA TO TALK ABOUT
STATE FUNDING PROVIDED FOR SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATION TO DATE AND, UM
THEN WE OFFER A FEW ISSUES AND
SORT OF QUESTIONS FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER AS IT
LISTENS TO THE OTHER PANELISTS
AND AS IT THINKS ABOUT
IMPLEMENTATION GOING FORWARD. OK
YOU SHOULD HAVE A HANDOUT, UM,
THAT OUR OFFICE PREPARED, AND,
UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU IN THE
AUDIENCE, THERE ARE COPIES OF
THIS HAND OUT IN THE BACK. AND
FOR THOSE WATCHING ONLINE, YOU
CAN FIND THIS HANDOUT AT OUR
WEBSITE AT L A Ó DOT èC A.GOV.
SO IF YOU TURN TO THE FIRST PAGE
OF ACTUAL CONTENT, UM I JUST
WANNA PROVIDE A BIT OF CONTEXT.
UM FOR THE SUSTAINABLE
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT, OR
SIGMA. UM FIRST, WE WOULD JUST
NOTE THAT GROUNDWATER IS A VERY
IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE
STATE'S WATER RESOURCES IN ANY
GIVEN YEAR. UM GROUNDWATER CAN
MAKE UP 40 TO 60% OF WATER
SUPPLIES OBVIOUSLY RELIANCE ON
GROUNDWATER INCREASES DURING DRY
YEARS AND IN SOME REGIONAL
REGIONS OF THE STATE GROUNDWATER
MAKES UP 100% OF WATER SUPPLIES.
UH BUT THERE IS SEVERE
GROUNDWATER DEPLETION IN SOME
AREAS OF THE STATE, AND THIS IS
BECAUSE ON AVERAGE, THE STATE
EXTRACTS MORE GROUNDWATER THAN
IS REPLENISHED. AND THIS, UH,
CAUSES UNDERGROUND BASINS TO
BECOME GRADUALLY DEPLETED OR
OVERDRAFTED OVERDRAFT CAN HAVE
SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES, INCLUDING
FAILED WELLS, UM, DETERIORATING
WATER QUALITY. COLLAPSE OF
GROUNDWATER BASINS AND SERIOUS
LAND SUBSIDENCE. AND,
INTERESTINGLY AND SORT OF. IN
RETROSPECT, IT'S ALMOST HARD TO
BELIEVE. BUT BEFORE 2014
GROUNDWATER WAS NOT REGULATED ON
A STATEWIDE BASIS, AND THIS IS
SORT OF IN CONTRAST TO HOW THE
STATE HAS REGULATED AND MANAGED
SURFACE WATER, UM OVER TIME. YOU
TURN TO THE NEXT PAGE, UM, THREE
LAWS WERE APPROVED IN 2014 THAT
TOGETHER, MAKE UP WHAT WE KNOW
AS SIGMA. THE GOAL IS REALLY TO
ACHIEVE LONG TERM GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY BY 2040. THIS
REALLY IS A NOTED BEFORE. THIS
REALLY MAKES UP THE FIRST TIME
THAT THE STATES HAD A
COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE
REQUIREMENT TO MANAGE AND
OPERATE GROUNDWATER BASINS.
NOTABLY SIGMA'S REQUIREMENTS
APPLIED IN 94 OF THE STATE'S 515
GROUNDWATER BASINS. UM, AND
THESE 94 BASINS ALONG WITH 2029
BASINS THAT HAVE BEEN
ADJUDICATED. ARE CONSIDERED, UM
OR OR REPRESENT ABOUT 98% OF THE
STATE'S ANNUAL GROUNDWATER
PUMPING. THESE 94 BASINS, UM,
HAVE BEEN DETERMINED AS HIGH OR
HAVE BEEN PRIORITIZED AS HIGH OR
MEDIUM PRIORITY BASINS BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
AND OF THESE 94 BASINS. 21 OR
CONSIDERED TO BE CRITICALLY
OVERDRAFTED. AN IMPORTANT
COMPONENT OF SIGMA IS THAT
CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT OF
GROUNDWATER BASINS REALLY
HAPPENS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND
BY 2017 LOCAL PUBLIC AGENCIES
WERE REQUIRED TO, UH, FORM
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES AND THESE AGENCIES HAVE
BROAD MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY TO
DEFINE THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD IN
A BASE IN A BASIN TO LIMIT
EXTRACTION AND TO IMPOSE FEES.
SIGMA ALSO REQUIRES THESE LOCAL
AGENCIES TO DEVELOP WHAT ARE
CALLED GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLANS OR G, S¼ P
S¼ AND THESE OF COURSE, GOVERN.
UM GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT IN THE
IN THE BASIN. UM. AS WAS ALREADY
NOTED BY UH, MADAM CHAIR. UH ALL
OF THE G S¼ P S¼ HAVE SINCE BEEN
REVIEWED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES. UM, THERE WERE
DEADLINES FOR SUBMISSION BY 2020
FOR THE CRITICALLY OVERDRAFTED
BASINS AND BY 2022 FOR THE OTHER
HIGH AND MEDIUM PRIORITY BASINS.
AND UM, UH, AN IMPORTANT NOTE
ABOUT THE SUBMISSION OF THE GSP
IS THAT GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES WERE
REQUIRED TO START ACTUALLY
IMPLEMENTING THESE PLANS. ON
SUBMISSION. UM EVEN AS THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
WAS REVIEWING THESE PLANS. UM
SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION IS OVERSEEN
BY TWO STATE AGENCIES. THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
WHICH REALLY LED THE EARLY, UM
IMPLEMENTATION PHASE OF SIGMA,
AS WELL AS THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD. UM Dð
WR S¼ RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDED,
DEFINING AND PRIORITIZING THE
GROUNDWATER BASINS, COLLECTING
AND PROVIDING DATA. UM AND THEN,
IMPORTANTLY, UM, REVIEWING THE
GSP, AS HAS ALREADY BEEN NOTED,
AND Dð WR WOULD MAKE
DETERMINATIONS ABOUT WHETHER THE
GSP WERE ADEQUATE TO, UH, COMPLY
WITH SIGMA'S REQUIREMENTS AND TO
ACTUALLY ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY.
UM BUT, UH, WE DID WANNA NOTE
THAT THIS PROCESS IS SORT OF AN
ONGOING LIVING PROCESS. UM,
THESE PLANS ARE SORT OF LIVING
DOCUMENTS IN THE SENSE THAT THE
DEPARTMENT WILL BE REVIEWING
ANNUAL REPORTS FROM THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES AND WILL BE REVIEWING
UPDATES TO THE PLANS EVERY FIVE
YEARS. IF YOU TURN TO THE NEXT
PAGE, UM I DON'T WANNA STEAL MR
GOSLINS THUNDER. UM BUT WE DID
JUST WANNA KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT
WITH THE CURRENT GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
DETERMINATIONS SO YOU CAN SEE IN
THE PIE CHART THAT TOO, ABOUT
TWO THIRDS HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
ANOTHER 13 HAVE BEEN DEEMED
INCOMPLETE. UM THOSE WERE MORE
RECENTLY MORE RECENT
DETERMINATIONS. AND THOSE
AGENCIES, UM HAVE 100 AND 80
DAYS TO ADDRESS THE DEFICIENCIES
IN THOSE PLANS AND RESUBMIT. SIX
HAVE BEEN DEEMED INADEQUATE.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE. IN A
MOMENT. NINE ALTERNATIVE PLANS
HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND THEN UH,
AN ADDITIONAL FOUR ARE SORT OF
IN ANOTHER TYPE OF STATUS. UM SO
THE OTHER AGENCY INVOLVED THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD. THE WATER BOARD STEPS IN
WHEN THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES HAS HAS DETERMINED
THAT A GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN IS
INADEQUATE TO ACHIEVE
SUSTAINABILITY IN A BASIN.
INTERVENTION CAN CAN INCLUDE
HOLDING PROBATIONARY HEARINGS,
UM, REQUIRING TYPES OF REPORTING
ISSUING FEES. AND IN THE WORST
CASE SCENARIO, UM, ACTUALLY
TAKING TEMPORARILY SORT OF
TAKING OVER MANAGEMENT OF A
GROUNDWATER BASIN. AND IT'S OUR
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FIRST
PROBATIONARY HEARING FOR ONE OF
THE SIX INADEQUATE UH, BASINS
THAT'S BEEN DETERMINED TO HAVE
AN INADEQUATE G S¼ P WILL TAKE
PLACE ON APRIL 13TH OF THIS
YEAR. TURNING TO THE NEXT PAGE.
UM I'M UH WE HAVE A TIMELINE FOR
SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION, AND I HAVE
TO APOLOGIZE FOR THIS SMALL FONT
. UH IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, YOU'RE
GONNA FIND IT HARD TO READ. UH,
BUT THE IMPORTANT THING ABOUT
THIS TIMELINE IS A LOT OF THE
MILESTONES HAVE ALREADY BEEN
REACHED, AND WHERE WE'RE AT
TODAY IS REALLY AT THE BOTTOM OF
THE TIMELINE. THE GSP HAVE BEEN
SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED AND NOW
AS UM MADAM CHAIR NOTED, WE ARE
IN FULL IMPLEMENTATION MODE WITH
THE GOAL OF REACHING
SUSTAINABILITY BY THE 2040 2040.
TO DATES. NEXT I'M GOING TO
ADDRESS SOME OF THE STATE
SUPPORT FOR SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION
. UM, AS YOU'LL SEE ON PAGE FIVE
OF THE HANDOUT, THE STATE HAS
THUS FAR PROVIDED MORE THAN 900
MILLION FOR SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION
. THE MAJORITY OF THIS FUNDING
HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THE FORM OF
LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS, BOTH
PLANNING GRANTS FOR THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES AS WELL AS
IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS, AND, UM
ALL OF THE INFORMATION ABOUT
THESE GRANT AWARDS CAN BE FOUND
ON THE DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE. AND
UH, JUST TO PROVIDE A COUPLE OF
EXAMPLES OF WHAT THE
IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS ARE
SUPPORTING. ARE THINGS LIKE
DEVELOPING GROUNDWATER, RECHARGE
BASINS OR DEVELOPING THE
CONVEYANCE THAT WOULD ACTUALLY
GET THE WATER TO THOSE
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE BASINS?
TURNING TO THE NEXT PAGE. THE
REST OF THE FUNDING HAS REALLY
GONE TO SUPPORT STATE OPERATIONS
TO IMPLEMENT SIGMA AND MOST OF
THIS BECAUSE OF Dð WR S¼ ROLE IN
THE EARLY DAYS OF SIGMA HAS
BEEN, UM TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES. I'M CURRENTLY
UH, Dð WR HAS ABOUT HAS 80
AUTHORIZED POSITIONS FOR SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATION. HOWEVER, UM A
NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL POSITIONS.
UH THE DEPARTMENT WILL SORT OF
LOAN POSITIONS FROM OTHER
PROGRAM AREAS AS NEEDED ON A
TEMPORARY BASIS. SO THERE'S
ABOUT 50 CURRENTLY ABOUT 50
ADDITIONAL STAFF. UM THE
DEPARTMENT HAS ABOUT 40 MILLION
IN IN ANNUAL FUNDING TO SUPPORT
ITS OPERATIONS, WHICH NOT ONLY
INCLUDES STAFF, BUT OTHER THINGS
LIKE, UH, THE DEPARTMENT MANAGES
THE CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MONITORING
PROGRAM, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS èC,
A S¼ GÒM. THE WATER BOARD, UM,
HAS CURRENTLY ABOUT 10 MILLION
IN FUNDING IN 20, THREE 24 AND
ABOUT 40 AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
FOR SIGMA ACTIVITIES. HOWEVER
SOME OF THIS FUNDING IS LIMITED
TERM AND WILL EXPIRE. UM AND THE
WATER BOARD HOPES TO BEGIN USING
SOME OF FEAR OF SOME OF ITS FEAR
REVENUES AS SOON AS 2526 TO
SUPPORT SOME OF ITS STATE
OPERATIONS COSTS. I ALSO WANTED
TO, UM, DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO
THE SOURCES OF FUNDING SOURCES
OF STATE FUNDING FOR SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATION. IN THE EARLY
DAYS. THERE WERE BOND FUNDS
AVAILABLE BOTH FROM PROPOSITION
ONE AND PROPOSITION. 68 THESE
PRIMA THESE FUNDS PRIMARILY
SUPPORTED LOCAL ASSISTANCE
GRANTS. UM AS THOSE BOND FUNDS
WERE EXHAUSTED, THE STATE HAS
COME TO RELY MORE HEAVILY ON
GENERAL FUND. UM AND YOU CAN SEE
THAT. IN FACT, THE MAJORITY OF
FUNDING HAS COME FROM THE
GENERAL FUND. I'D NOTE THAT THE
GOVERNOR'S CURRENT, UM, BUDGET
PROPOSAL FOR 2024 25 DOES NOT
INCLUDE ANY NEW REQUESTS FOR
FUNDING FOR SIGMA, BUT IT DOES
INCLUDE ABOUT 50 MILLION OF
PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED FUNDING
FROM THE GENERAL FUND FOR STATE
OPERATIONS. AND THEN I'LL JUST
CLOSE. I WANTED TO RAISE A FEW
FISCAL AND POLICY ISSUES AND
QUESTIONS FOR LEGISLATIVE
CONSIDERATION. SO FIRST IN ORDER
TO IMPLEMENT SIGMA LOCAL
AGENCIES WILL IN FACT, UH,
FARMLAND, SOME AMOUNT OF
FARMLAND WILL HAVE TO GO OUT OF
PRODUCTION OR HAVE TO BE
FOLLOWED, UM, IN CERTAIN YEARS,
AND SO WE RAISE A COUPLE
QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT. UM.
OH I'M SORRY. I'M GETTING AHEAD
OF MYSELF. THAT'S A POLICY
QUESTION. WELL, LET'S GO THROUGH
POLICY QUESTIONS FIRST, AND THEN
I'LL I'LL GO BACK TO FUNDING. SO
PAGE NINE. WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS?
UM ON THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR OF
TAKING FARM LAND OUT OF
PRODUCTION OR HAVING TO FOLLOW
FARMLAND. UM FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT
SHOULD BE THE STATE'S ROLE IN,
UH, HELPING FARM WORKERS
TRANSITION TO OTHER TYPES OF
JOBS. WHAT STEPS COULD THE
LEGISLATURE CONSIDER TAKING
ANOTHER ISSUE RELATED TO TAKING
FARMLAND OUT OF PRODUCTION HAS
TO DO WITH THE TOXIC DUST THAT
CAN BECOME AIRBORNE AS FARMLAND
IS FOLLOWED. AND UM, WE WANTED
TO RAISE THIS BECAUSE ESPECIALLY
IN THE AREAS WHERE FARMLAND WILL
BE FOLLOWED. THERE ARE ALREADY
SERIOUS AIR POLLUTION PROBLEMS
AND SERIOUS, UM, PUBLIC HEALTH
IMPACTS, INCLUDING HIGH RATES OF
ASTHMA AND RESPIRATORY DISEASES.
SO UH, A QUESTION FOR
CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE
LOCAL AGENCIES ARE REQUIRING
DUST SUPPRESSION TECHNIQUES, UM,
OR MEASURES AND WHETHER THE TWO
STATE AGENCIES ARE CONSIDERING
THESE IMPACTS IN THEIR OVERSIGHT
ROLES. WE ALSO WANTED TO ASK
WHETHER ANY STATUTORY CHANGES
ARE NEEDED AT THIS POINT AT THIS
SORT. JUST TO NAME A COUPLE OF,
OF EXAMPLE, OR A FEW EXAMPLES
SHOULD ARE ANY CHANGES NEEDED TO
START STATUTE TO ADDRESS SOME OF
THE VARIOUS LEGAL CHALLENGES
THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED AGAINST
LOCAL AGENCIES. TO ESTABLISH A
GROUNDWATER TRADING FRAMEWORK OR
TO INSTITUTE ANY CHANGES TO
WATER RATES. ANOTHER QUESTION OF
SPEAKING OF GROUNDWATER. TRADING
IS JUST HOW CAN THE STATE HELP
FACILITATE GROUNDWATER TRADING?
THIS COULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT
ACTIVITY TO HELP BRING LIMITED
GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES AND DEMAND
INTO BALANCE. I WOULD ALSO NOTE
THAT THE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED
900,000 IN THE 2324 BUDGET TO
DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN BASED ON
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE
CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION, AND
THE LEGISLATURE COULD ASK WHAT
ABOUT THE STATUS OF THAT PLAN?
AND THEN A FINAL POLICY QUESTION
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND A
VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION IS HOW
THE STATE CAN HELP ENSURE
EQUITABLE IMPLEMENTATION OF
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLANS
AND HELP AVOID NEGATIVE
CONSEQUENCES FOR VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES. WE WOULD NOTE THAT
SOME COMMUNITY GROUPS HAVE
RAISED EQUITY CONCERNS ABOUT HOW
SIGMA IS BEING IMPLEMENTED IN
CERTAIN AREAS. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN
IT COMES TO THE COMPOSITION OF
BOARDS OF LOCAL AGENCIES, AND
THERE ALSO ARE GOING TO BE
POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON DRINKING
WATER SUPPLY AND QUALITY. AND SO
HOW IS THE ADMINISTRATION
MONITORING AND REGULATING LOCAL
AGENCIES TO ENSURE THAT, UH,
PUMPING AND FUTURE PRACTICES DO
NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT
COMMUNITIES WHO REALLY RELY ON
THIS WATER? OKAY, SO KEEPING YOU
ON YOUR TOES. WE'RE GOING TO
TURN BACK TO PAGE EIGHT TO GO
OVER SOME FUNDING QUESTIONS. UM.
SO THE FIRST ONE WE WANTED TO
RAISE IS SORT OF WHAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE ROLE FOR THE STATE
AS COMPARED TO LOCAL AGENCIES IN
TERMS OF FUNDING SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATION UM AND. AND
SPECIFICALLY HOW MUCH
RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD
GROUNDWATER USERS, PARTICULARLY
THOSE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
SOME OF THE OVERDRAFT AND
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION BEAR
IN FUNDING ACTIVITIES TO
IMPLEMENT THESE PLANS. UM A
SECOND QUESTION IS WHAT FUNDING
SOURCES SHOULD WHEN THE STATE
DOES WANT TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO
SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION, WHAT
SOURCES OF FUNDING SHOULDN'T
RELY ON. AS WE ALL KNOW THE
GENERAL FUND IS FACING SOME
SERIOUS CHALLENGES THIS NOT ONLY
THIS YEAR BUT EXPECTED OVER THE
NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. UM DOES THE
LEGISLATURE WANT TO CONSIDER
ASKING VOTERS TO APPROVE ANOTHER
BOND? OR DOES IT WANT TO RELY ON
GENERAL FUND IN WHICH CASE IT
MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER REDUCTIONS
IN OTHER BUDGET AREAS. NEXT WE
WANTED TO RAISE THE QUESTION OF
WHETHER FEE REVENUES AT THE
WATER BOARD WILL OR IMPOSED BY
THE WATER BOARD WILL BE
SUFFICIENT TO COVER THEIR STATE
OPERATIONS COSTS AND IF NOT WHAT
OTHER SOURCES OF STATE FUNDING
MIGHT BE NEEDED TO HELP COVER
THEIR THEIR OPERATIONS COSTS. UM
AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. HOW ARE
LOCAL AGENCIES DOING IN TERMS OF
FUNDING THEIR OWN IMPLEMENTATION
ACTIVITIES? THEY HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO RAISE FEES. HAVE
THOSE FEES BEEN SUFFICIENT? WHAT
DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF
FEES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED? OR
FEES THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED AN
AMOUNT OF REVENUES RAISED AND
THEN FINALLY HOW CAN THE STATE
ENSURE THAT AGENCIES AND
DISADVANTAGED AREAS ARE WELL
POSITIONED TO ACHIEVE THEIR
SIGMA GOALS? UM SOME G S S IN
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES HAVE
NOT ONLY FINANCIAL CHALLENGES
BUT TECHNICAL CHALLENGES AND
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABILITY
PLANS AND SO TO WHAT EXTENT
SHOULD THE STATE UM, TARGET
STATE FUNDING TO HELP THOSE
PARTICULAR AGENCIES. SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE THANK YOU.
UM THIS ONE? YES. UM SO THANK
YOU. CHIP HAPPENED. CHAIR
BENNETT COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M
PAUL GOSSELIN. I'M DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES OVER THE
SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT
DIVISION. SO I'M GOING TO GIVE A
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF, UH, KIND OF
WHERE WE HAVE COME TO THIS POINT
. UM AND GIVE A LITTLE, UH,
TASTE OF WHAT'S GONNA BE ON THE
PLATE FOR SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION
OF AS WE GET. FULL BORE INTO
IMPLEMENTATION. UM UP UNTIL NOW.
I'VE BEEN SAYING THAT USING
WINSTON CHURCHILL'S QUOTE THAT
WE'RE NEARING THE END OF THE
BEGINNING, AND I THINK NOW THAT
PLANS HAVE BEEN, UH, REVIEWED
AND DETERMINATIONS MADE. WE ARE
DONE WITH THE BEGINNING. NOW
WE'RE IN FULL BORE ON
IMPLEMENTATION. UM SO I THINK
YOU KNOW SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IS
BEING MADE TO DATE, UH, TO BRING
BASINS INTO SUSTAINABILITY, AND
I THINK, HIGHLIGHTED BY THE
RESPONSE FOR THE RESOURCES THAT
HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, UH TO THE
STATE AGENCIES, LOCAL AGENCIES
AS WELL AS THE RESPONSE TO
HITTING ALL THE DEADLINES ARE
REALLY SHOWS THE COMMITMENT.
BOTH OF THE STATE AND LOCAL
LOCAL LEVEL TO MAKE THIS WORK
AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE EASY,
AND I THINK THIS PAST WINTER
REALLY REFLECTED THE HEIGHTENED
NEED TO REALLY MOVE SIGMA
FORWARD WITH, YOU KNOW. IT'S
HARD TO REMEMBER WE WERE STARING
DOWN THE FOURTH YEAR OF THE MOST
SEVERE DROUGHT PERIOD WE'VE EVER
SEEN OR EXPERIENCED AND THEN THE
ATMOSPHERIC RIVERS CANINE AT THE
SAME TIME, AND THIS IS JUST
HIGHLIGHTING WHAT THE GOVERNOR
CAME OUT WITH HIS HEART AND
DRYER STRATEGY. UH REALLY
FORETOLD. WHAT WHAT WE'RE GOING
TO EXPERIENCE AND HAVE BEEN
EXPERIENCED THE LAST FOUR OR
FIVE YEARS WITH JUST THE
ADVANCEMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
UM I SHOULD NOTE EVEN THOUGH
WE'RE LOOKING AT SURFACE, WATER
SUPPLIES AND RESERVOIRS LOOKING,
UM BETTER THAN IN THE PAST.
GROUNDWATER BASINS ARE STILL IN
DROUGHT CONDITION EVEN AFTER
THIS. 2021 AND 2022 WATER YEAR
WE SAW OVER 15 MILLION ACRE FEET
OF LOST STORAGE. WE'RE GONNA
LATER THIS SPRING. WE'RE GOING
TO COME OUT WITH UPDATE FOR THE
PAST WATER YEAR THAT HEAVY, WET
PRECIPITATION SNOW PACK AND
WE'LL SEE WHAT THE CHANGE IN
STORAGE WAS THAT THAT PAST YEAR
AND I SUSPECT WILL STILL HAVE A
LONG WAY TO GO TO BRING TO BRING
PATIENTS. UH BRING BASINS BACK.
UM SO I THINK IT AS MUCH AS
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF GOOD
ADVANCEMENT. THERE'S A
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF WORK
AHEAD. UM AND SO I DON'T WANT TO
REITERATE SORT OF THE STATUS WE
HAD. I DO HAVE A COUPLE SLIDES.
UM PICTURES ARE WORTH 1000 WORDS
. UM SO I THINK BESIDES THAT THE
DEADLINES HAVING YOU KNOW THE
DETERMINATIONS COMPLETED ON THE
REVIEWS WITH 71 BASINS RIGHT
NOW, UM, HAVE I CAN ADVANCE
COOL, ALL RIGHT. AH! SO THIS IS
A SORT OF THE TALE OF THE TAPE
IS TO WHAT? UM THE WORKLOAD AND
RESPONSE WE HAD. I THINK THE
MULTI PLAN BASINS WERE VERY
CHALLENGING, AND WE CAN SPEAK TO
THAT, UM A LITTLE BIT, BUT ALL
THESE PLANS CAME IN FROM
CRITICALLY OVER DRAFTED BASINS
AND NON CRITICALLY OVER DRAFTED
BASINS. UM LARGELY ON TIME, AND
REVIEWS WERE COMPLETED IN BY THE
TWO YEAR STATUTORY DEADLINE, UM.
SO I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT WHAT WENT INTO OUR REVIEW
OF THE INITIAL PLANS AND AGAIN
IT'S THE REVIEW OF THE INITIAL
PLANS AS THEY WERE SUBMITTED, UH
, TWO YEARS PRIOR TO US
REVIEWING IT, AND WE FOCUSED ON
YOU KNOW WHAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR
ONE COMPLETENESS. THERE'S A
NUMBER OF REQUIREMENTS AND
SECTIONS THAT THEY NEEDED TO
SUBMIT. AH AND WE MADE SURE IT
WAS COMPLETE, BUT PRIMARILY WHAT
WE FOCUSED ON. AND THESE GOT
INTO THE DEFICIENCIES WAS HOW
THE SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT
CRITERIA WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE
BASINS IN THE PLANTS, AND THAT
WAS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST CHANGE
FOR WATER MANAGERS THAT IT WAS
MORE THAN JUST ENDING THE
OVERDRAFT, WHICH WAS STILL A
CONSIDERABLE EFFORT. BUT THEY
NEEDED TO LOOK AT, UM HOW THE
ALL THE GROUNDWATER USES AND
USERS IN THE BASIN WAS GOING TO
BE AFFECTED WHEN THEY ENDED
OVERDRAFT TO AVOID UNDESIRABLE
RESULTS FROM THE, UH SIX
INDICATORS. UM, WE'VE BEEN
MESSAGING TO THE BASINS THAT YOU
KNOW THEIR RESPONSIBILITY IS
MORE THAN JUST A STATUTORY
PAPERWORK. THEY ARE STEWARDS.
FOR ALL THE GROUNDWATER USES AND
USERS AND THEIR BASE IN THEIR
BASIN. UM THEY NEED TO ACCOUNT
FOR ALL OF THEM. AND SO WHAT?
WE, UM LOOKED AT. AND WHAT WE
FOUND WAS, UM, UH, A NUMBER OF
COMMON THEMES AND DEFICIENCIES.
AND I THINK THE COMMITTEE REPORT
HAS DID A GOOD DESCRIPTION OF
THAT, UM, BUT REALLY LOWERING
GROUNDWATER LEVELS AND AFFECTING
DRINKING WATER. WELLS WAS A VERY
COMMON DEFICIENCY WE HAD AS WELL
AS SUBSIDENCE AND, UM, LACKING
OF TAKING ACTION TO ADDRESS THE
SCIENCE. WATER QUALITY. UM AND
THEN, FOR THE MULTI PLANT BASINS
. THERE ARE A NUMBER THAT DIDN'T
USE THE SAME DATA IN THE SAME
METHODOLOGY, WHICH WAS REQUIRED
BY THE ACT AND ARE LOOKING AT
THE DEFICIENCIES. ONE IS TO MAKE
SURE THAT THEY'RE ON TRACK WITH
WITH THE PROMISE OF SIGMA ABOUT
AVOIDING UNDESIRABLE RESULTS FOR
ALL GROUNDWATER USES AND USERS,
BUT IT WAS ALSO A FEEDBACK
MECHANISM FOR US. IT REALLY TOLD
US WHERE THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT
WAS REQUIRED AND ALSO POINTED
OUT AREAS THAT WE NEEDED TO
PROVIDE BETTER GUIDANCE AND
ASSISTANCE FOR THOSE COMMON
THEMES. AND I THINK THE DRINKING
WATER. UM DEFICIENCY WAS ONE
THAT, UM, REALLY GOT US FOCUSED
TO COME OUT WITH A GUIDANCE
DOCUMENT ON ADDRESSING DRINKING
WATER. UM JUST ABOUT A YEAR AGO,
AND THAT HAS BEEN REALLY
INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING AGENCIES
AVOID THE MISTAKES OF OTHER
BASINS AND ARE ACTUALLY. YOU
KNOW? GET GET THEIR PLAN ALIGNED
. WITH WHAT? UM WHAT THE ACT AND
REGULATIONS REQUIRE SO AS WE GO
FORWARD ON IMPLEMENTATION. AND
WE DO OVERSIGHT OF BASINS. IT IS
GONNA ALSO BE A FEEDBACK
MECHANISM FOR US AS TO WHAT
ASSISTANCE AND OTHER THINGS WE
NEED TO DO TO HELP BASINS. STAY
ON TRACK AND ACHIEVE, UM,
SUSTAINABILITY. UM. AND NOW YOU
KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED. FUNDING
IS AN ISSUE AND THIS IS JUST
LOOKING AHEAD IS SORT OF THE
CHALLENGES ON ON BASINS. UM, IN
IMPLEMENTING, UM YOU KNOW,
FUNDING HAS BEEN A BENEN ISSUE,
ESPECIALLY FOR SOME BASINS THAT
ARE SMALL AND DON'T HAVE THE
ECONOMIES OF SCALE. OF SCALE TO
IMPLEMENT. UM YOU KNOW THEIR
THEIR PLANS, SO WE'VE BEEN
PROVIDING SOME WORKSHOPS AND
WEBINARS AND GATHERING
INFORMATION. WE'RE GOING TO COME
OUT WITH SOME GUIDANCE, BUT
REALLY, IT'S THEIR FEE
RESPONSIBILITY THAT, UM IS
POSING A LOT OF DIFFICULTY. A
LOT OF AGENCIES HAVE NOT, UM,
HAVE GONE THROUGH A PROP TO 18
BEFORE, SO THIS WAS A NEW
EXPERIENCE FOR THEM. YOU HAVING
CONSTITUENTS IN THE BASIN, WHO
MAY LIKE OR NOT LIKE THE FEES OR
HOW IT'S STRUCTURED, AND THERE'S
A LOT OF CHALLENGES THERE. AND
THIS IS REALLY AT THE HEART. UM
THE BALANCE WE HAVE ON
IMPLEMENTATION ABOUT MAINTAINING
THAT LOCAL DISCRETION BUT
PROVIDING OVERSIGHT, UM AND
GUIDANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE KEEPING TRACK OF WHAT
THEY NEED TO DO FOR COMPLIANCE.
SO WHEN THEY RUN INTO THESE
CHALLENGES, LET'S SAY ON FEES.
THAT'S WHERE WE TRY TO PROVIDE
GUIDANCE, BUT ALSO SOME OF THE
SUPPORT WE HAVE ON LIVELY
THROUGH FACILITATION SERVICES TO
TRY TO HAVE GOOD DIALOGUE
LOCALLY AND HELP THEM RESOLVE
THOSE THOSE ISSUES AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL. UM BUT AGAIN AS AS WE
MOVE FORWARD, UM WE ARE GOING TO
KEEP TRACK OF FEES AT SOME. IT'S
ONE OF THE CRITERIA WE HAVE TO
LOOK AT. WITH AGENCIES DO THEY
HAVE THE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLANTS SO
IN THEIR PLANS, THEY DID
INDICATE WHAT THEY EXPECT THE
COST TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN AS
AND WE'LL BE TRACKING, UM THE
FEE ISSUES AND THEIR ANNUAL
REPORTS WHERE THEY HAVE TO
DISCUSS PROGRESS ON THE
IMPLEMENTATION. UM. I DO WANT TO
TALK, YOU KNOW, BESIDES THE
REGULATORY OVERSIGHT, I DO WANT
TO TALK ABOUT THE ASSISTANCE
PROVIDED, UH, AND IT CONTINUED
TO PROVIDE IT AGAIN.
FACILITATION SERVICES HAS BEEN
REAL INSTRUMENTAL FROM
EVERYTHING ON HOW TO ESTABLISH
GOVERNANCE. UM OR DEVELOPED THE
PLAN AND SOMETIMES THEY'RE USING
IT TO RESOLVE ISSUES WITHIN THE
BASINS AND HOPEFULLY AVOID, UM
LAWSUITS AND OTHER OTHER TROUBLE
AND GET TO A GOOD POINT.
TRANSLATION SERVICES IS ALSO
BEEN, UH, SOMETHING WE'VE REALLY
ADVANCED WRITTEN AND WE'VE
PILOTED AND NOW WE'RE
IMPLEMENTING VERBAL TRANSLATION
SERVICES AVAILABLE TO JESUS. UM
AND THAT'S BEEN REALLY HELPFUL
AND SOME OF THE PILOTS WE'VE
DONE AND WHEN WE DO THAT WE ALSO
WANT MORE THAN THEM. JUST
GETTING A TRANSLATOR AT A
MEETING. WE WANT A PLAN ON HOW
THEY'RE GOING TO DO OUTREACH TO
BRING IN, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS
INTO THAT MAKE IT MAKE IT
MEANINGFUL AND THEN TECHNICAL
SUPPORT SERVICES, WELL,
INSTALLATION AND OTHER, UM MEANS
THAT THAT HELPED FILL DATA GAPS
FOR AGENCIES AS WELL AS THIS
LAST BUDGET, THE AUTHORIZATION
OF FUNDING TO ALLOW US TO DO
WHAT WE'RE CALLING BASIC
CHARACTERIZATION. UM AND THIS IS
GOING TO ALLOW US TO BUILD UPON
THE A M WORK. THAT'S THE
HELICOPTER THAT DOES THE
GEOPHYSICAL MEASUREMENTS AS WELL
AS OTHER DATA. WE HAVE TO
CHARACTERIZE BASINS FOR LOCAL
AGENCIES. THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR
A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE IS IT'S
A MAJOR DATA GAP FOR A LOT OF
AGENCIES. AND SO EVEN THOUGH
FUNDING HAS BEEN, UM RIGHT NOW
SHORT WITHOUT GRANTS AND GENERAL
FUND SHORT, WE CAN TARGET OUR
ASSISTANCE TO HELP FOSTER THE
IMPLEMENTATION AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL, AND THIS IS GOING TO BE
IMPORTANT ONE FROM A CONSISTENCY
STANDPOINT. AGENCIES ARE GONNA
GO DO THIS AND BY US DOING IT,
IT'S DONE IN A CONSISTENT WAY AT
A HIGH STANDARD, UM AND IT'S
GOING TO ALLOW AGENCIES TO KNOW
FOR RECHARGE WHERE THE BEST
PLACES TO PUT WATER THAT'S GOING
TO GET INTO THE BASIN AS WELL AS
WELL. INSTALLATION UM AND AGAIN,
OTHER ASSISTANCE WE HAVE AS
WEBINARS GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS AND
THERE'S MORE TO COME ON ON
GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS. UM SO NOW
THAT WE'RE LEAVING THE PLANNING,
PHASE AND IMPLEMENTATION, UM,
YOU KNOW WE'RE MAKING A
TRANSITION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT
TO WHAT WE'RE CALLING BASIN
STEWARDSHIP. UM, IT'S GOING TO
BE, UM YOU KNOW, ONGOING
RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSURE THAT
BASINS ARE ON TRACK FOR
SUSTAINABILITY AND A COMING INTO
COMPLIANCE. UM SO OUR BASIN
STEWARDSHIP IS GONNA MAINTAIN
OUR ROLE TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE
AND REGULATORY OVERSIGHT. UM SO
WE EXPECT TO ENGAGE A LOT MORE
WITH LOCAL AGENCIES ON A ROUTINE
BASIS. AND SO IF WE DO FIND
ISSUES, LET'S SAY A MONITORING
WELL, LOCATION IS GETS SWAPPED
OUT, AND IT'S NOT CONSISTENT.
AND IN THE THING, IT MIGHT BE
SOMETHING WE MIGHT MAKE A PHONE
CALL AND WORK IT OUT OR ISSUES
MAY THROUGH OUR REVIEW OF
PERIODIC EVALUATIONS OF FIVE
YEAR EVALUATIONS. THEY MAY BE,
UH, ISSUES THAT ARE RAISED THAT
ARE REAL CONCERNING AND WE'RE
GOING TO NEED TO ELEVATE IT
SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE DONE IN IN
PLAN REVIEW THAT COULD LEAD TO A
BASIN BEING DEEMED INCOMPLETE OR
INADEQUATE AT ANY TIME, SO WE DO
HAVE THIS RANGE OF ENGAGEMENT.
AND OUR GOAL IS TO ONE. MAKE
SURE THAT, UM WE ARE CLEAR AND
DIRECT WITH LOCAL AGENCIES AS TO
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO STAY IN
COMPLIANCE AND PROVIDE
ASSISTANCE. BUT AGAIN, IT'S ALSO
A FEEDBACK TO US IF WE'RE
STARTING TO SEE COMMON PROBLEMS
OUT THERE THAT WE NEED TO BE
MINDFUL TO PUT SOME GUIDANCE
DOCUMENTS, UM OUT. UM I DO WANT
TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
ANNUAL REPORTS. WE ARE GOING TO
START DOING THE REVIEWS OF THEM.
THEY'VE BEEN COMING IN JUST
WORKLOAD. PRIORITIES HAVE BEEN
YOU KNOW, REVIEWING THEM?
THEY'RE POSTED, BUT NOW WE'RE
GOING TO DO A REVIEW AND
FEEDBACK TO AGENCIES ON
CONSISTENCY AND AGAIN. HAVING
CHANGE IN STORAGE INFORMATION,
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION
INFORMATION, ANNUAL REPORTS AND
THEIR PROGRESS IS GOING TO BE,
UH, GOOD, IMPORTANT FOR US TO,
YOU KNOW, SURVEY HOW
IMPLEMENTATION IS GOING TO FEED
IN WHERE WE NEED TO TARGET OUR
EFFORTS. UM SO, BUT WE'RE
PROBABLY NOT GONNA YOU KNOW,
USING YOUR REPORTS AS THE MEANS
OF, UM YOU KNOW? REGULATORY
RESPONSE. BUT UNLESS THERE'S
SOMETHING REALLY HUGELY
TROUBLING, BUT THE PERIODIC
EVALUATION IS GOING TO BE THAT
MAJOR COMPLIANCE CHECK WE HAVE
ISSUED LAST OCTOBER, A GUIDANCE
DOCUMENT FOR AGENCIES ON WHAT WE
EXPECT IN THE ANNUAL REPORT AND
PERIODIC EVALUATION 12. MAKE
THEIR WORK CONSISTENT AND AT
LEAST EFFICIENT AND PUT THEM AND
GET THAT IN A FORMAT THAT THAT
WE CAN UTILIZE AND EVALUATE. UM
AND AGAIN AS WE GO THROUGH THIS,
THIS REVIEW BASINS COULD BE
DEEMED INCOMPLETE OR INADEQUATE.
UM DEPENDING UPON THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, SO I THINK, UM,
THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OF
IMPLEMENTATION, AYE. ARE GOING
TO BE RATHER DIFFICULT. TO SOME
EXTENT, THIS HAS BEEN THE EASY
PART SO FAR, NOT FOR LOCAL
AGENCIES, ITS CONSIDERABLE
AMOUNT OF WORK. BUT NOW WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT REALLY HITTING THE
GROUND ON IMPLEMENTATION
AGENCIES HAVE BEEN AT IT FOR YOU
KNOW 2 TO 4 YEARS RIGHT NOW, BUT
A LOT OF THOSE EFFORTS ARE
STARTING TO REALLY COME INTO, UM
TO PLACE PARTICULARLY ON ON LAND
USE, AND WE'RE STARTING TO SEE,
UM, LOSS OF PRODUCTION, SO
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION'S
MULTI BENEFIT LAND REPURPOSING
PROGRAM HAS BEEN ENORMOUSLY
HELPFUL FOR THOSE BASINS, AS
WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT'S LAND
FLEX PROGRAM, WHICH WE PILOTED.
PROVIDED SOME TRANSITION. AND
FOR THOSE, UM, ACREAGE IS THAT
WE'RE GOING TO BE SHORT OF WATER
AND POTENTIALLY GO OUT. AND I
THINK THE TRANSITION TO UM
FUTURE LAND USE IS GOING TO BE
CRITICAL FOR A LOT OF THESE
COMMUNITIES, AND CDF HAS ALSO
BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND
SUPPORTIVE. UM SO AS AGENCIES
ARE STARTING TO IMPLEMENT THEIR
PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS.
UH ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY STARTED
GETTING INTO SETTING ALLOCATIONS
, WHICH A NUMBER OF ON ALMOST UP
TO 20 HALF SOME ALLOCATIONS. UM,
UH, IN PLACE. UM TO SOME EXTENT,
IT'S GOING TO GET MORE
CHALLENGING, BUT YOU KNOW REAL
QUICK. TWO COMPONENTS ON PROJECT
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS RECHARGE, UH,
LOT OF EFFORT WORK WITH US IN
THE STATE BOARD, SEE DFW LAST
YEAR ON FLOOD DIVERSIONS AS WELL
AS THE STREAMLINE 180 DAY
PERMITS ARE STARTING TO RAMP UP
IN AGENCIES ARE REALLY LOOKING
FIRST IT SUPPLY AUGMENTATION,
WHICH MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, BUT
BASINS ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO
RECHARGE THE WAY OUT OF THE
OVERDRAFT. SO THERE IS GOING TO
NEED TO BE IN MANY BASINS
ALLOCATIONS. IT'S STILL IN EARLY
STAGES, AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF
THEM. THEY MAY LEAD TO WATER
MARKETS AND, AS WAS MENTIONED
THE CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION.
DID PREPARE A WHITE PAPER ON,
UH, IMPLICATIONS OF WATER
TRADING AND AGAIN. AND WE'VE
SEEN THIS IN UNREGULATED MARKET
CAN RUN INTO A LOT A LOT OF
PROBLEMS, AND I THINK THAT WAS
THE HIGHLIGHT OF THE CALIFORNIA
WATER COMMISSION. SO WE ARE IN
THE PROCESS NOW OF TAKING THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DEVELOPING
AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ON NEXT
STEPS, UM, TO ENSURE THAT AND
LARGELY OUR OVERSIGHT, A LOT OF
IT WE CAN BUILD INTO OUR
EXISTING PROGRAM. BUT THAT'S
GOING TO BE SOMETHING WE'RE
GOING TO TAKE A VERY, VERY CLOSE
LOOK AT UM AND AGAIN, WE'RE
GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK. UM
WITH GS ASAN, THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION AND SOMETHING
WE'VE NOTED IN SOME BASINS,
PARTICULARLY THE CURRENT ONES
THAT ARE INCOMPLETE. THEY DIDN'T
HAVE A HUGE REPOSITORY OF
PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
THAT APPEARED LIKE THEY WERE
GOING TO END OVERDRAFT, WHICH IS
A MAJOR ISSUE. UM YOU KNOW, BUT
AS MUCH AS THE EFFORTS BEEN
REALLY SUCCESSFUL, SO FAR,
THERE'S A LOT MORE TO DO SO THE
PLANS EVEN THE ONES WE HAVE
APPROVED RIGHT NOW ARE NOT GOING
TO LOOK REMOTELY THE SAME IN
2040 OR 2042, AND THAT HAS A LOT
TO DO WITH SOME OF THE WORK THAT
WE HAVE YET TO PUT ON THE TABLE.
ONE IS DEPLETION OF
INTERCONNECTED SURFACE WATERS,
WHICH IS ONE OF THE SIX
INDICATORS LARGELY. THAT'S A NEW
AREA FOR A LOT OF WATER
MANAGERS. AND THERE'S NOT A THE
SHELF METHODOLOGY FOR THAT, SO
WE'RE DEVELOPING GUIDANCE THIS
YEAR. THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE SOME
CHANGES AND A LOT OF BASINS TO
ADDRESS THAT SUBSIDENCE. UM THIS
HAS BEEN A COMMON, UM,
DEFICIENCY IN MANY BASINS, NOT
JUST IN THE LOWEST SAN JOAQUIN.
WE'VE SEEN IT UP IN SECTOR
AUMENTO VALLEY, WHICH WAS KIND
OF ALARMING BECAUSE IT WAS AN
AREA THAT WE NEVER THOUGHT WE'D
SEE IT AND WE'RE GOING TO BE
DEVELOPING THE BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICE LATER THIS YEAR. AH TO,
UM EXPLAIN HOW AGENCIES NEED TO
NEED TO ADDRESS SUBSIDENCE, AND
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S
PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST, UM
IMPORTANT THINGS WE NEED TO TAKE
ON AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. UM
AND THEN CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSES
. UM YOU KNOW, AS WATER SUPPLY
AVAILABILITY DECLINES BECAUSE OF
CLIMATE CHANGE. WE'RE GOING TO
BE ADVANCING INFORMATION OUT TO
AGENCIES FOR THEM TO ADJUST
THEIR WATER BUDGETS AND PROJECT
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS IF THEY'RE
ASSUMING A GREATER AH, SUPPLY
FROM SURFACE WATER, WHICH IS
PROBABLY GONNA BE OFFSET FOR
GROUNDWATER AS WELL AS WATERSHED
STUDIES. ALL OF THESE ARE GOING
TO, UM RESULT IN CHANGE IN BASIN
PLANS AS WELL AS INTER BASE AND
INTERACTION, AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT THE STATUE CALLED
FOR THAT ONE BASINS PLAN CAN'T
IMPEDE AN ADJOINING BASIN FROM
ACHIEVING THEIR GOALS NOW THAT
PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. THE
MINIMUM THRESHOLDS HAVE SAID
WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY IN 2025
START THAT PROCESS, WHICH IS
PROBABLY GOING TO CAUSE SOME
BASINS TO HAVE TO READJUST. AH
THERE MINIMUM THRESHOLDS AND
PLAN TO AVOID AN ADJOINING BASIN
FROM NOT ACHIEVING THEIR GOALS.
UM SO THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT
MORE AHEAD THAT WAS GOING TO
SURPRISE US THAT WE'RE GOING TO
NEED TO ADDRESS BUT, UM IN THE
END. I'M VERY CONFIDENT WE'RE
GOING TO ACHIEVE THE PROMISE OF
SIGMA AND HAVE BASINS
SUSTAINABLE. UM BY 2040 2042, SO
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
MR. GOSSELIN, MR. KNOCK POWER
FOR WERE YOU PLENTY OUR NEXT.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING CHAIRS
AND MEMBERS. I'M JAMES KNOCK
BAUER. I'M THE STATE WATER BOARD
DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF THE
RECENT RESEARCH, PLANNING AND
PERFORMANCE, AND I'M JOINED
TODAY BY MY COLLEAGUE TINA CANON
LEAHY FROM OUR OFFICE OF CHIEF
COUNSEL. UM, WHO WILL KICK
THINGS OFF? YES SO, UM, GOOD
MORNING CHAIR. PAPIN CHAIR BAN
IT. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
STAFF. I'M GOING TO START BY
SAYING IT'S REALLY AN HONOR TO
BE HERE TODAY, 10. YEARS AGO, I
WAS THE WATER POLICY CONSULTANT
FOR ASSEMBLY, WATER, PARKS AND
WILDLIFE AND I WAS WORKING WITH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S DICKINSON AND
HIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR LESS
SPAWN ON A B 1739 1 OF THE BILLS
THAT WOULD BECOME STIGMA. AND OF
COURSE WE WERE WORKING WITH
SENATOR PAVLE STAFF AND DENIS
O'CONNOR. SO TO BE HERE TODAY,
10 YEARS IN AND TO SEE WHAT'S
BEEN HAPPENING. IT REALLY TRULY
IS A PLEASURE TO BE HERE. UM
ABOUT THE STATE WATER BOARD'S
ROLE SIGMA YOU KNOW, IT'S SUCH
AN UNUSUAL LAW AND THAT IT HAS A
ROLE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES IN A ROLE FOR THE
STATE WATER BOARD. AND YOU KNOW,
THE STATE WATER BOARD'S ROLE IS
WHEN THE LOCAL GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY IS NOT
MANAGING ITS GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABLY ONCE THAT
DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE IS
FOR THE STATE WATER BOARD TO
COME IN TEMPORARILY BECAUSE WE
RECOGNIZE THAT SIGMA IS A
LOCALLY DRIVEN LAW. AND SO OUR
ROLE IS A TEMPORARY ONE UNTIL
THE BASIN CAN BE HANDED BACK TO
THE LOCALS FOR SUSTAINABLE
MANAGEMENT. AND THAT HAS ALWAYS
BEEN THE GOAL OF THE SUSTAINABLE
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT. JUST
A MOMENT. SO THE BOARD'S ROLE.
OF COURSE. IT BEGINS WITH THE
TRIGGERING EVENT AND WE'VE
MENTIONED WHAT THE TRIGGERING
EVENTS WERE. THERE CAN BE A
TRIGGERING EVENT OF IF AN AGENCY
ISN'T CREATED IF A GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY WASN'T
CREATED THE AGENCIES, YOU KNOW
99% COMPLIANCE 100% COMPLIANCE
ON THE CREATION OF AGENCIES SO
THAT TRIGGER HAD NEVER HAPPENED.
SO NOW WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE
IF THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES REFERS A BASIN OVER TO
THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD. THEN IT'S FOR THE
STATE WATER BOARD TO EXERCISE
ITS DISCRETION ON WHETHER IT
WOULD TAKE THAT BASIN INTO
PROBATION AND THAT SOME
STAKEHOLDERS HAVE SAID THEY
DON'T LIKE THE WORD PROBATION.
BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S PROBATION IS
THE WORD IN THE STATUTE, SO THE
STATE WATER BOARDS INTERVENTION
ROLE IS DISCRETIONARY AND IT
RELIES ON IF ONE OF THESE
TRIGGERING EVENTS OCCURS, AND
THAT'S WHEN WE COME IN SO
PROCEEDING TO THAT FIRST PHASE,
WHICH WOULD BE FOR THE STATE
WATER BOARD TO DETERMINE IN A
PUBLIC PROCESS. UM WHETHER OR
NOT PROBATION IS WARRANTED FOR
THE BASIN AND THE STATE WATER
BOARD IDENTIFIES WHAT THOSE
DEFICIENCIES ARE, AND HAS
SUGGESTIONS FOR CORRECTING THOSE
DEFICIENCIES IN THAT PROCESS,
WHICH INVOLVES A PUBLIC HEARING.
I WANT TO MAKE A NOTE THAT YOU
KNOW BY THE TIME OF THE PUBLIC
HEARING, THE STATE WATER BOARD
HAS ALREADY BEEN WORKING WITH
THE BASINS. AND THE BASINS ARE
ALREADY WORKING HARD TO TRY TO
CORRECT DEFICIENCIES THAT HAVE
BEEN IDENTIFIED, SO THERE'S A
LOT OF WORK THAT IS OCCURRING
BEFORE A HEARING EVER HAPPENS.
AND, OF COURSE, THERE ISN'T A
DETERMINATION IN ADVANCE OF WHAT
IS GOING TO HAPPEN AT THE
HEARING. THAT'S FOR THE MEMBERS
TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THAT
PROBATION WOULD BE WARRANTED. SO
THE CONSEQUENCES. OF PROBATION.
ARE THAT THAT FIRST STEP SO THE
STATE INTERVENTION IS A TWO STEP
PROCESS, AND THE FIRST STEP
WOULD BE FOR THE STATE WATER
BOARD TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT
PROBATION IS WARRANTED THE
CONSEQUENCE OF BRINGING A BASIN
INTO PROBATION WOULD BE THAT,
UH, PUMPERS PUMPERS AND THE
BASIN SO NOT THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY, BUT THE
PUMPERS AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT
MAKES SIGMA KIND OF AN UNUSUAL
LAW. THE PUMPERS IN THE BASE AND
WOULD NEED TO REPORT THEIR
PUMPING AND THEN THEY NEED TO
PAY FEES. SO THAT'S THAT FIRST
STEP, AND THAT WOULD BE THE
CONSEQUENCE OF PROBATION AND
THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE
STATUTE, FOR EXAMPLE, GENERALLY
DOMESTIC USE OF TWO ACRE FEET OR
LESS THAN YOU KNOW, AND WATER.
WE ALWAYS USE THE ACRE FOOT,
WHICH IS LIKE A FOOTBALL FIELD
ABOUT A KNEE DEEP. UH TWO ACRE
FEET OR LESS OF DOMESTIC USE IS
GENERALLY EXEMPTED, ALTHOUGH IF
YOU HAD A BASIN WHERE THAT
PUMPING WAS REALLY THE PROBLEM,
YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTING TO THE
LACK OF SUSTAINABILITY IN THE
BASIN. IT MIGHT, IT COULD BE
REQUIRED, BUT GENERALLY IT CAN
BE ASSUMED, UM, THAT IT WOULD
NOT BE REQUIRED. I THINK IT'S
ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE YOU KNOW
WHEN, WHEN GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES APPROVED
THEIR PLANS, THEY IMMEDIATELY
BEGIN IMPLEMENTING SO THAT'S
EVEN BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES FINISHES IT
REVIEW ITS REVIEW. AND DURING IF
A BASIN WERE TO BE BROUGHT INTO
PROBATION. THEY CONTINUE
IMPLEMENTING, AND THEY CONTINUE
TO EXERCISE ALL OF THEIR
AUTHORITIES EVEN IN PROBATION,
SO I THINK THAT'S A VERY
IMPORTANT POINT, BECAUSE OF
COURSE, THE GOAL IS FOR THEM TO
FIX THOSE DEFICIENCIES AND THEN
TO BE ABLE TO RETURN TO THAT
LOCAL MANAGEMENT. AND WITH THAT,
I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO
JAMES. I GUESS IF YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS, YOU WOULD YOU'LL ASK
AFTERWARDS OR OKAY. THANK YOU.
GREAT. THANK YOU. YEAH AS AS MY
COLLEAGUE MENTIONED, THIS IS A
VERY NEW PROCESS, AND WE'RE
WORKING HARD TO BE SURE, IT'S
CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD BY OUR BOARD
MEMBERS BY SOUS BY MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC BY ALL INTERESTED
PARTIES. AND WE'RE DOING THAT IN
MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. SO A MAIN
FOCUS OF OURS HAS BEEN DRAFTING
REPORTS FOR OUR BOARD FOR THE
PUBLIC ABOUT THE BASINS THAT MAY
BE COMING UP FOR PROBATIONARY
HEARINGS AND IN THOSE REPORTS
WERE GOING INTO DETAIL ABOUT
POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS THE
STAFF MAY BE MAKING TO THE
BOARD, I SAY POSSIBLE BECAUSE AT
THIS POINT, THESE REPORTS ARE
WE'VE WE'VE ISSUED ONE AS A
DRAFT. WE HELD A WORKSHOP TO
DISCUSS IT. WE SOLICITED
COMMENTS ON IT, AND WE ARE NOW
IN THE PROCESS OF REVISING THAT,
AND THAT IS ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS
THAT WOULD MOVE, UM, WOULD
ASSIST OUR BOARD MEMBERS AT A
PROBATIONARY HEARING IN MAKING
THEIR DETERMINATIONS. IN
ADDITION, WE'VE BEEN HOLD. WE
HOLD CONSULTATIONS WITH
CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN
TRIBES ON THEIR REQUEST. AND
OTHER DISCUSSIONS AS WELL. WE'VE
HAD A ROBUST SERIES OF MEETINGS
WITH GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES, NON GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER PARTIES.
AND THROUGHOUT THIS WE ARE
INTENTIONALLY CREATING A
SUCCESSFUL A PROCESS AS POSSIBLE
. WE'RE CREATING OPPORTUNITIES
FOR INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND
FROM AFFECTED COMMUNITIES. AND
WE ARE CONDUCTING TARGETED
OUTREACH TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
WE PROACTIVELY OFFER SPANISH
LANGUAGE MATERIALS AND
INTERPRETATION AT ALL OF OUR
PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AND AT ANY
HEARINGS. UM AND SO HEARING THIS
IS A NEW THING FOR THE BOARD.
THE BOARD HAS NOT HELD HEARINGS
FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF MAKING
A BASIN PROBATIONARY UNDER SIGMA
BEFORE. AT AT ONE OF THESE
HEARINGS, THOUGH, WE'RE
EXPECTING THAT THE BOARD WILL BE
HEARING FROM BOARD STAFF WHO
HAVE COMPLETED THESE ANALYSES
FROM GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCIES FOR THE BASIN FROM
INTERESTED PARTIES AND MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC. UM I WILL NOTE UM
, DWR WE'RE EXPECTING WILL BE
THERE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A
FORMAL ROLE. IN THESE HEARINGS,
AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY
CLOSELY WITH DWR THROUGH ALL
STAGES OF SIGMA, UM,
IMPLEMENTATION. SO AT THE END OF
THESE HEARINGS, THE BOARD MAY
DECIDE TO PLACE A BASIN AND
PROBATION MAY LAY OUT CRITERIA
FOR PROBATION TO END. AND MAY
DETERMINE HOW SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS OF PROBATION PLAY
OUT. SO, FOR EXAMPLE,
REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO METERING
CERTAIN WELLS OR REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO REPORTING OF
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION. AND THE
BOARD'S ROLE HERE IS INTENDED TO
BE TEMPORARY, AND SO LET ME
SPEAK FOR A MOMENT ABOUT HOW A
BASIN GETS OUT OF PROVISIONS.
THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE THAT A
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCY PROPOSES CHANGES TO THEIR
EFFORTS AT BASIN MANAGEMENT TO
ADDRESS THE DEFICIENCIES AND
THEY REVISE AND SUBMIT THEIR
PLANS. UM BOARD STAFF WOULD THEN
REVIEW THESE REVISED PLANS AND
THE BOARD WOULD HOLD A PUBLIC
HEARING COULD HOLD A PUBLIC
HEARING TO, UH TO EVALUATE
CONDITIONS AND EFFORTS IN THE
BASIN. SO THIS IS A HUGE AMOUNT
OF WORK, AS EVERYONE HAS
MENTIONED PREDOMINANTLY AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL, WHICH IS WHERE ALL
OF THIS IS BEING, UH, BEING LED
FROM UM, THE BOARD TEAM, AS L O
MENTIONED IS 40 POSITIONS.
CURRENTLY THOSE ARE NOT ALL
FILLED AT THE MOMENT. BUT WE
HAVE ENGINEERING GEOLOGISTS,
WATER RESOURCE CONTROL ENGINEERS
, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS,
ATTORNEYS SPECIALISTS IN PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNICATION
AND ANALYSTS. WE'VE ALSO ENTERED
INTO CONTRACTS FOR ASSESSMENT
ASSISTANCE WITH ENGAGEMENT DATA
COLLECTION FACILITATION. AND
ENGINEERING AND TO DATE, ALL OF
THIS HAS BEEN FUNDED THROUGH THE
GENERAL FUND. WORK HAS INCLUDED
DEVELOPING TOOLS TO FACILITATE
COMPLIANCE BY ESA'S SUPPORT FOR
COURTS IN SOME CASES IF THEY
HAVE GRAPPLED WITH GROUNDWATER,
TECHNICAL GROUNDWATER ISSUES AND
HOSTING LOTS OF SIGMA
DISCUSSIONS WITH PSAS AND OTHER
PARTIES, UM AS BASINS MAY MOVE
INTO POSSIBLE BOARD
JURISDICTION. WE SHIFT GEARS AND
DEVELOP THESE STAFF REPORTS WE
MEET REGULARLY WITH THE G S A
SIN THOSE BASINS AND WE DRAFT.
UH POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
THE BOARD TO CONSIDER. IF A
BASIN WAS ON PROBATION, THE TEAM
WOULD THEN SHIFT AGAIN INTO A
DIFFERENT MODE OF WORKING TO
REDUCE DATA GAPS AND MAKING
RECOMMENDATIONS TO JI ESAS OR
MAKE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE BOARD. ANDREESSEN REQUESTS
TO FOR PROBATION TO END OR
MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
BOARD ABOUT WHETHER IT WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE FOR THE BOARD TO
MOVE THE BASIN INTO THE SECOND
STEP. OF STATE INTERVENTION AND
CONSIDER IMPOSING AN INTERIM
PLAN. UM AND THEN, FINALLY IN
THAT LAST STAGE IF A BASIN
REACHED IT, WHILE BASING WAS
SUBJECT TO AN INTERIM PLAN,
BOARD STAFF WOULD BE WORKING TO
MANAGE GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION,
AND THEN WE'LL BE MAKING
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD
REGARDING GSA'S REQUESTS FOR THE
END OF THE IMPOSITION OF THAT
INTERIM PLAN. EACH BASIN IS
DIFFERENT. AND SO THE WORK WILL
BE DIFFERENT. THE WORK IS VERY
CASE SPECIFIC, VERY BASIC
SPECIFIC. THIS WILL REFLECT THE
NUMBER OF PUMPERS IN EACH BASIN.
THE DEGREE OF OVERDRAFT SPECIFIC
UNDESIRABLE RESULTS IN EACH
BASIN. UM HOW LONG ISSUES ARE
GOING ON? WHAT WHAT LEVEL THE
BOARD'S INVOLVEMENT IS AND MANY
OTHER FACTORS. AND WE'RE VERY
AWARE THAT THE BOARD, PLACING A
BASIN ON PROBATION WOULD HAVE
IMPACTS ON MANY PEOPLE IN THE
BASIN. ONE IMPACT IS THAT
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION STARTING
90 DAYS AFTER PROBATIONARY
HEARING WOULD BE SUBJECT TO BE
REPORTED TO THE BOARD, ALTHOUGH
EXCEPTIONS TO THIS ARE POSSIBLE.
AND THERE ARE STATE BOARDS.
SIGMA FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION
REPORTING. EXTRACTION REPORTING
IS BASED ON THE WATER YEAR,
WHICH RUNS OCTOBER 1ST THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 30TH. AND FEES RELATED
TO PUMPING IN THE PRIOR YEAR ARE
DUE ANNUALLY ON FEBRUARY 1ST
SORRY REPORTS ARE DUE ANNUALLY
ON FEBRUARY 1ST FEES WILL BE
INVOICED ABOUT A MONTH AFTER
THAT, AND THE FEES ARE DUE AFTER
THE INVOICE AND AGAIN, UM ALL
THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT FEES AND
REPORTING OR ANYTHING IN THE
BOARD'S PURVIEW HERE. THIS IS
ONLY FOR BASINS THAT THE BOARD
HAS DETERMINED ARE ON PROBATION.
OR ARE SUBJECT TO AN INTERIM
PLAN. IF A PARTY WAS EXCLUDED
FROM HAVING TO REPORT THEIR
EXTRACTION, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE
TO PAY THESE REPORTING FEES. FOR
EXAMPLE, IN MANY BASINS WHERE
IT'S POSSIBLE THE BOARD MAY
EXEMPT HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE USING
SMALL AMOUNTS OF WATER FROM ANY
KIND OF REPORTING THEY WOULD NOT
BE PAYING ANY KIND OF SIGMA
GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION REPORTING
FEES TO THE BOARD. THERE'S ALSO
WAIVERS OF THE FEES POSSIBLE.
OUR FEE REGULATION. UM ALLOWS
PEOPLE WHO DO REPORT THEIR
EXTRACTION TO BE TO NOT HAVE TO
PAY THE FEE, UM, IN THE CASE OF
THEM BEING A LOW INCOME
RESIDENTS BEING A PUBLIC WATER
SYSTEM OR STATE, SMALL WATER
SYSTEMS SERVING DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITY OR IN THE CASE OF A
PUBLIC SCHOOL. AND THE FEES WE
HAVE TODAY WERE BASED ON 2017
ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING WHAT THE
BOARD'S WORK WOULD BE UNDER
CHAPTER 11 UNDER PROBATION OR
UNDER INNER IMPLANTS. THE FEES
AS CURRENTLY STRUCTURED FOR
BASIN SUBJECT TO PROBATION. I
HAVE TWO MAIN PARTS. ONE IS A
PER WELL CHARGED. THAT'S $300
PER WELL AND A $40 PER ACRE
FOOT. UH FEE IS ALSO, UM,
PROVISION FOR LATE FEES IF
PEOPLE ARE LATE IN PAYING. THE
TIMING HERE GETS A LITTLE TRICKY
AS I MENTIONED EXTRACTORS. IT'S
PUMPING. STARTING 90 DAYS AFTER
A PROBATIONARY DETERMINATION
BECOMES SUBJECT TO REPORTING AND
SUBJECT FEES. BUT I ALSO
MENTIONED THIS IS ON THE WATER
YEAR BASIS. SO IF A BASIN WERE
PUT INTO PROBATION RELATIVELY
SOON, THEY MIGHT ONLY BE A FEW
MONTHS BETWEEN WHEN THE END OF
THAT 90 DAY SORT OF WINDOW ENDS
AND ALSO WHEN THE WATER YEAR
TURNS OVER. AND SO WE WOULD BE
EXPECTING IF A BASIN WERE PUT
INTO PROBATION. RELATIVELY SOON
THAT THE REVENUES THE FIQH
SPECIAL FUND FEE REVENUE THE
BOARD WOULD BE GETTING WOULD BE
RELATIVELY LOW IN THAT FIRST
YEAR. IF A BASIN STAYED IN
PROBATION FOR A FULL WATER YEAR,
THOUGH THE FEW REVENUES WOULD BE
HIGHER. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE
TULARE LAKE SUB BASIN WERE PUT
INTO PROBATION FOR FULL YEAR
PAYMENTS MIGHT BE AROUND $11
MILLION UNDER VARIOUS
ASSUMPTIONS, AND THERE ARE A LOT
OF DIFFERENT UNCERTAINTIES HERE
AROUND WHAT THE FEES WILL BE,
AND I'LL TOUCH ON THAT MORE IN A
SECOND. BUT I MEAN POINT HERE IS
THAT SIGMA ALLOWS THE BOARD TO
CHANGE THIS FEE STRUCTURE. AND
IN FACT, THE BOARD HAS ACTUALLY
ASKED STAFF TO REEVALUATE THE
FEE STRUCTURE AND REPORT BACK TO
THE BOARD. THAT EVALUATION IS
UNDERWAY AND WE MAY MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD AT A
BOARD MEETING THAT A DIFFERENT
FEE STRUCTURE MIGHT BE WARRANTED
. ANY CHANGES TO THE FEE
STRUCTURE WOULD HAPPEN AT A
BOARD MEETING, UM FOLLOWING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMENTS AND
DISCUSSION. SO YEAH, LET ME
SPEAK JUST BRIEFLY ABOUT THE
FEES AND THE WHOLE SYSTEM HERE
OF FUNDING FUNDING THIS KIND OF
WORK. IT'S A VERY CHALLENGING
SYSTEM TO USE FEES FOR FROM A
BUDGETING PERSPECTIVE, THE FEE
REVENUE THE BOARD CAN EXPECT IS
PRETTY VOLATILE. UM IT WILL
DEPEND ON FOR EXAMPLE, HOW MANY
BASINS ARE IN PROBATION. HOW
LONG THOSE BASINS ARE IN
PROBATION. HOW MANY EXTRACTORS
ARE IN THAT BASIN? HOW MUCH
THEY'RE EXTRACTING, SO THIS WILL
DEPEND ON MANY, MANY FACTORS,
INCLUDING BOARD DECISIONS, BUT
ALSO TO EFFORTS WHETHER MANY,
MANY OTHER CONDITIONS AND
FACTORS AND THIS DOES MAKE IT
CHALLENGING TO ASSESS WHAT LEVEL
OF FEES MIGHT MAKE THE MOST
SENSE. ALSO THE BOARD CAN ASSESS
ALL OF ITS FEES ANNUALLY, AND SO
IT MAY BE PRUDENT TO LOWER THESE
FEES. UM IN THE FUTURE,
DEPENDING ON HOW MANY BASINS
THERE ARE, UM, SUBJECT TO THESE
FEES. SO SO FAR I'VE SPOKEN
ABOUT PROCESS AND STRUCTURE.
I'LL JUST CLOSE WITH OUR
SCHEDULE. LOOKING AHEAD. THE TWO
LARRY LAKE SUB BASIN IS ACTUALLY
SCHEDULED FOR A BOARD HEARING
FOR THE CONSIDERATION, UM, OF
PUTTING THAT BASIN INTO
PROBATIONARY STATUS ON APRIL
16TH 2 LI COMES BEFORE THE BOARD
MAY COME BEFORE THE BOARD IN
SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR. KOREA
COULD COME BEFORE THE BOARD IN
NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR. AND WE'RE
LOOKING AT JANUARY 2025 FOR A
POSSIBLE HEARING FOR THE CURRENT
COUNTY SUB BASIN. DELTA MENDOTA
MAY COME BEFORE THE BOARD IN THE
FIRST QUARTER OF 2025 AND
CHOWCHILLA, MAYBE IN THE SECOND
QUARTER OF 2025. THAT ONE HAS A
BIT OF AN ASTERISK ON A, UM,
WE'RE SAYING THAT ONE IS SORT
OF. ASKED IF NEEDED PENDING ARE
AH STATE BOARD DETERMINATION OF
AN UPDATED PLAN THAT GS THOSE
GSS SUBMITTED IN MAY OF 2023. SO
ALL OF THAT SCHEDULE, UM IS
PROPOSED AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
BUT THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE. THE
GENERAL TIMEFRAME FOR THE
HEARINGS. WE MAY BE HAVING AND
WITH THAT, I WILL CONCLUDE.
EXCELLENT THANK YOU TO EACH OF
THE WITNESSES REALLY APPRECIATE
IT. I'M GOING TO TURN TO MY
COLLEAGUES TO SEE IF THEY HAVE
QUESTIONS. I WOULD VENTURE TO
GUESS. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BENNETT'S GOT SOME QUESTIONS. I
CERTAINLY DO IF YOU'RE GREAT,
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. REALLY APPRECIATE
FIRST THING. I'D JUST LIKE TO
START OFF BY SAYING THIS IS
REALLY AN IMPORTANT TOPIC FOR
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I MEAN,
IF WE? WE WERE SLOW GETTING
AFTER OUR GROUNDWATER BASINS,
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS,
ONE OF THE LAST IN THE IN THE
COUNTRY TO DO THIS, AND WE'RE
SEEING NOW THE TREMENDOUS
IMPACTS ON THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IF WE LOSE THE
RECHARGE CAPABILITY BECAUSE OF
SUBSIDENCE. I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE
WASTING YOUR FUTURE FOR
GENERATIONS AND GENERATIONS TO
COME. SO I CAN'T EMPHASIZE
ENOUGH AND I KNOW I'M TALKING TO
THE CHOIR HERE. WHEN I SAY HOW
IMPORTANT IT IS, BUT BECAUSE
IT'S THIS IMPORTANT, I WANT TO
START BY SAYING I REALLY
APPRECIATE WHAT DWR HAS DONE IN
TERMS OF TRYING TO PULL TOGETHER
THIS CHALLENGING TASK OF
IMPLEMENTING THE LAW WRITTEN 10
YEARS AGO IN VERY POLITICALLY
CHARGED ATMOSPHERE, AND I DON'T
THINK ANYBODY WOULD SAY HEY,
EVERYTHING WAS EVERYTHING WAS
THOUGHT THROUGH. EVERYBODY WAS
ABLE TO END TOUS IP EIGHT. ALL
OF THE CHALLENGES AND SO IT'S
OUR JOB. IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US
FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR SO TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE DO WHATEVER
TWEAKS NEED TO BE DONE TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE CAN HANDLE THIS
ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT CHALLENGE
PROPERLY. SO JUST OVERALL, I SEE
THE SPIRIT OF DWR AND STATE
WATER BOARD IN TERMS OF TRYING
TO SAY WE DON'T HAVE TO DO GOOD
WORK TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. UM
NUMBER ONE NUMBER TWO. THIS
REPORT WRITTEN BY L. A O IS JUST
ANOTHER EXAMPLE. I MEAN, I
CONTINUE TO BE REALLY IMPRESSED
WHEN I COME TO THESE MEETINGS IN
LAO JUST CAPTURES THE WHOLE
ISSUE AND IT'S LIKE, WELL, I
WONDER IF THEY COVERED AND THEY
DID. I WONDER IF THEY DID. SO
YOU JUST CONSISTENTLY KEEP DOING
A GREAT JOB AND IT'S SO IT
REALLY HELPS SET THE FRAMEWORK
FOR THIS CONVERSATION AND
HOPEFULLY KEEPS ALL OF US ON OUR
TOES AS WE GO FORWARD. THE NEXT
THING I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS IS TO
GO BACK TO BECAUSE THIS IS SO
IMPORTANT. THE ROLE OF THE STATE
BACKDROP IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL
FOR THIS TO WORK. AND IT IS, UH,
IT IS AN INTERESTING DANCE THAT
WERE TRYING TO ENGAGE IN. WE
WANT THE LOCALS TO BE IN CONTROL
BECAUSE OF THE WAY SIGMA WAS
WRITTEN, AND BECAUSE IT MAKES A
LOT OF COMMON SENSE. THEY KNOW
THE ISSUE AND ALL OF THAT. BUT
AT THE SAME TIME WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THEY DO IT IN THE WAY
THAT IT WORKS FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THAT WILL ONLY
HAPPEN IF THE LOCALS GENUINELY
BELIEVE THERE REALLY IS A STATE
BACKSTOP THAT THE STATE IS
REALLY GOING TO DO SOMETHING. IF
YOU DRAG YOUR YOUR FEET AND I
WILL, I WILL TALK ABOUT THE
EXPERIENCE. WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT
MORE LATER ABOUT TALK ABOUT THE
EXPERIENCE THAT I HAVE DONE IN
VENTURA COUNTY IN 1982. THE
STATE CREATED A SPECIAL
GROUNDWATER AGENCY IN VENTURA
COUNTY BECAUSE OF SALT WATER
INTRUSION, AND THEY GAVE THEM
FROM 1982 TO 2010 VERY SIMILAR
TO SIGMA TO GET THE BASIN INTO
SAFE YIELD TO STOP THAT
SALTWATER INTRUSION, RIGHT? AND
THERE WAS A STATE BACKSTOP THERE
, BUT IT DIDN'T HAVE ANYWHERE
NEAR THE VISIBILITY OF SIGMA NOW
AND WHEN WE GOT TO 2010 THEY
WERE STILL PUMPING WAY OVER SAFE
YIELDS, AND IT'S PARTIALLY
BECAUSE THEY THEY DIDN'T TAKE
THE STATE BACKSTOP REALLY
SERIOUSLY. AND SO IT WAS JUST
REALLY EASY TO COME UP WITH
ANOTHER REASON WHY YOU CAN'T
ANOTHER REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T
AND THE PRESSURES THAT YOU'RE
GOING TO FACE THE STATE WATER
BOARD, YOU KNOW? HOW COULD YOU
CHARGE THEM? YOU KNOW MONEY FOR
PUMPING AND YOU KNOW THAT MONEY
IS GOING TO GO TO THE STATE,
ETCETERA, SO ENORMOUS PRESSURES
FOR THE STATE BACKSTOP TO NOT BE
, UH, APPROPRIATELY APPLIED,
BUT, UH, BUT THE AVERAGE PERSON
WHO'S NOT AT THE TABLE, THE
AVERAGE PERSON THAT DOESN'T HAVE
THE HIGH PRICED LAWYERS TO COME
IN AND PUT PRESSURE ON YOU.
THOSE FARM WORKERS WHOSE WELLS
ARE GOING DRY, THEY ABSOLUTELY
DEPEND UPON YOU BEING THE
APPROPRIATE BACKSTOP TO REALLY
MOTIVATE ALL OF THE LOCAL
AGENCIES TO GET IT DONE, SO I
CAN'T EMPHASIZE THAT ENOUGH. THE
OTHER THING I WOULD POINT OUT IS
THE G S A C HAVE SIGNIFICANT
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN
ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. IT'S JUST
INHERENT TO THE NATURE OF THIS
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO
MAKE SURE THEY HAD A VOICE AT
THE TABLE AS JESUS REFORMED. IT
WAS VERY MUCH WHO WANTS TO PLAY
WHO WANTS TO GET INVOLVED? AND
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAD THE
MOST AT STAKE, WANTED TO MAKE
SURE THEY HAD REALLY STRONG
VOICES IN THERE. AND SO THERE'S
THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AND THEREFORE THE
POTENTIAL TO DRAG YOUR FEET. AND
SO I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU LOOK AT
AT AGENCIES IF THEY WERE GIVEN
ONE SHOT TO RIGHT THEIR PLAN
PROPERLY, AND THEY DIDN'T YOU
GAVE HIM ANOTHER SHOT AND SAID
YOU DIDN'T DO THIS RIGHT? AND
YOU GOT TO DO THIS RIGHT? AND
THEY STILL DON'T THEN I WOULD
SUGGEST THAT FROM THE STATE
STANDPOINT, THERE NEEDS TO BE A
CONSEQUENCE OR ELSE. EVERYBODY'S
GOING TO GO. WELL LET'S DRAG OUR
FEET IF WE GET 34 SHOTS AT IT.
WELL THAT'S A LONG TIME TO KEEP
OVER PUMPING OR BENEFITING FROM
OVER PUMPING, ETCETERA AND
POSTPONING AS WE GO FORWARD ONE
QUESTION, SO NOW I'M AT MY
QUESTIONS AFTER MY EDITORIAL IS
OVER WITH THANK YOU. ONE
QUESTION IS THAT, UM WHEN AN
AGENCY IS PUT INTO PROBATION YOU
TALKED ABOUT FEES WILL BE
CHARGED. IT IMPLIES TO ME THAT
THE THAT THE WELLS MUST BE
METERED. BUT DOES THE LAW SAY
THE WELLS HAVE TO BE METERED FOR
THESE FEES TO BE APPLIED IN
PROBATION? UM NO, THANK YOU FOR
THE QUESTION. ANOTHER DIFFERENT
WAYS OF ASSESSING HOW MUCH WATER
? UM SOMEONE IS USING, UM, AND
SO THE FEE AND REPORTING
STRUCTURE THE BOARD ENVISIONS
WOULD ALLOW MULTIPLE DIFFERENT
METHODS FOR ESTIMATING THAT
MONEY OR THAT THAT PUMPING,
HOWEVER, IN SOME CASES, THE
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE
BOARD REQUIRE METERS BE
INSTALLED ON ON SOME WELLS. UM
AND THAT COULD CAPTURE THE BULK
OF THE PUMPING AND GIVE GIVE A
LOT OF CLARITY HERE. UM DATA
GAPS AROUND HOW MUCH THE DEGREE
OF OVERDRAFT AND WHERE PUMPING
IS OCCURRING ARE MAJOR PROBLEM
THAT PREVENTS EFFECTIVE
MANAGEMENT AND SO, UH, THE ROLE
OF PROBATION IS TO GATHER A LOT
OF THAT INFORMATION. AND SUPPORT
BETTER MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE
I'D OFFER FROM VENTURA COUNTY
WAS THERE WAS NOTHING MORE
ACCURATE THAN ACTUALLY PUTTING
THE METER ON THE WELL AND
IDENTIFYING WHICH PUMPER WAS
DOING. WHAT SO I WOULD OFFER
THAT ALTHOUGH THERE ARE OTHER
METHODS THEY JUST WERE NOT AS AS
AS ACCURATE AS EFFECTIVE AND AS
DIRECTLY RELATED TO MAKING SURE
PUMPER IS PAYING THE PROPER
CHARGE AND IF THERE'S A FEE FOR
OVER PUMPING, ETCETERA THAT IT'S
OUT THERE, UM, FUNDING FOR THE
GSA'S HOW WHAT KIND OF RECORDS
DO YOU HAVE IN TERMS OF HOW MANY
GS ASAR? DO YOU HAVE THE RECORDS
ON HOW MANY ASIA'S ARE CHARGING
A PER ACRE FOOT PUMP FEE OF
WEALTHY? AND WHAT THEIR
SITUATION IS. HOW HOW MURKY IS
THAT AND HOW ACCURATE
INFORMATION? I THINK SOME
SOMEWHAT, UM I WOULD SAY MORE ON
THE MURKY SIDE RIGHT NOW. I
MEAN, THEY'RE PUTTING SOME OF
THAT INFORMATION IN THE ANNUAL
REPORTS ON PROGRESS AND
GENERALLY IN DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE
WITH THE S A S. WE HAVE A
GENERAL IDEA IS TO WHO'S DOING
IT. BUT WE HAVE HAVE NOT YET
CAPTURED THAT, UM, LIST OF WHO
HAS ALLOCATIONS HOW THEY'VE PUT
THEM IN PLACE AGAIN. SOME OF
THEM ARE STILL IN EARLY STAGES.
BUT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS BASIN
STEWARDSHIP, THAT'S GOING TO BE
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO
CAPTURE. KEEP TRACK OF IS, UM,
WHAT THE WITH THE FEES ARE AND
REVENUE GENERATION PARTICULARLY
IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT WHEN
WE START TO LOOK AT HOW A BASIN
IS ACTUALLY IMPROVING CONDITIONS
AND IT'S GOING TO BE BASED UPON
EMPIRICAL DATA IN THE BASIN. AND
IF THINGS ARE NOT PROGRESSING,
THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
START POSING QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHERE THEY ARE ON PROJECT AND
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS. DO THEY HAVE
THE MEANS TO CARRY IT OUT? UM
AND AGAIN EVEN FOR FEES TO IN
THIS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE
CAME OUT WITH ANNUAL GUIDANCE ON
HOW TO DO ANNUAL REPORTS AND
PERIODIC EVALUATIONS. THERE WAS
A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS AND BASINS
THAT THEY WERE THINKING IT WAS
GOING TO COST THEM. $300,000 TO
DO AN ANNUAL REPORT AND I THINK
IT WAS THEY WERE TOLD SORT OF IT
HAD TO BE BIGGER AND MORE
INVOLVED IN OTHERWISE. SOMETIMES
WE WERE GETTING THE KITCHEN SINK
THROWN AT US, SO WE NARROWED IT
TO WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY
REQUIRED TO DO IN A FORMAT THAT
MADE SENSE THAT ALSO AVOIDS THEM
DOING UNNECESSARY COSTS. SO COST
IS GOING TO BE A BIG THING.
WE'RE GONNA KEEP TRACK ON ONE TO
MAKE SURE THEY'RE EFFICIENT AND
TWO. THEY HAVE THE MEANS TO
CARRY OUT THEIR PLAN. I WANT TO
GO BACK TO THE POINT ABOUT THE
POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
OUT THERE. AND THAT IS THAT, UM,
OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THE
HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES,
WE'VE SEEN THE REGULATE TEAS.
TRY TO MAKE SURE AND THIS IS IN
ALL SITUATIONS, BUT THERE'S AN
INHERENT INTEREST TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE REGULATE TOUR IS
STARVED FOR RESOURCES AND YOU
STARVE THE GS A FOR RESOURCES,
AND THEY CAN'T DO A GOOD JOB OF
MONITORING THE PUMPING AND
MONITORING THE THINGS THAT HAVE
TO BE DONE. AND SO I WOULD I
WOULD ENCOURAGE DWR AND THE
STATE WATER BOARD TO MAKE SURE
THAT PART OF THE ANNUAL REPORT
IS ROBUST ANALYSIS SO THAT YOU
HAVE IT'S NOT MURKY AS TO WHO'S
CHARGING FEES. ARE THEY CHARGING
SUFFICIENT FEES TO BE ABLE TO
ACTUALLY DO THE JOB AND AS
LAWSUITS PICK UP THE ESAS HAVE
TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF
LAWSUITS ALSO, AND THAT'S A
WHOLE ANOTHER COMPLICATED ISSUE.
BUT GENERALLY THE PRINCIPLE
SHOULD BE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE PROFITING FROM TAKING THE
PUBLIC IDENTIFIED RESOURCE,
THEIR GROUNDWATER SHOULD BE THE
ONES TO BE FUNDING THE
APPROPRIATE REGULATORY EFFORT.
THAT'S ON TOP OF THAT. SO I
WOULD OFFER THAT THEN TO JUMP TO
FUNDING FOR THE OWEN TO ROLL OF
218. COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT
JUST VERY BRIEFLY IN TERMS OF UM
DO ALL THE FEES HAVE TO BE
APPROVED BY 218 ARE THERE WAYS
TO GET AROUND THAT HOW DIFFICULT
IS TO 18 IN IN, UH, A LOT OF
BASINS HAVE IMPOSED THESE
THROUGH PROP 218. THERE'S A
PROTEST PROCESS AND THAT MAKES
IT CHALLENGING. THERE'S ALSO
AGAIN. IT'S A CIRCULAR THING.
YOU NEED FUNDING TO DEVELOP THE
DOCUMENTS TO BE ABLE TO DO THE
218 AND THAT ESPECIALLY AGENCIES
THAT ARE SHORT STAFFED THAT ALSO
CREATED A CHALLENGE FOR THEM AND
THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE IN
BASINS, REGULATORY FEES. I
BELIEVE SOME BASINS USED PROP 26
REGULATORY FEES, NOT FOR PROJECT
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS, BUT I THINK
JUST KEEPING UM, YOU KNOW,
OPERATIONS GOING AND JUST THE
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE. SO IT IS,
UM, YOU KNOW, RUNNING THE GAMBIT
NOW I DO AGREE LARGELY WHEN
SIGMA WENT IN, UM THEY HAVE A
LOT OF AUTHORITY, A LOT OF FEAR
AUTHORITY AND THIS HAS TO BE AND
SHOULD BE, UM, BUILT UPON, YOU
KNOW, LOCAL, UM, LOCAL FEES. I
THINK WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE
AGAIN CONTINUED ASSISTANCE ALONG
THE WAY AS WE CAN IF THERE'S
AVAILABILITY OF STATE FUNDS.
BONDS HAVE BEEN ENORMOUSLY
INSTRUMENTAL, BUT WE'VE REACHED
A POINT WHERE, UM BASINS NEED TO
REALLY STAND UP ON THEIR OWN, 2
FT. AND TAKE THIS THIS ON, UM
THE MORE THEY STAND UP AND WHERE
THEY CAN DO SUPPLY PROJECTS,
WHICH COULD ACTUALLY DECREASE
THE NEED FOR CUTBACKS IN TERMS
OF ALLOCATIONS AND HOPE THAT
THEY WOULD VIEW IT POSITIVELY
THAT WAY. UM, FUNDING FOR THE
STATE OVERALL, UM, YOU TALKED
ABOUT THE VARIABILITY OF FEES
FOR THE STATE WATER BOARD. WE
HAVE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN
INTERESTING QUESTION, AND THAT
IS AS WE FACE BUDGET DEFICITS
HERE AT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
HOW IMPORTANT IS FUNDING THE
REGULATORY ASPECTS OF THE
GROUNDWATER AGENCIES? UM
RELATIVE TO ALL THE OTHER
PRIORITIES OUT THERE, AND SO
IT'LL BE. IT'LL BE A QUESTION
THAT I THINK WILL BE TURNING TO
YOU GUYS OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN
TERMS OF ASKING, BUT I THINK
THAT IT CERTAINLY IS. ONE OF THE
MAJOR PRIORITIES IS FOR US TO
MAKE SURE WE WERE APPROPRIATELY
DOING THAT. AND THE FINAL. UM
THANKS. THEME THAT I WANT TO
COVER IS HOW AWARE ARE WE OF THE
MAKEUP OF THE GS ASSESS IN TERMS
OF WHO IS BEING REPRESENTED? HOW
MUCH ARE DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES BEING PROPERLY
REPRESENTED? HOW MUCH IS THIS?
UH YOU KNOW, THE MOST POWERFUL
HAVING, YOU KNOW, A DIS ORDINATE
AMOUNT OF IMPACT. AND WHAT KIND
OF, UH, ROLE IS THE STATE ABLE
TO PLAY AND DO WE NEED ANY
LEGISLATION TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE MOST DISADVANTAGED ARE BOTH
WELL, REPRESENTATIVE GSA'S, UM,
AND ALSO ARE PROTECTED BY THE
STATE IF THEY'RE NOT HAVE ANY
ANY THOUGHTS AND, UM, I THINK
THAT THE BEGINNING PART ABOUT
HOW GS ASCEND EVEN WITHIN BASINS
DIFFERENT CHIESA'S ARE FORMED.
IS REALLY AT THE HEART OF LOCAL
DISCRETION. AND REALLY IN THE
ACT, SO WE HAVE TAKEN ALTHOUGH
THE ELIGIBILITY IS THERE IN
STATUTE, UM, FOR US, IT'S A
MINISTERIAL ROLE WHEN THEY DO
FORM AND I'VE BEEN BEFORE I WAS
CAME TO D W R TWO YEARS. 2.5
YEARS AGO, I WAS IN A WORK FOR
COUNTY AND WE HAD THREE SUB
BASINS. AND THEY ALL HAD
DIFFERENT MAKEUPS OF HOW THE
AGENCIES WERE FORMED, AND IT
REALLY IN MY MIND REALLY STUCK
OUT KNOWING THESE BASINS. REALLY
WELL, THAT YEAH, THE
DEMOGRAPHICS, CULTURE AND SORT
OF EXPECTATIONS IN WITHIN THE
SAME COUNTY WERE VASTLY
DIFFERENT AND THEY NEEDED TO
REFLECT THAT. AND SO YOU'RE
RIGHT. THERE'S A RANGE OF
AGENCIES. COUNTIES ARE IT PLAY A
BIG ROLE IN MANY BASIS, AS WELL
AS WATER DISTRICTS AND SOME
MUNICIPALITIES. I THINK FOR SOME
WATER DISTRICTS AND IRRIGATION
DISTRICTS, UM IT'S A NEW ROLE
BEING A G S A. IT'S NOT THE SAME
TRADITIONAL ROLE THEY HAVE
LOOKING AT THEIR LANDOWNERS FOR
WATER SUPPLY DELIVERY, AND I
THINK SOME OF THEM ARE. I THINK
THROUGH THE EVALUATION PROCESS
AND, UM STARTING TO COME TO
GRIPS THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT
WORLD THAN JUST REGULARLY
MANAGING THEIR BASIN. SO WE'VE
HEARD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT
HOW AGENCIES ARE FORMED, UM,
THEIR MAKEUP, WHICH WE DON'T
TRACK IS THAT FRANKLY, OUTSIDE
OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY, THAT'S A
LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND AGAIN,
WE PROVIDE FACILITATION ON THE
GOVERNANCE. BUT WHAT WE DO DO
AND THIS IS THE POINT
IRREGARDLESS OF HOW AGENCIES ARE
FORMED, AND THEY COULD BE FORMED
IN A VERY NICE WAY. IF THEY'RE
NOT DOING THEIR JOB, WE'RE GOING
TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. SO
THEY MAY HAVE PERCEPTIONS OR
HISTORIES OF HOW WELL THEY
EMBRACED THIS OR HOW WELL THEY
WORK. WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THEM
ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT ACTIONS
THEY TAKE AND PROVIDE ASSISTANCE
TO PROVIDE ACCESS. AND, UM FOR A
COMMUNITY MEMBERS INVOLVEMENT,
SO WE KEEP COMMENTS ARE COMMENT
PERIOD OPEN AT ANY TIME ON
PLANTS AND WE ENCOURAGE, UM
PEOPLE TO SUPPLY COMMENTS AS
WELL AS OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
IS ALSO ANOTHER MAJOR COMPONENT
OF PLANNING IMPLEMENTATION. AND
SO WE'RE GOING TO KEEP PRESSING
THAT, UH, WITH AGENCIES ON ON
HOW THEY YOU KNOW, BRING PEOPLE
TO THE TABLE AND ENGAGE. UM SO
THAT'S GOING TO BE ONGOING WORK.
A LOT OF AGENCIES HAVE ASKED US
FOR ASSISTANCE BECAUSE THEY'VE
TRIED TRADITIONAL THINGS AND
THEY'RE HAVING DIFFICULTIES. SO
THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD DIALOGUE
AND, UH, ASPECTS GOING ON WITH
THAT. BUT IN THE END WE'RE GOING
TO KEEP FOCUSED ON WHAT THEY DO
AND HOLD HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE
ON TRACK FOR SUSTAINABILITY.
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS. UM I'M
INTERESTED IN THE LOCAL
IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS. IT SOUNDS
LIKE, UM, AS TIME HAS GONE ON.
UM, AGENCIES HAVE BEEN LOOKING
FOR FINANCIAL HELP FROM THE
STATE OF APPLIED FOR THESE
FUNDS. WE HAD BOND REVENUES
AVAILABLE FOR THAT PURPOSE NOW
HAS KIND OF SHIFTED TO THE
GENERAL FUND. AS THOSE OF THE
SOURCES HAVE, UM, BEEN USED WITH
THE CONSTRAINTS ON THE GENERAL
FUND GOING FORWARD SEEMS LIKELY.
THAT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO
CONTINUE TO MAKE THAT KIND OF
LEVEL OF INVESTMENT. HOW
CRITICAL IS THAT TO THE WATER
AGENCIES MAKING PROGRESS AND
LOOKING AT WHERE THOSE GRANTS
WENT, UM, DID THEY KEEP AGENCIES
FROM GETTING INTO PLACES WHERE
THERE ARE INADEQUATE PLANS OR
INCOMPLETE PLANS? YOU KNOW, ARE
THEY CONCENTRATED IN THOSE AREAS
TO HELP BRING THEM UP? WHAT'S
THE GENERAL TENOR AND YOUR
EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE LOCAL?
YEAH AND I'LL START WITH, UH THE
EARLY IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS, AND
THOSE WERE, UM I MEAN THE TIMING
ON HAVING THE FUNDS AVAILABLE
FOR THESE GRANTS WAS, UM YOU
KNOW, INCREDIBLE. THE TIMING
COULDN'T HAVE BEEN BETTER. UM SO
AGENCIES GOT FORMED 2017 AND
STARTED TO DEVELOP THEIR PLANS.
THE GRANTS THE IMPLEMENTATION
GRANTS WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN
GETTING PLANS, UM, CRAFTED AND
SUBMITTED IN AS WELL AS
FACILITATION SERVICES WE
PROVIDED WITH PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
SO I DON'T KNOW. AND I KNOW FOR,
UM CONNIE. I WORKED, IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN ENORMOUSLY DIFFICULT,
IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, EVEN EVEN FOR
A COUNTY THAT HAD A PRETTY GOOD,
UM, MAKEUP TO DO THE PLANTS.
THEY WERE ENORMOUSLY COMPLEX, UM
, OVER 1000 PAGES WITH A LOT OF
DATA AND INFORMATION. SO THE
IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS UM REALLY?
YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE THE
INSTRUMENTAL AND ACTUALLY
MEETING THE MARK AND GETTING
PLANS IN NOW THE IMPLEMENTATION,
UM, GRANTS THAT HAVE GONE OUT
THE OTHER CRITICALLY, OVER
DRAFTED BASINS GOT $7.6 MILLION,
WHICH THEY'RE EXPENDING AND
WORKING ON NOW, WHETHER EVEN THE
ONES THAT ARE INADEQUATE AND
THEY STILL HAVE GRANTS AND ARE
IMPLEMENTING AWAY. WE JUST
ISSUED OUR LAST ROUND LAST, UM
FALL FOR 187 MILLION FOR
IMPLEMENTATION, LARGELY A LOT OF
IT'S FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, RECHARGE
PROJECT SUPPLY AUGMENTATION, UH,
PROGRAMS. WE HAD THAT
SOLICITATION. WE HAD OVER $800
MILLION IN IN REQUESTS, AND
THAT'S PROBABLY A FRACTION OF
WHAT REALLY, THE NEED IS OUT
THERE, BUT THERE WAS ALSO
PROJECTS IN THERE ABOUT DOING
WELL, INVENTORIES AND OTHER
THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO REFINE
MITIGATION AND OTHER ASPECTS. SO
REAL IMPORTANT, I THINK IT
GROUNDED BUT AGAIN. THERE THERE
IS A BALANCE WITH, YOU KNOW
RELIANCE ON STATE DOLLARS AND WE
CAN GUIDE THAT AND I THINK EVEN
THE GRANT PROCESS DOES HAVE ITS
OWN COST FOR LOCAL AGENCIES
BECAUSE YOU DO NEED TO EXPEND
MONEY TO PREPARE THE GRANT
APPLICATION, WHICH IS COSTLY AND
SUBMIT. AND THEN THERE'S THE
CONTRACTING AND SO TIME AND
MONEY GETS EATEN UP THROUGH THE
GRAND PROCESSES EFFICIENTLY AS
WE RUN IT, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT
THAT AGENCIES DO HAVE THE MEANS
TO FUND THEIR PROGRAM AND THEIR
PLAN. BECAUSE IT IS LOCALLY
DRIVEN. UM AND I THINK WE AGAIN
LOOKING WITH THE WITH THE
RESOURCES WE HAVE. WAYS TO
AUGMENT THE WORK WE DO TO HELP
SUPPORT LOCAL AGENCIES, REMOVING
DATA GAPS AND PROVIDING OTHER
ASSISTANTS. SO WITHOUT HAVING
GRANTS, THIS DATA AND THINGS WE
CAN DO TO HELP BOLSTER LOCAL
AGENCIES. SO I HOPE THAT HELPS
PERFECT SEGWAY TO THE OTHER
QUESTION I HAVE IS THAT, UM THE
BUDGET PROPOSAL HAS CUTS TO THE
FORECAST INFORMED RESERVOIR
OPERATION AND SNOWPACK SERVICE.
AND SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE
CRITICAL DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS
AT THE STATE DOES. IT HELPS
INFORM EVERYBODY DOWN THE LINE
AND ULTIMATELY INFORMS
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE STRATEGIES.
ARE WE AT RISK UNDERFUNDING
THOSE PROGRAMS YOU KNOW, BEING
ABLE TO GIVE THE AGENCY'S THE
INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED TO
MANAGE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, AND
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN
DO? TO SUPPLEMENT THAT OR ASSIST
THEM TO MAKE THAT WORK BETTER.
YEAH I THINK, GIVEN THE
DIFFICULT BUDGET CHALLENGES, UM
YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE A LOT MORE
TO SAY DURING THE BUDGET
HEARINGS ON THAT, BUT I THINK
WE'RE LOOKING TO WORK, UM, WITH
THE LEGISLATURE ON BUDGET FIXES
AND TRYING TO BALANCE UM, THE
BUDGET AVAILABILITY WITH WITH
IMMEDIATE NEEDS, WE HAVE, BUT
WE'LL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WITH
SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION. UM YOU
KNOW, ON ON GOING BASIS AND IN
THE CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY. AND
THEN THE LAST QUESTION I HAD TO
DO HAVE IS IN REGARDS TO, UM THE
ADJUDICATED BASINS. AND ARE THEY
, UM, PROBLEMS THAT ARE
ANOMALOUS TO THE PROCESS OF
HAVING PLANS AND THE DIFFERENT
VALUES IN THE GOALS OF THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLANS
VERSUS WHAT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY
THROUGH ADJUDICATION AS THEIR
CONFLICT THERE THAT HAS TO BE
ADDRESSED. WE MAY GET MARRIED TO
THIS, BUT IF YOU CAN GIVE US A
BRIEF ANSWER, THAT'D BE GREAT.
YEAH I THINK IDEALLY,
ADJUDICATIONS COULD WORK. UH
COMPATIBLE LI WITH G S P S. I
THINK WE'VE SEEN SOME PEOPLE
WANTING TO USE IT FOR DIFFERENT
MEANS NOT LIKING THE PROCESS.
I'LL DEFER TO UM, COLLEAGUE TINA
AND JAMES, IF YOU WANT TO WEIGH
IN ON ADJUDICATIONS, BUT IT'S
SOMETHING WE'RE KEEPING A CLOSE
EYE ON. UM I THINK YOU KNOW
ADJUDICATIONS COULD BE HELPFUL
AND THAT THEY DETERMINE ALL ALL
THE WATER RIGHTS. AND SO ONE
THING THAT GSS HAVE STRUGGLED
WITH SOME JESUS IS, YOU KNOW
THEY DON'T HAVE UNDER STIGMA THE
AUTHORITY TO GERMAN WATER RIGHTS
IN A BASIN. SO IF THAT'S
DETERMINED THAT COULD ACTUALLY
HELP. YOU KNOW, ON THE OTHER
HAND, OF COURSE, THERE HAVE BEEN
EQUITY ISSUES RAISED ABOUT THE
ADJUDICATION PROCESS IT IS, YOU
KNOW, IT'S AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS.
IT CAN BE ALONG THE FOLLOWING
SIGMA. WE TRIED TO STREAMLINE
THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS AS WELL
WITH THE ALEJO'S BILLS. I'M SURE
YOU'RE AWARE AND WITH SENATOR
PAVEL'S AMENDMENTS THE CHAPTER
12 INTO SIGMA, SO THERE WAS
THOUGHT IN HOW TO MESH THOSE TWO
TOGETHER. UM BUT, YOU KNOW, LIKE
ALL THINGS, YOU KNOW, IT COULD
BE VERY HELPFUL. OR YOU KNOW, IT
COULD POSE CHALLENGES AS MY
COLLEAGUE PAUL GOSSELIN HAS
IDENTIFIED THANK YOU. I JUST
WANT TO SAY WE'VE GOT LIMITED
TIME SO QUICKLY FOR THE QUESTION
AND THE ANSWER WOULD BE GREAT
CHAIRS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE
TODAY. AS A FORMER COUNTY
SUPERVISOR. I IT SEEMS LIKE
SOMETIMES WE GET THIS
INFORMATION LATE. THE STATE
ALREADY HAD IMPLEMENTED WHAT
THEY WANTED TO DO. AND JUST
GOING GOING BACK REALLY QUICK TO
THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. THOSE ARE
VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. I MEAN, I
KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOU GUYS ARE
ROLLING THOSE OUT. BUT HOW ARE
THEY REALLY COMING OUT? YEAH
GREAT. GREAT QUESTION. UM, SO I.
UM WE'VE ONLY DONE WELL. 11
BASIN, THE ONE COMING UP FOR AN
APRIL SCHEDULED HEARING THE
TULARE LAKE SUB BASIN. UM IS THE
ONE WHERE WE'VE COME FURTHER
ALONG AND SORT OF DEFINING OUR
PROCESS? UM, AS I MENTIONED, WE
PUT OUT A STAFF REPORT A DRAFT
STAFF REPORT LAYING OUT
DEFICIENCIES THAT THE ESAS THAT
IF THE BOARD ADOPTS THOSE IN IN
A PROBATIONARY HEARING WOULD BE
SORT OF THE. CRITERION THAT THE
GSA'S WOULD HAVE TO MEET TO GET
OUT OF PROBATION. SO WE PUT
THOSE OUT IN PUBLIC. WE
DISCUSSED THOSE IN THE BASIN AT
A STAFF LED PUBLIC WORKSHOP. WE
DISCUSSED THOSE ONLINE IN A
PUBLIC STAFF LED WORKSHOP. THE
PROBATIONARY HEARING. LIKE I
SAID, THESE ARE THE FIRST OF
THEIR KIND OF BOARD HASN'T
HASN'T ESTABLISHED LIKE A CLEAR
PROCESS FOR HOW EVERY ONE OF
THESE WILL GO. BUT THE PLAN IS
THAT THEY WOULD HEAR BOARD
MEMBERS WOULD HEAR FROM, UH,
STAFF ABOUT THEIR
RECOMMENDATIONS, THEIR
ASSESSMENTS OF BASIC CONDITIONS
BASED ON EFFORTS AND THEY WOULD
ALSO HEAR FROM THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES, UM AND
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS AND
INTERESTED PARTIES BEFORE MAKING
BEFORE ASKING QUESTIONS OR
MAKING ANY DECISIONS. UM WE HAVE
TRIED TO BE AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE
WITH THE PARTIES WHO COULD BE
AFFECTED BY A PROBATIONARY
DETERMINATION ABOUT WHAT'S AT
STAKE AND HOW THEY CAN GET
INVOLVED. WE REALLY DO WANT
COMMENTS AND INPUT AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE. AND I WAS JUST GONNA
ADD REALLY QUICKLY. I THINK
YOU'VE COME TO THE HEART OF WHAT
MAKES IT A VERY UNUSUAL STATUTE.
IN THAT THE STATE WATER BOARD
WHEN IT COMES TO THE STATE
WATERBOARDING, THAT INTERVENTION
ROLE, THE REASON IT WAS THE
STATE WATER BORDERS CHOSEN FOR
THAT ROLE IS IT DOES ITS WORK IN
PUBLIC, SO IT'S A FIVE MEMBER
BOARD AND IT HOLDS PUBLIC
HEARINGS. AND ALL OF THAT WORK
HAPPENS IN PUBLIC, WHICH I THINK
CAN LOOK AWKWARD TO THE PUBLIC
BECAUSE THE BOARD MEMBERS, YOU
KNOW THEY'RE NOT DISCUSSING THAT
AMONGST THEMSELVES IN PRIVATE.
ALL OF THAT WORK IS HAPPENING IN
PUBLIC WITH THE ABILITY FOR
PUBLIC INPUT, SO THAT WAS UM,
CHOSEN ON PURPOSE. THANK YOU. SO
I'VE GOT A FEW QUESTIONS AND A
COUPLE OF COMMENTS. UM FIRST OF
ALL, THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY, AND I CONCUR WITH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BENNETT. THIS
IS TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT TO THE
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE STATE AS A
WHOLE. SO NUMBER ONE. THE STATUS
CEMENT ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS
AND SING MUCH SO FAR. DO WE HAVE
ANY IDEA HOW MUCH THE LOCALITIES
HAVE SPENT? AH! NOT OFFHAND, BUT
WE CAN. WE CAN SEE IF WE CAN
GATHER THAT. AND LET ME JUST
TELL YOU THE REASON WHY I ASKED
THAT. AND I WAS PLEASED TO HEAR
YOU SAY, MR GOSSELIN THAT YOU
ARE WORRIED THAT WE BECOME SO
OPPRESSIVE IN REPORTING AND
CREATING PLANS THAT THE MONEY
ISN'T LEFT OVER TO DO THE WORK.
SO AS WE GO FORWARD, I IMPLORE
YOU TO KEEP THAT IN THE BACK OF
YOUR MIND. WE ALL KNOW THAT
THESE AGENCIES RUN ON A
SHOESTRING AS IT IS, AND I DON'T
WANT TO SEE. YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN
WHAT HAPPENED IN HDD AND HOUSING
ELEMENTS AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING
TO MUNICIPALITIES. I DON'T WANT
TO SEE THAT PLAY OUT HERE. AND
SO THAT BRINGS ME TO ANOTHER
QUESTION FOR YOU, UM MR KNOCK
POWER IN THE EVENT THAT YOU ARE
MONITORING AND THEN COLLECTING
FEES. WHERE WILL THAT MONEY GO?
I'D LIKE TO SEE IT GO BACK TO
THE LOCALITIES TO DO THE WORK
THAT THEY PROBATIONARY BASINS
ARE REQUIRED TO DO BUT I DIDN'T
HEAR WHERE THAT MONEY'S GOING.
CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME? SURE THANK
YOU. GREAT QUESTION. SO US SIGMA
IS STRUCTURED. THE STATE BOARDS
ACTIONS UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF
SIGMA, WHICH COVER PROBATION
BASINS ON PROBATION OR BASED ON
SUBJECT TO AN INTERIM PLAN. THAT
WORK. UM THE BOARD CAN RECOVER
THE COSTS OF DOING THAT WORK
FROM THE POPULATION OF BASINS,
SUBJECT TO CHAPTER 11 SUBJECT,
INTERVENTION OR SUBJECT TO AN
INTERIM INTERIM PLAN OR
PROBATION. UM. TO PUT TO THIS
DATE. ALL STATE BOARD WORK HAS
BEEN FUNDED THROUGH THE GENERAL
FUND, AND SO, UM, IT MAY BE A
MIX OF THOSE FUNDING STREAMS
THAT FUND OR EFFORTS HERE. THE.
THE GOAL HERE THROUGH
INTERVENTION THROUGH STATE BOARD
INTERVENTION IS TO BENEFIT THE
PEOPLE IN THE BASIN BY KEEPING
THEM ON TRACK FOR
SUSTAINABILITY. UM AND WITH THAT
INCLUDE UH, SOME OF THE MONEY
GOING BACK TO HELP THEM DO THE
WORK. AH NO AS CURRENTLY
STRUCTURED THE FEES COLLECTED BY
THE STATE BOARD ARE JUST TO
COVER STATE BOARD OPERATIONAL
COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING CHAPTER 11
OF SIGMA. WE WOULD NOT BE TRYING
TO RAISE ADDITIONAL MONEY, OKAY,
BECAUSE I WANT TO KEEP THAT IN
THE BACK OF OUR MIND IS WE
CREATE THESE BUREAUCRACIES AND
WE IMPOSE A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF
ON FOLKS. VERY IMPORTANT WORK.
NO QUESTION ABOUT IT, BUT I
DON'T WANT TO SEE THE PENDULUM
SWING SO FAR THAT THAT THE PLUMP
COMPLIANCE IS BEARING FOLKS.
YEAH AND I AND I KNOW WE'RE
PROBABLY ON THE SAME PAGE. AND
IT SOUNDS GREAT TO SAY THAT
HEARING TODAY IN SACRAMENTO, BUT
I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT PLAY OUT.
ULTIMATELY JUST SO YOU KNOW, I
HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU.
IS IT, MR GOSSELIN THAT AS WE GO
FORWARD, WITH SOME OF THE MORE
FIVE YEAR REPORTING IN THE
REPEAT PERFORMING, DO YOU SEE IT
BECOMING MORE PRO FORMER PRO
FORM? ALEJO'S THAT THERE'S A LOT
OF THINGS THAT CHANGE ALONG THE
WAY. BUT I WAS WONDERING, UM, DO
YOU SEE THAT THERE MIGHT BE
SOME, YOU KNOW, IT GETS EASIER
AS WE GO ALONG AND LESS
EXPENSIVE CONSULTANTS AND
WHATNOT. RIGHT AND THAT THAT'S
OUR DESIRE, I THINK FAIR POINT
ABOUT. THIS CANNOT BE A PAPER
PROCESS AND, UM, EVEN
DISCUSSIONS WITH BASINS ON
ISSUES WE'VE HAD WITH THEIR
PLANS, AND THEY'RE LIKE, DO YOU
WANT US TO RERUN THE GROUNDWATER
MODEL, WHICH WOULD COST HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS? IT'S
LIKE, NO, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD
BE YOU KNOW IF YOU WANT TO DO
THAT AT SOME FUTURE DATE, BUT
FOCUS ON WHAT IT TAKES. TO
IMPROVE BASIC CONDITIONS AND
ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE. SO AND JUST
KNOWING THAT THE COSTS AND THE
SHOESTRINGS WE NEED TO MAKE IT,
YOU KNOW, VERY EFFICIENT FOR
LOCAL AGENCIES AND AGAIN, WE'RE
SHIFTING OVER TO EMPIRICALLY HOW
BASINS ARE IMPROVING IN THE
AGENCIES HAVE A LOT OF MEANS TO
GET THERE. AND SO, YEAH, I'M
HOPING IT'S GOING TO GET A LOT
MORE. UM ROUTINE, I WOULD SAY
ROUTINE, BUT I THINK FOCUS WHERE
AGENCIES ARE REALLY DIRECTED IS
WHAT CAN WE DO ON THE GROUND TO
DO PROJECTS AND ACTIONS TO CHIEF
SUSTAINABILITY? THAT'S WHAT
AGENCIES WANT TO DO. THIS
PLANNING PROCESSES IS LARGELY
DONE, YOU KNOW, SO AGAIN, I
THINK IT'S UM GOING TO ENTER A
NEW PHASE, AND HOPEFULLY WE'RE
JUST GOING TO HELP, UM RAMP UP
AND SUPPORT THOSE AGENCIES THAT
HAVE BEEN, UM YOU KNOW, REALLY
AGGRESSIVELY TRYING TO PUT
PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
IN AND AGAIN OUR ASSISTANCE AND
GUIDANCE IS HOPEFULLY GONNA
HELP, UM, SUPPORT THEIR EFFORTS.
GOOD GOOD. AND I KNOW WE'LL KEEP
AN EYE ON EQUITY AS WELL. SO
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME
AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE
SECOND CHANNEL. SORRY STEVIE.
JUST AS WE MOVED THE SECOND
PANEL. I JUST FIND IT. THIS IS
THE VALUE OF HAVING A JOINT
HEARING BETWEEN A POLICY
COMMITTEE AND BUDGET. UH YOU
KNOW, OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND
IT'S INTERESTING. I ASKED AS
MANY POLICY QUESTIONS AS
OVERSIGHT, AND SHE ASKED AS MANY
BUDGET QUESTIONS YOU KNOW, IN
TERMS OF DOING THAT, BUT I DO
WANT TO. FROM THE BUDGET
STANDPOINT, POINT OUT THAT WE
REALLY HAVE A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE EXPENSES
EXPENSES HERE ONE YOU HAVE TO
HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES AT THE
STATE LEVEL TO ACTUALLY DO THE
BACKSTOP THAT IS ABSOLUTELY
ESSENTIAL OR ELSE PEOPLE WON'T
DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO WITH THE
LOCAL LEVEL. AND THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING. WHAT THE FEES ARE
GOING FOR IS IF SOMEBODY HAS
FAILED TO DO WHAT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO DO, AND THEY GET PUT
ON PROBATION. THEN YOU'RE GOING
TO CHARGE THEM, JUST LIKE WE
CHARGE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO, YOU
KNOW FOR YOU GET AN ANKLE
BRACELET BECAUSE YOU DID
SOMETHING WRONG AND YOU HAVE TO
PAY FOR THE ANKLE BRACELET.
THAT'S SORT OF THE SAME THING
BECAUSE WE HAVE TO STAFF UP MORE
BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING BECAUSE WE
HAVE THESE PROBATIONARY AGENCIES
THAT ARE OUT THERE, ETCETERA.
WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING MONEY
BACK TO THESE AGENCIES FOR
THAT'S WHERE WE COME UP WITH THE
BOND MONEY, THE GRANT MONEY TO
DO PROJECTS TO BE ABLE TO DO THE
PLANS ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF.
WHICH IS ALL IN SHORT SUPPLY.
WHICH IS WHY I'M LOOKING FOR
EVERY RESOURCE POSSIBLE. ALL OF
THAT'S IN SHORT SUPPLY RIGHT
ABOUT NOW. SO YEAH, AND I JUST
WOULD MAKE THAT DISTINCTION. AND
I THINK THAT THAT'S THAT'S
IMPORTANT FOR US TO POINT OUT,
SO YEAH, THE FEES ARE NOT TO
FUND PROJECTS. THEY'RE THERE TO
DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM
ENCOURAGING FEES IN THE FUTURE.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO USE THOSE TO
PAY FOR PAY FOR THE REGULATORY
OVERSIGHT THAT IS NOW REQUIRED
BECAUSE SOMEBODY, UM, PUT
THEMSELVES INTO THAT SITUATION,
BUT WITH THAT WE'RE GOING TO
SWITCH OVER AND GO TO THE OUR
NEXT TO THE NEXT PART OF OUR
PANEL, AND, UM, SO I'D LIKE TO
CALL UP JENNIFER HARDER,
PROFESSOR OF GEORGE SCHOOL OF
LAW AND JEFF PRATT, EXECUTIVE
OFFICER OF THE FOX CANYON
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY TO
ENLIGHTEN US ON THE TOPIC OF THE
ADJUDICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
TAKING PLACE NOW THAT THESE
GROUNDWATER AGENCY PLANS ARE IN
THERE ARE OUT THERE. WE'RE NOW
STARTING TO SEE JUDI CATIONS POP
UP. I MIGHT POINT OUT HERE IN MY
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS. THERE ARE
FIVE ONGOING JUDICIAL
ADJUDICATIONS IN THE STATE.
THREE OF THEM ARE IN VENTURA
COUNTY, THE COUNTY THAT I
REPRESENT, AND SO IT'S PRETTY
APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THE VENTURA
COUNTY EXECUTIVE FOX CANYON
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HERE WITH US
TO TALK ABOUT THAT, AND SO, UH,
WE'VE TALKED WITH PROFESSOR
HARDER. UM TO TRY TO GIVE US AN
OVERVIEW OF SORT OF THIS WHOLE
ISSUE OF THE ADJUDICATION AND
THE LAWS, ETCETERA, AND WE WILL
HEAR FROM YOU. THEN WE'LL ASK
YOU A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS.
AND THEN WE'LL GO TO MR PRATT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR PAPON IN CHAIR
BENNETT AND MEMBERS. IT'S MY
PLEASURE TO BE HERE. I'M
JENNIFER HARDER FROM GEORGE. UM
AND AS CHAIR NOTE, BARRETT
BENNETT NOTED, I WAS ASKED TO
GIVE A ABOUT 15 MINUTES.
OVERVIEW. OF GROUNDWATER
ADJUDICATION, A BASICS OF
GROUNDWATER ADJUDICATION. I DO
HAVE SOME SLIDES UP ON THE
TELEVISION SCREEN. UM IF THOSE
ARE HELPFUL, LET'S SEE IF I CAN.
THERE WE GO. OKAY OKAY. SO THE
BASICS OF ADJUDICATION WHAT IS A
GROUNDWATER ADJUDICATION? WHERE
DOES IT COME FROM? WELL
GROUNDWATER ADJUDICATIONS
ESSENTIALLY COME FROM THE FACT
THAT THERE'S NO STATE AS YOU'VE
HEARD REGULATORY SYSTEM FOR
GROUNDWATER UP UNTIL 2014. AND
THERE IS TO THIS DAY, NO PERMIT
SYSTEM FOR GROUNDWATER.
GROUNDWATER RIGHTS ARE A MATTER
OF COMMON LAW. TYPICALLY YOU
HAVE A COUPLE OF KINDS. UM, ONE
IS OVERLYING RIGHTS FOR
LANDOWNERS. THOSE ARE TYPICALLY
YOUR IRRIGATORS. THEN YOU HAVE
APPROPRIATED RIGHTS, WHICH ARE
TYPICALLY YOUR PUBLIC WATER
SUPPLIERS. UM AND THOSE RIGHTS
WHEN BASINS ARE IN A CONDITION
OF SHORTAGE CAN BECOME
PRESCRIPTIVE, MEANING THAT THEY
CAN ACQUIRE SOME OF THE RIGHTS
OF THE OVER LIARS AND SO WHEN A
BASIN IS IN SHORTAGE, THE WATER
RIGHT HOLDERS WANT TO SETTLE.
WHO HAS WHICH WATER RIGHTS AND
WHO CAN PUMP HOW MUCH THERE WERE
SOME ATTEMPTS TO HAVE SPECIAL
DISTRICTS MANAGE SOME OF THESE
BASINS, AND SOME OF THE SPECIAL
DISTRICTS DID IT VERY WELL. AND
OTHERS DID NOT. AND SO
ADJUDICATIONS ARE USED TO HELP.
UM UH, TO HELP CREATE A
MANAGEABLE BASIN AND TO BRING
THE BASIN INTO SOMETHING CALLED
SAFE YIELD, OR TODAY'S
SUSTAINABLE YIELD, WHICH I'LL
TALK ABOUT IN JUST A MOMENT. NOW
IS TINA LEAHY FROM THE STATE
BOARD NOTED THE SUSTAINABLE
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT DOES
NOT GIVE THE GS GS A SAW
AUTHORITY OVER WATER RIGHTS, SO
THERE'S WATER RIGHT HOLDERS IF
THEY WANT TO HAVE CERTAINTY HAVE
TO GO TO COURT TO HAVE THOSE
RIGHTS ADJUDICATED. SO
ADJUDICATIONS HAVE A TIME
HONORED LONGSTANDING HISTORY IN
CALIFORNIA. THE FIRST
ADJUDICATION GOES BACK TO THE 19
FORTIES AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
MANY BASINS IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED
AND ARE OPERATING WELL UNDER
THOSE ADJUDICATIONS SO FAR IN
CALIFORNIA, THERE ARE
APPROXIMATELY 29 ADJUDICATED
AREAS. AND AS THE CHAIR NOTED
THERE ABOUT FIVE ADJUDICATION.
STILL PENDING. ONE WAS RECENTLY.
UM UH, ENTERED AS WELL. SO WE'RE
SOMEWHERE AROUND EARLY 30 IN
NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE. WHEN WE
GET INTO ADJUDICATIONS. WE HAVE
TWO MAJOR ISSUES. ONE IS THIS
QUESTION OF OVERDRAFT. YOU HEAR
YOU HEAR ABOUT OVERDRAFT A LOT.
UM OVERDRAFT OCCURS WHEN YOU
HAVE THE AVERAGE ANNUAL AMOUNT
OF PUMPING THAT EXCEEDS INPUT TO
THE BASIN ON A LONG TERM BASIS,
SO AS A SINGLE YEAR OF SHORTAGE
IN THE BASIN DOES NOT EQUATE TO
OVERDRAFT. IT HAS TO BE A LONG
TERM TREND. SO IF YOU LOOK AT
THE GRAPHIC ON THE SLIDE THE
TREND AS THE BASIN GOES UP AND
DOWN, EACH OF THOSE DOWNWARD
SPIKES IS NOT OVERDRAFT, BUT THE
LONG TERM TREND. THAT EQUATES TO
OVERDRAFT. THE OTHER KEY FACTOR
IN AN ADJUDICATION IS THE
QUESTION OF WHAT THE COURTS HAVE
TRADITIONALLY CALLED SAFE FIELD.
WHAT SIGMA CALLS SUSTAINABLE
YIELD. UM SOME FOLKS WOULD ARGUE
THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN
THE TWO. I'M NOT SURE I BUY
THAT, BUT, UM, FROM FROM HERE ON
OUT, I'M GOING TO CALL IT
SUSTAINABLE YIELD. FOR EASE OF
REFERENCE. UM AND THE IDEA OF
SUSTAINABLE YIELD IS THAT THERE
IS A QUANTITY OF WATER. THAT CAN
BE PUMPED FROM THE BASIN, UM,
THAT THAT IF YOU EXCEED THAT
AMOUNT, CAUSE UNDESIRABLE
RESULTS. AND SIGMA LISTS THE
UNDESIRABLE RESULTS. THESE ARE
LARGELY COLLECTED FROM THE CASES
THAT PREDATED SIGMA. THE
ADJUDICATION CASES. UM SO THEY
LOOK AT THINGS LIKE LOWERING OF
GROUNDWATER LEVELS REDUCTION IN
STORAGE, WATER QUALITY
SUBSIDENCE. UM AND THEN SIGMA
EXPRESSLY ADDS THE IDEA OF THE
PUMPING IMPACT ON INTERCONNECTED
SURFACE WATERS IN THE BENEFICIAL
USES. OF SURFACE WATERS LIKE
FISH AND WILDLIFE. UM THERE'S AN
ARGUMENT THAT THAT ACTUALLY
WOULD BE PART OF A SAFE YIELD
CALCULATION UNDER THE COMMON LAW
ANYWAY TODAY, UM, BUT THAT'S A
BIGGER CONVERSATION. UM SO WITH
THESE CONCEPTS OF OVERDRAFT IN
SUSTAINABLE YIELD, THE
ADJUDICATION HAPPENS WHEN
PUMPERS INVOKE THE JUDICIAL
POWER TO DETERMINE THE RIGHTS TO
PUMP AND AS PART OF THAT PROCESS
ESTABLISHED A METHOD FOR
ACHIEVING AND MAINTAINING SAFE
YIELD. SUSTAINABLE YIELDS. SO
THE IDEA IS THAT THE
ADJUDICATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE
COMPREHENSIVE. ALL OF THE
PUMPERS IN THE BASIN ARE
SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF THIS
LITIGATION, AND THEN THEY WILL,
BUT THE JUDGMENT WILL BIND ALL
PUMPERS IN THE FUTURE NOW IN THE
PAST BEFORE SIGMA BEFORE 2015
ADJUDICATIONS WERE, UM THERE
WERE NO CLEAR STATUTORY
STANDARDS FOR ADJUDICATIONS, SO
EACH ADJUDICATION WAS MANAGED
SORT OF DIFFERENTLY IN TERMS OF
PROCESS, AND THEY OFTEN TOOK A
VERY LONG TIME AND IN 2015, THE
LEGISLATURE ADOPTED SOME LAWS TO
STREAMLINE THE ADJUDICATIONS,
PROVIDE SOME CLEAR PROCESSES AND
INTEGRATE THE ADJUDICATIONS.
WITH SIGMA. IN THE IN THOSE
STANDARDS THEY SPECIFY WHEN THE
COURT CAN IMPOSE AN INJUNCTION,
BASICALLY IN ORDER THAT HALTS
PUMPING FOR SOME SHORT PERIOD OF
TIME, OR A LONG TERM PERIOD OF
TIME IN ACCORDANCE WITH, UM, THE
INTERIM FINDINGS OR THE LONG
TERM SOLUTION. SO THE STATUTORY
GOALS IN ENERGY DEDICATION THESE
THE STATUTES NOW CLEARLY SPELL
OUT WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN
IN AN ADJUDICATION. ONE OF THE
ONE OF THE STATUTORY GOALS IN
THE ADJUDICATION IS TO PROTECT
WATER RIGHTS. TO THE EXTENT
THOSE WATER RIGHTS ARE BEING
USED CONSISTENT WITH THE
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION. AND TO
PROVIDE THE WATER RIGHT HOLDERS
WOULD DUE PROCESS. THE
ADJUDICATION IS SUPPOSED TO
PROMOTE EFFICIENCY, AVOID
UNNECESSARY DELAYS, REDUNDANT
REDUNDANCIES AND UNNECESSARY
COSTS IN DEVELOPING TECHNICAL
INFORMATION AND THE ULTIMATE
OUTCOME. UM, AND THAT IS, IN
PART A WAY OF INTEGRATING THE
ADJUDICATION WITH SIGMA, WHICH
I'LL TALK ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IN
JUST A MOMENT. ONE OF THE
STATUTE, STATUTORY GOALS IS TO
ENCOURAGE COMPROMISE AND
SETTLEMENT AND THAT CONSISTENCY
WITH SIGMA SIGMA TIMEFRAME
ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT WITHIN
THAT TIME FRAME IN A MINIMIZING
INTERFERENCE WITH GSP
IMPLEMENTATION THAT IS
SPECIFICALLY IN THE STATUTES
ALSO TO ENSURE EQUITY. FOR
EXEMPT IN NON STIPULATING
PARTIES, SMALL FARMERS AND
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, AND
I'LL TALK ABOUT ALL OF THAT IN
JUST A MOMENT AND NOTE THAT SOME
OF THESE STATUTORY GOALS MAYBE
INTENTION WITH EACH OTHER, FOR
EXAMPLE, ENCOURAGING COMPROMISE
MAY NOT ALWAYS ENCOURAGE FURTHER
EQUITY IN A PARTICULAR CASE, SO
THE COURT HAS THE VERY DIFFICULT
JOB OF MANAGING THE LITIGATION
TO SEEK TO PROTECT ALL OF THESE
VALUES AT THE SAME TIME, WHICH
IS A TALL ORDER FOR THE COURT.
GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT ADJUDICATIONS, ONE OF
THE IMPORTANT THINGS TO
UNDERSTAND IS THAT COMPREHENSIVE
ADJUDICATION IS A COMPLEX
LITIGATION. THAT MEANS THAT THE
ADJUDICATION IS MANAGED IN
PHASES. UM THE ISSUES ARE
DIVIDED UP IN ONE ISSUE IS
DETERMINED BEFORE OTHER ISSUES
ARE TACKLED, AND I'VE GOT A LIST
OF POTENTIAL PHASING HERE ON THE
SLIDE. IT TALKS ABOUT
IDENTIFYING THE GEOGRAPHY FOR
THE HYDROLOGIC. MODEL, THE MODEL
OF HOW THE BASIN WORKS. THIS IS
LESS LESS INTENSE NOW THAN IT
USED TO BE, WITH SOME
IMPROVEMENTS TO SIGMA AND
IDENTIFICATION OF BASE AND
BOUNDARIES. BUT OTHER PHASES
FOCUS ON THINGS LIKE
DETERMINATION OF THE LONG TERM
SUSTAINABLE YIELD, COMPARING
THAT TO PUMPING EVALUATING THE
UNDESIRABLE RESULTS REVIEWING
CONFIRMING WATER RIGHTS.
ASSESSING THE CONSISTENCY WITH
SIGMA AND THE GSP AND APPROVING
WHAT'S CALLED A PHYSICAL
SOLUTION. I'M GOING TO TALK
ABOUT PHYSICAL SOLUTION IN JUST
A MINUTE. NOW IN THESE PHASES,
THEY DON'T NEED TO OCCUR IN THIS
ORDER. UM, AND IN FACT, THE
STATUTE HAS SOME DIRECTION THAT
SAYS CERTAIN ISSUES SHOULD BE
DECIDED EARLY ON, LIKE WATER
RIGHTS. PRESCRIPTIVE WATER
RIGHTS, FOR EXAMPLE, DECIDED
EARLY ON IMPORTANTLY, THE
PARTIES MAY STIPULATE TO CERTAIN
FACTS AND OUTCOMES OF THESE
PHASES ALONG THE WAY OR AT THE
END, AND I WANT TO KEEP THAT IN
MIND AS AS WE GO FORWARD AND
TALK ABOUT ADJUDICATIONS. I
THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT
THING TO UNDERSTAND. HAVE FIVE
MINUTES LEFT FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION. OKAY THANK YOU. UM
SO THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION IS
SEEKS TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE
YIELD. PHYSICAL SOLUTIONS ARE
REQUIRED. BY CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 10 SECTION
TO THE COURT HAS THE AUTHORITY
AND THE OBLIGATION EVEN IF THE
PARTIES DON'T AGREE. TO
IMPLEMENT THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION.
THIS IS TYPICALLY GOING TO
CREATE NOT ONLY AN ALLOCATION
METHODOLOGY, BUT ALSO A PLAN FOR
POTENTIALLY BRINGING
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER INTO THE
BASIN OR REDUCING PUMPING AND
HOW TO PAY FOR THOSE. THE
PHYSICAL SOLUTION WILL ALSO
CREATE A MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
CALLED THE WATER MASTER, WHICH
IS OFTEN APPOINTED IN THE
ADJUDICATION. UM SO THIS IS THIS
IS ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT
HAPPENS WITH THE PHYSICAL
SOLUTION. THAT'S IMPORTANT IS
THE COURT WILL RESERVE
JURISDICTION SO THE WATER MASTER
WILL DECIDE LOTS OF ISSUES ALONG
THE WAY. BUT THE COURT WILL ALSO
HAVE THE ABILITY TO WEIGH IN
DOWN THE ROAD. FINALLY THE
IMPORTANT THING ABOUT
ADJUDICATIONS BEFORE I GET TO
SOME BIG PICTURE ISSUES IS THAT
THEY'RE OFTEN RESOLVED. THEY'RE
ALWAYS RESOLVED BY COURT DECREE,
BUT THEY'RE OFTEN RESOLVED BY
STIPULATED JUDGMENT. THE STATUTE
PROVIDES THAT THE COURT CAN
APPROVE A STIPULATED JUDGMENT,
WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A
SETTLEMENT OF THE PARTIES IF
CERTAIN CRITERIA ARE PRESENT. UM
THEY HAVE TO MEET THESE
MANDATORY STATUTORY CRITERIA AND
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF PUMPERS AGREE ON IN
THE PARTIES HAVE TO BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT
OF PUMPING IN THE BASIN, AND
THERE'S A FORMULA. IN THE
LEGISLATION FOR THAT. NOW THE
MANDATORY STATUTORY CRITERIA IS
THAT THE COURT MUST FIND THAT
THE JUDGMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE CONSTITUTION AND WATER RIGHT
PRIORITIES MUST TREAT NON
STIPULATING PARTIES AND EXEMPT
CLAIMS, WHICH ARE SMALL CLAIMS
UNDER FIVE ACRE FEET PER YEAR.
EQUITABLY UM CONSIDER WATER USE
AND ACCESSIBILITY FOR SMALL
FARMERS AND DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. AND UM, NOT
SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIR THE ABILITY
OF A G S A, THE STATE BOARD OR
DWR TO COMPLY WITH SIGMA AND
ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT SO ADJUDICATIONS
HAVE A LOT OF BENEFITS. THEY
PROVIDE CERTAINTY ON WATER
RIGHTS AND ALLOCATIONS, CLARIFY
AN EXERCISED RIGHTS. ESTABLISH A
CLEAR MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK,
IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF WATER
USE, DEVELOP A PATHWAY FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL WATER AND LONG TERM
SUSTAINABILITY, AND THEY CREATED
CLEAR GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND
CAN INSTITUTIONALIZED
SUSTAINABILITY AND IMPORTANT
WAYS. HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THAT
MORE LATER, BUT ADJUDICATIONS
ALSO HAVE CHALLENGES. THEY'RE
THEY'RE VERY TIME INTENSIVE.
THERE ARE VERY COSTLY. AND HERE
REALLY IMPORTANT, THERE'S
SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE IN THE
JUDAIC ATION FROM PARTIES THAT
HAVE CERTAIN RESOURCES. CERTAIN
WATER RIGHTS MAY BE LOCATED IN
CERTAIN AREAS AND THEREFORE HAVE
NEGOTIATING POWER, AND THERE'S A
LACK OF ACCESS TO THE PROCESS
FOR OTHERS WHO DON'T HOLD THOSE
WATER RIGHTS OR HAVE THOSE
RESOURCES AND SOME OF THE THINGS
THAT TEND TO GET LEFT OUT IN
THIS PROCESS ARE THE PUBLIC
INTEREST LOOKING AT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS,
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, SMALL
FARMERS AND SOMETIMES
INTEGRATION WITH SIGMA. NOW WHAT
HAPPENS? UM WHEN YOU HAVE THAT
PHASING AND AN ADJUDICATION IS
THAT THE PARTIES WILL FORM
COALITIONS, SOMETIMES FORMAL
CLASSES, SOMETIMES INFORMAL
COALITIONS BASED ON THEIR WATER
RIGHTS OR THEIR GEOGRAPHY, AND
THEN THEY WILL PROMOTE THEIR
INTERESTS WITHIN THOSE
COALITIONS. THEY WILL DEVELOP A
PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION AND
PRESENTED TO THE COURT. THE
COURT HAS A NUMBER OF STATUTORY
OBLIGATIONS TO MAKE FINDINGS.
ABOUT EQUITY AND THESE OTHER
FACTORS. THE FACT IS THAT THE
COURT IS JUST 11 JUDGE. UM THERE
THE COURT HAS SOME RESOURCES
THEY CAN APPOINT A SPECIAL
MASTER. THESE ALSO HAVE TIME AND
COST AND THE COURT IS ALSO
ENCOURAGED TO, UH TO PROMOTE
EFFICIENCY. AND SO WHEN THE
PARTIES COME TO THE COURT WITH
SOLUTIONS STIPULATIONS, THERE IS
A BIG INCENTIVE FOR THE COURT TO
ADOPT THOSE SOLUTIONS. AND ANY
REVIEW THAT COMES LATER IS
REALLY, UH, THE CLOSING THE BARN
DOOR RIGHT AFTER THE HORSES OUT.
THERE'S A LOT OF MOMENTUM.
TOWARD A PARTICULAR PHYSICAL
SOLUTION, AND THAT'S WHERE YOU
GET SOME INEQUITIES. AND SO AS
WE MOVE FORWARD, AND WE THINK
ABOUT THE COURT'S RESOURCE IS
IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THE
CRITICAL ROLES OF PARTIES IN
THIS MATTER. THE COURT ONLY
KNOWS WHAT THE PARTIES TELL IT
AND WHAT'S IN THE RECORD, SO
IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT
PARTIES IN FRONT OF THE COURT.
AND THAT OFTEN WILL MEAN
CREATING STRONGER STANDARDS THAT
ALLOW MORE PEOPLE TO INTERVENE
TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF
THOSE WHO ARE NOT PRESENT AT THE
TABLE. THIS CAN ALSO REQUIRE NOT
ONLY STRONGER STATUTORY
STANDARDS, BUT FUNDING TO
SUPPORT THOSE PEOPLE
PARTICIPATING IN THE IN THE
LITIGATION, SO I WOULD OFFER
THAT THERE ARE THREE AREAS WHERE
I'D SUGGEST FOCUS. UM GOING
FORWARD. ONE IS TO CONTINUE TO
PROVIDE MEANINGFUL DIRECTION AND
SUPPORT FOR THE JUDGES IN THEIR
COMPLEX LITIGATION TASK. THE
CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL COUNCIL HAS
DONE SOME WONDERFUL WORK LATELY
AND PROVIDED A LOT OF SUPPORT. I
THINK THERE'S MORE THAT CAN BE
DONE IN TERMS OF PROVIDING CLEAR
STATUTORY STANDARDS. TO ENSURE
APPROPRIATE INTEGRATION OF THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
BY MAKING SURE THAT THE COURT
HEARS ABOUT THE PLAN EARLY IN
THE PROCESS ENOUGH FOR IT TO
MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND ISN'T LEFT
TO A LATER PHASE IN THE
LITIGATION. UM AT LEAST SO THAT
THE COURT HAS THE INFORMATION.
THE COURT MAY NOT MAY DECIDE
THAT THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION IS
BETTER THAN THE SOLUTION IN THE
PLAN THAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE
STATUTE, BUT AT LEAST THE COURT
SHOULD HAVE THE INFORMATION. THE
OTHER. THE OTHER THING IS TO
DEVELOP THAT REALISTIC PATHWAY
FOR ENSURING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
AND REPRESENTATION OF THOSE
UNREPRESENTED INTEREST. PERHAPS
THROUGH INTERVENTION STANDARDS,
PERHAPS THROUGH ADDITIONAL
FUNDING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. RIGHT ON TIME. TOO.
IMPRESSIVE THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM I THINK
WE'LL CONSOLIDATE OUR QUESTIONS
BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S GOING TO
BE SIGNIFICANT OVERLAP. YOU'RE
SO WHY DON'T WE TURN TO MR PRATT
FOR YOUR 15 MINUTES. THANK YOU,
CHAIR BENNETT AND GOOD MORNING
CHEERS, COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND
STAFF FOR THE RECORD. MY NAME IS
JEFF PRATT. I WORK FOR THE
VENTURA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
AGENCY. I'VE BEEN WITH THE TURK
COUNTY 24 YEARS AND THAT
POSITION ON THE CHIEF ENGINEER
OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION
DISTRICT I OVER STAND. THE CHIEF
ENGINEER BEFORE WATER DISTRICT
SENT. I AM THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
FOR THE FOX CANYON GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT AGENCY, AND WE STAFF
SEVERAL THE GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES. THAT'S
IMPORTANT BECAUSE HERE I'M HERE
TODAY, SPEAKING. FOR THE
RESOURCE AND ALL THE INTERESTS
THAT THOSE DIFFERENT TASKS
REPRESENT. UM. I'M GOING TO
DESCRIBE OUR EXPERIENCE WITH OUR
FIRST COMPLETED ADJUDICATION AND
, UM, TALK TO YOU ABOUT SOME OF
THE THINGS WE SEE AS CHALLENGES.
UM AS CHAIR BENNETT TALKED ABOUT
. I WON'T GO INTO THIS AND MUCH,
BUT FOX CANYON IS VERY SIMILAR
TO WHAT IS G S A IS. IT WAS
FORMED MORE THAN 40 YEARS AGO.
UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES,
THE STATE CAME TO TOWN AND SAID,
TAKE CARE OF IT, OR WE'LL TAKE
CARE OF IT FOR YOU. SO IN IN,
UM, RESPONSE TO THAT, UM THE ACT
WAS CREATED AND THE BOARD WAS
FORMED AND IT TURNED OUT THAT
THEY CHOSE THE COUNTY TO STAFF
THE AGENCY BECAUSE THEY WERE
DETERMINED TO BE THE LEAST
CONFLICTED OF ALL THE CONFLICTED
PARTIES AROUND WATER, AND WE
HAVE STAFF THAT AGENCY UP TO
THIS CURRENT POINT. UM. THE
BASIN STAKEHOLDERS ARE ALL
REPRESENTED ON THAT BOARD THERE.
OPEN FREQUENT AND ALL THINGS
CONSIDERED BROWN ACT MEETINGS
THAT RUN THAT BOARD. THE BOARD
IS COVERED BY THEIR KNOW THAT
THE FOX CANYON BOARD HAS NO
AUTHORITY TO SET WATER RIGHTS.
THEY ONLY SET ALLOCATIONS. UM
AND, UM THEY WERE CREATED TO
ADDRESS AN UNDESIRABLE RESULTS.
SEAWATER INTRUSION, WHICH HAD
BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE 19
FORTIES. UM. UH THE FOX CANDY
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY'S
MISSION WAS TO BRING ALL BASES
THE SAFE FIELD BY 2010 THAT WAS
CONSIDERED ENOUGH TO ADDRESS THE
SEAWATER INTRUSION. WE HAVE
FAILED MISERABLY SAFE YIELD WAS
AT ONE TIME 120 K. ANOTHER STUDY
DETERMINED IT LATER TO BE 100 K,
AND WE CONTINUE TO PUMP WELL IN
EXCESS OF THAT. AS MUCH AS 140
OR 150, K. MR PRATT, WILL YOU
MAKE SURE YOUR MICROPHONES I
DON'T NEED ANY CLOSER. SORRY
YOU'RE ON. UM. AND SO SWITCHING
TO SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT SHOWS UP 2014. IT
DESIGNATES THE G M A AS FIRST
RIGHT OF REFUSAL FOR THE ESSAY.
AND SO THE G M A OPTED, MAYBE
BECOME THE G S A FOR THE THREE
BASINS UNDER HIS CONTROL. THREE
D W ARE DEFINED BASINS. IT ALSO
PROVIDED THE G M A WITH NEW
AUTHORITIES THAT IT DIDN'T HAVE,
UM, ELSEWHERE. UM AND THOSE NEW
AUTHORITIES MADE EVERYONE
UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE PREVIOUSLY
FOR 40 YEARS, THE G M A HAD BEEN
COMFORTABLY CONSTRAINED. UM AND
AS I SAID, BEFORE, NO MEANINGFUL
REDUCTIONS IN PUMPING HAD REALLY
OCCURRED. UM. UNDER THE STATE
ONCE THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
ACT HIT, WE STARTED PREPARING
RGS PS IMMEDIATELY. WE DID SO
BEFORE THERE WAS ANY GRANT MONEY
AVAILABLE. WE SPENT MILLIONS ON
THEIR DEVELOPMENT AND IT HAD A
ROBUST STAKEHOLDER INPUT, AS YOU
CAN SEE ON A ON A SLIDE. THEY
WERE SUBMITTED TIMELY. THERE
WERE 47 SUBMIT ALS. I THINK THE
REASON, PAUL SAID 46 1 OF OURS
WASN'T CRITICALLY OVER DRAFTED
BUT OTHERS 47. THERE WERE EIGHT
APPROVALS GIVEN THREE OF THEM
WERE THE G MÁS. SO NOT ONLY WERE
THEY SUBMITTED TIMELY MILLIONS
WERE SPENT THEY WERE THOROUGHLY
VETTED BY STAKEHOLDERS AND THEY
WERE GOOD SCIENCE. BY THE WAY,
I'M AN ENGINEER, SO I APOLOGIZE
FOR MY STYLE. UM THE LAST POSES
VALUE ADJUDICATION WAS BROKEN
INTO THREE PHASES. THE FIRST
PHASE WAS A SAFE YIELD
DETERMINATION. WE ARGUED, IT
SHOULD BE SUSTAINABLE YIELD. AND
WE DO BELIEVE THERE IS A
DIFFERENCE. YOU CAN HAVE SAFE
YIELD WITHOUT SUSTAINABLE YIELD.
IT'S A NUANCED DIFFERENCE. AN
EXAMPLE WOULD BE THE INPUTS AND
OUTPUTS ARE SAFE YIELD, BUT YOU
CAN HAVE UNDESIRABLE. UM
OCCURRENCES LIKE HIGHER SAUCE
AND PUMPING FROM THE BASIN OF
THE SAFE FIELD NUMBER, SO IT'S A
VERY NUANCED BUT IT SEEMS THAT
WILL SAY THEY INSISTED SAFE,
YOU'LL BE KEPT IN THE
ADJUDICATION LANGUAGE, AND I'LL
GET TO THAT MORE IN A MOMENT. UM
THEY WERE FILED. BY THE WAY THE
LAWSUITS FATHER, G. SPS WERE
UNDER DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THEY
KNEW WHAT WOULD BE IN THERE. UM
AND WE WERE TAKEN WITH IT TO OUR
BOARD HAD ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT
THE COURT WAS THE RIGHT PLACE TO
DETERMINE WATER RIGHTS, AND THAT
WOULD TAKE A BIG TASK OFF THE
TABLE FOR THEM. UNFORTUNATELY IT
DIDN'T PROVE TO BE A LOT MORE
THAN THAT, AND IT MAY PRESENT
SOME PROBLEMS LATER. ANOTHER
SURPRISE. THE BOARD WAS THE
PHYSICAL SOLUTION PROCESS AND
I'LL GET SOME MORE OF THAT
MOMENT. AND THE REASON FOR THE
INITIAL. UH WELL, I SUPPOSE THIS
IS ONE OF THE THREE BASINS IN
THE G M. A AND THE REASON FOR
THE INITIATION OF THE
ADJUDICATION WAS REALLY A
DISPUTE BETWEEN MUTUAL WATER
COMPANIES AND THEIR UM,
SERVICES. PEOPLE COME TO THE GM
ON A FREQUENT BASIS WANTING THE
G M A. TO REMOVE WHATEVER
ALLOCATION THEY WERE BEING
SERVED BY THE MUTUAL AND PUT IT
ON THEIR PROPERTY OR IN A NEW,
WELL, GM, A SAID. WE'RE NOT
GETTING INTO MUTUAL. THAT'S
BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR MOODS.
WELL, SO WHEN IT STARTED, IT WAS
BETWEEN THE MUTUALS, BUT IT
ULTIMATELY SPREAD. WHAT ACTUALLY
HAPPENED. THEN THE COURT EVEN
THOUGH THE PHASING WAS SCHEDULED
THAT WAY. WAS THAT IN PHASE ONE,
THERE WAS A TERMINATION OF SAFE
YIELD. EXCUSE ME AND THE M AND I
PERCENTAGE SHARE. UM AND I'M
GOING TO USE EMINI AND
LANDOWNERS TO DESCRIBE THE TWO
BASIC INTERESTS IN EACH OF THE
BASINS. UM ON PHASE TWO, WHICH
WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE
INDIVIDUAL WATER RIGHTS. IT
EXPANDED ITS STARTED STEPPING
INTO PHASE THREE, WHICH WAS A
PHYSICAL SOLUTION AND THAT
PRESENTS SOME PROBLEMS AND I'LL
TALK ABOUT THAT MORE IN A
MOMENT. UM THE DETERMINED ALL
THE WATER RIGHTS IN THE BASIN.
THAT WAS A GREAT RELIEF TO THE
GYM. A BOARD IT APPOINTED. THE
GMA IS WATER MASTERS. THE
JUDGMENT STILL OUT ON WHETHER
THAT'S GOING TO WORK OR NOT.
AND, UM, IT SPOKE TO THE GSP IN
THE SUMMER GOALS. SUSTAINABLE
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT. I'M
TALKING ABOUT THAT MORE IN A
MOMENT. UM. IT ALSO CREATED
SOMETHING THAT OH, THANK YOU.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. IT ALSO
CREATED, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE
ARE ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH IT
FORMALLY CREATED. THANK YOU.
THERE'S A SUSTAINABILITY PHOEBE
IN CHARGE FOR THAT. THIS DOESN'T
PUT YOU IN OVERDRAFT. UM UH,
THEY CREATED TWO COMMITTEES,
FORMAL COMMITTEES. UNDER THE
JUDGMENT, THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE AND THE POLICY
ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THESE WERE
THE VEHICLES SUBSTITUTED FOR
WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY OUR
STAKEHOLDER INPUT FORMALLY IN
THE JUDGMENT. AND NOTE THAT
NEITHER ONE OF THESE ARE BROWN
AT COMMITTEES. THERE'S AN ODD TO
BROWN ACT COMPLIANCE IN THE
JUDGMENT, BUT IT STOPS SHORT OF
THE FORM 700 THE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST STATEMENTS, WHICH I'LL
TALK ABOUT MORE IN A MOMENT. UM
WE ANTICIPATE THAT THIS
COMMITTEE CONSULTATION PROCESS
BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN, UM ADDED THE
IN MANY YEARS BEFORE WILL BE
USED TO CHALLENGE THE GM, A
SCIENCE AND TECHNICAL
CONCLUSIONS, BUT LIKELY THE WAY
WE CALCULATE SUSTAINABLE YIELD,
AND THE WAY THAT, UM WE
CALCULATE BASED MANAGEMENT
OBJECTIVES AND MINIMUM
THRESHOLDS. THAT'S WHERE THE
ATTACK WILL COME. IT'S ALREADY
COME BEFORE IT WAS HAPPENING THE
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WITH THESE
COMMITTEES AND NOW THE SAME 10.
PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO DO THIS
ARE GOING TO BE THE ONES WITH
THE MAJORITY OF THE VOICE. UM IN
THE JUDGMENT. THE PHYSICAL
SOLUTION ALLOCATED 42,000 ACRE
FEET TO PEOPLE THAT GET THEM TO
THE TABLE. UM YOU CAN THINK OF
THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION AS AN
ENGINEER. I THINK IT WAS A BIG
BASKET FULL OF CHIPS YOU SHARE
WITH EVERYBODY TO GET THEM TO
COME TO THE TABLE AND THAT WILL
FORCE THE 850 CRAMMED DOWN RULE.
JENNIFER ALLUDED TO IT IN HER
PRESENTATION WAS THE 75% OF
WATER. 50% OF THE LANDOWNERS.
IT'S IN THE CODE IF YOU CAN GET
THAT, AND THE JUDGE JUMPS, AND,
UM ATTORNEYS CALLED IT THE CRAM
DOWN RULES. I DIDN'T MAKE THAT
UP. AND IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO
THE ATTORNEYS. THEY THOUGHT IT
WOULD SHORTEN THINGS IF THEY
COULD GET TO THE CRAM DOWN, BUT
IT TOOK THEM A LONG TIME TO GET
TO THE CRAMP TOWN BECAUSE THEY
HAD TO MAKE SO MANY SIDE DEALS.
INITIALLY THEY WEREN'T SURE THEY
COULD GET THAT NUMBER. BUT WHEN
THEY STARTED THE TRADE OFFS THAT
THEY CALLED PHYSICAL SOLUTION
THEY GOT THERE. HM? UM IT ALSO
CREATED SOME NEW YIELD
CALCULATIONS OPERATIONAL YIELDED
BASE AND OPTIMIZATION YIELD.
I'LL TALK ABOUT THOSE AND
THEY'RE BOTH DIFFERENT FROM
SUSTAINABLE YIELD. AND IT'S
VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED THE
POSSIBILITY OF AN OPEN AND
PUBLIC WATER MARKET SOMETHING
THAT WE HAD TO DO IN THAT CASE,
THE COMMITTED MORE THAN A
MILLION DOLLARS TO DEVELOPING,
AND IT STARTED THAT WATER MARKET
DEVELOPMENT STARTED LONG BEFORE
SIGMA HIT. IT STARTED WITH THE
DROUGHT. UM ALL THIS. ANYTHING
THAT GM A WATERMAN OR THE WATER
MASTER DOES IS, UH, IS BASED
MANAGEMENT ACTION IS SUBJECT TO
THE COURTS, CONTINUING
JURISDICTION, SO THAT MEANS YOU
PUT THE SCIENCE IN THE HANDS OF
THE COURT. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT
IN THE GSP. UM AND ANY PARTY
THAT HAS THE MONEY CAN CHALLENGE
AN ACTION TO TAKE IT TO COURT.
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE G M A
IN THE JUDGMENT GAVE AWAY THEIR,
UM, ABUSE OF DISCRETION
AUTHORITY. NORMALLY WHEN THE
BOARD LIKE THE G M E, UM IS GOES
TO COURT, THE COURT HOLDS IT TO
ABUSE OF DISCRETION. STANDARD IF
YOU DON'T ABUSE DISCRETION
TYPICALLY REFER TO THE AGENCY
THAT'S GONE. IT'S DE NOVO
REVIEW. EVERYBODY GOES WITH THE
DOCUMENTS THEY CREATE DURING THE
ARGUMENT OR THE DISCUSSION ON
WHATEVER THE BASE MANAGEMENT
ACTION IS, AND THE COURTS GET TO
DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENS. UM
ANOTHER THING IT I'LL TALK ABOUT
BASING OPTIMIZATION YIELD HERE,
I GUESS, UM ANY. IT IS SOMETHING
THAT IS, UM THE CIA FIVE. SORRY
JUMPING AROUND, BASED ON
OPTIMIZATION YIELD IS A YIELD
THAT INCLUDES THE YIELDS THAT
WERE INCLUDED IN THE GSP
INCLUDES TWO ADDITIONAL FACTORS
ANY REASONABLE PROJECT THAT
MIGHT BE DONE OVER SOME TIME
PERIOD. AND IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT
THOSE TIME PERIODS ARE TO MY WAY
OF THINKING AND ANY CHANGE
CONDITIONS AND THOSE CONDITIONS
CAN BE ANYTHING FROM YOU KNOW
JUSTIN MASON MANAGEMENT
OBJECTIVES OR THRESHOLDS TO NEW
IDEAS ABOUT PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS
OR SOMETHING IMPORTANT THING TO
NOTE HERE IS THAT YOU DON'T
SUBTRACT CARRYOVER FROM THAT
YIELD. ONCE YOU GET CARRY OVER
HERE, UM, CARRY OVERS CARRIED ON
FOREVER. NOW, IF I MIGHT DIGRESS
JUST FOR A MOMENT. UM I DO.
THANK YOU. IN THE WHEN THE G M A
WAS OPERATING. EVERYBODY UP HERE
THOUGHT GM IS DOING GREAT JOB
AND WHAT I FOUND OUT WAS, HEY,
THE REASON THEY THOUGHT THAT WAS
BECAUSE WE HAD CREATED THIS
THING CALLED CREDITS. AND IF YOU
DIDN'T PUMP UP AS MUCH AS YOUR
ALLOCATION, YOU GOTTA CREDIT FOR
WHAT WAS LEFT AND IT WENT ON THE
BOOKS. SO WE STARTED AMASSING
THESE CREDITS, AND BY THE TIME I
GOT THERE AND 2004 2005. THERE'S
SOMETHING LIKE 700,000 CREDITS
ON THE BASE, AND AT THAT TIME
THAT HAD 120,000 SAFE YIELD, SO
THERE'S A LOT OF LIKE
CONFEDERATE MONEY. AND THE
CREDITS WERE CREATED WERE
AMASSED AGAINST PAPER WATER
ARTIFICIALLY HIGH ALLOCATIONS
BASED ON ARTIFICIALLY HIGH
PUMPING NUMBERS, AND SO CARRY
OVER. IN THE CASE OF THIS IS
VERY SIMILAR. THERE WE WILL
START ARTIFICIALLY HIGH BECAUSE
THE BASE AND SAY FIELD I THINK I
TOLD YOU 42 AND WE THINK ON
AVERAGE, IT'S ABOUT 31. PEOPLE
WERE COLLECTING CREDITS ON THAT
THEY WILL CALL IT CARRY OVER AND
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO USE IT
BEFORE THERE ARE ANY CUTS AT.
YOU HAVE TO CUT OTHER THINGS
RAMP DOWN, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT YOU NEED TO CARRY
OVER IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT AND
WHY IT MAY PRESENT A PROBLEM
LATER. UM SO, UM, I THINK I
COVERED EVERYTHING I WANT TO
COVER ON THAT SLIDE. UM SO JUST
IN SUMMARY AT THE FIVE MINUTE,
MARK, YEAH. SO THIS IS THE
SUMMARY SO OKAY, SO I DIDN'T PUT
HIM IN ANY, BUT THESE ARE THE
OVERARCHING QUESTIONS AND ISSUES
RAISED BY THE OUTCOME OF THIS
ADJUDICATION. AND WE THINK THIS
IS DEDICATION IS GOING TO BE
USED AS A MODEL FOR THE FUTURE
ADJUDICATIONS OF INTERCOUNTY.
IT'S ALREADY BEEN THE DISCUSSED.
YES FOR THE SO FOR THE NEXT
ADJUDICATION, WHICH IS OXEN ARE
PLEASANT VALLEY BASINS. AND SO
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT
BECAUSE IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT
BASIN. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO WON'T BE WELL
REPRESENTED THEIR NUMBER OF
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES SOLELY
RELIANT ON GROUNDWATER AND WHO
DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO STAND
UP FOR THEIR OWN RIGHTS OR
FINANCIAL ABILITY. UM BUT I'M
GONNA GO AND SORT OF THE ORDER.
I THINK OF IMPORTANCE TO KNOW
THE DROVERS STANDARD. THAT WAS
IN MY MIND, PROBABLY THE WORST
OUTCOME OF THE ADJUDICATION. YOU
KNOW THAT THERE'S A POTENTIAL
FOR JUST ENDLESS ARGUMENTS THAT
THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGAIN WHICH WILL ATTACK THE
SCIENCES APPOINTED BY PACK, AND
THERE'S NO FORM, 700 CONFLICTS
REQUIRED AND OUR PREVIOUS
EXPERIENCE, THE TECHNICAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE PUT US IN
ENDLESS LOOPS OF DISCUSSIONS
THAT STUDIES AND SO FORTH. THE
SECOND THING I WOULD NOTE IS
THIS NOT A BROWN AT COMMITTEE?
UH AND SO THEREFORE THERE'S NO
FORM 700 REQUIRED. AND, UM THE.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CAN'T BE
DETERMINED. SO YOU CAN'T REALLY
TELL WHERE FOLKS ARE COMING FROM
. WE'RE STILL WRESTLING WITH
THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T FINISHED
THE RULES. WATER MASTER RULES.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE CONSIDERED
IN THE RULES, BUT SOME THINK
IT'S A DONE DEAL. AND THEN THE
850 CRAM DOWN DEALS NOW WHAT?
THE THAT THAT TOOK THE MOST PART
OF ALL THIS ADJUDICATION AND
TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
SPENT. WE SPENT 6 MILLION ON
THIS AND, UM, WE WERE TOLD THAT
THE LANDOWNER SPENT 10 MILLION
TENS OF MILLIONS. AND THIS TOOK
THE MOST TIME BECAUSE IT WAS
THAT BIG BASKET OF DEALS YOU CAN
MAKE TO GET PEOPLE TO COME TO
THE TABLE. AND IT INVOLVED
EVERYTHING FROM JEEZ,
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES. UM UH,
STAKEHOLDER PROCESSES PROGRAMS
PROJECTS. EVERYTHING IS ON THE
TABLE. IT'S NOT WHAT YOU THINK
WOULD NORMALLY THINK OF, OR AT
LEAST AS AN ENGINEER. YOU WOULD
THINK OF AS A PHYSICAL SOLUTION.
SO, UM AND THEN I THINK AFTER
THAT, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW,
WITH THE COURT DECIDED TO
SCIENCE. UM I THINK THAT CREATES
A REAL POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT
WITH THE APPROVED DSP, WHICH
JUST MEANS MORE TIME. IN THE
COURTS. THE POINTS I MADE TO YOU
ABOUT INITIAL OPERATING AND THE
JUDGMENT ALLOCATION AND THE
BASIN OPERATION YIELD. I MEAN
THE WAY THE BASED OPERATION
OPERATIONAL YIELD WORK IS YOU
SUBTRACT THE BASIN. TAKE THE
BASEMENT OPERATION YIELD WITH
THOSE TWO EXTRA CHARACTERS,
WHICH IS LIKELY PROJECTS AND
CHANGES IN CONDITION YOU
SUBTRACT THE OPERATIONAL YIELD.
YOU DIVIDED BY THE YEARS LEFT
AND YOU GET YOUR RAMP DOWN.
THEORETICALLY IN THE CONCEIVABLY
THAT COULD BE ZERO BECAUSE IF
YOU SAY I'M GONNA GET THIS MANY
PROJECTS DONE, AND YOU CAN
INCLUDE THOSE AS AN INCREASE IN
YOUR YOUR SUSTAINABLE YIELD,
YOUR OPERATIONAL YIELD WOULD BE
EQUAL TO YOUR BASED OPTIMIZATION
. SO YOUR NUMERATOR WILL BE
ZERO. OR IT COULD BE VERY
MINIMAL DEPENDING UPON WHAT THAT
IS, AND SO I THINK THAT'S QUITE
CONSEQUENTIAL AND VERY
DELIBERATE ON THE PART OF THE
FOLKS WHO DEVELOP THIS. AND THEN
, UM, CARRYOVER IS NOT SUBJECT
TO RAMP DOWN. WE TALKED ABOUT
THAT. I THINK ANOTHER THING IS
THAT THE GSP AND I THINK
JENNIFER SAID THIS SHOULD BE
HEARD. FIRST THERE WERE
CHALLENGES TO THE GSP. THE COURT
REFUSED TO HEAR IT. FIRST GSP
HAVE HEARD ON ITS OWN MERITS IN
FRONT OF ALL OF THIS SHOULD PUT
SUFFICIENT CONSTRAINTS ON THAT
PHYSICAL SOLUTION TO MINIMIZE
COSTS TO EVERYBODY INVOLVED IN
THE LITIGATION. THAT'S MY OWN
CONSIDERED OPINION, AND THEY
CONSIDERED OPINION OF THE
ATTORNEYS I WORKED WITH. UM AND
THEN JUST SOME ONE OBSERVED
OBSERVATION. WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT
OF COMPLAINTS SINCE THIS PAST A
LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO THOSE DEALS NOW
CLAIMED THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND
THE DEALS. THEY THOUGHT THE
DEALS THEY MADE TO JOIN INTO THE
850. WE'RE GONNA GET THEM
VARIANCES, SO THEY'VE COME TO US
APPEARANCES. WE SAY NOPE. YOU
GET WHAT YOU GOT, AND THAT'S
THAT'S ALL IT IS. AND THEN THEY
HAVE BEEN A NUMBER WHO CLAIMED
THAT THEY WERE NEVER NOTIFIED.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY
PRESENTATION. FIRST I APPRECIATE
THE SPEED WITH WHICH YOU COVERED
A LOT OF INFORMATION. UM GOOD
ENGINEER CAN DO THAT. UM THE
WANT TO TRY TO CLARIFY SOME
THINGS THAT I HEARD THAT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THAT WE HAVE IT. AND
FOR BOTH OF YOU FROM THE START
WITH BOTH OF YOU ON THE ONE
THING THAT I THAT THAT YOU
TALKED ABOUT YOU TALKED ABOUT IF
A CERTAIN NUMBER OF LANDOWNERS
GET TOGETHER THAN THE COURTS AND
THE INTERESTS OF EFFICIENCY AND
THE SORT OF THE TRADITION OF THE
COURT IS TO GO WITH THAT
SETTLEMENT POSITION THAT THAT
COMES FROM, UM FROM THAT
GATHERING OF ALL OF THOSE
PARTIES, UM AND I'M JUST GONNA
ASKING THE ATTORNEY CORRECT THAT
YOU WERE REFERRING TO YES, THAT
A CHEATER 50% OF THE 50% OF THE
OWNER 75% OF WATER. YEAH YEAH,
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY IN STATUTE.
ALL RIGHT? EXACTLY AND THAT THAT
RISK IF THAT IF THAT SETTLEMENT
PROPOSAL IS CONFLICTS WITH SORT
OF THE G S A, UH WITH WITH THE
GROUNDWATER WITH A GROUNDWATER
PLANT THE GSP WITH THE
GROUNDWATER PLAN. THAT'S THE
NUANCE. THAT'S WHAT'S DIFFICULT.
AND SO ARE YOU SAYING, MR PRATT
THAT YOU THINK THAT THE FIRST
THING THAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN
THESE LITIGATIONS IS THEY SHOULD
SIT DOWN AND SAY, IS THE SAFE
FIELD NUMBER THAT IS IN THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
THE RIGHT NUMBER. IS THAT WHAT
YOU MEAN? WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU
GO FIRST I IT IS. IT'S TWO
THINGS. UM, IT IS THAT HERE'S
THE SUSTAINED AND IT IS,
JENNIFER SAID. THAT EXPOSES THE
COURT TO WHAT'S IN THE GSP,
WHICH MIGHT NOT HAPPEN OTHERWISE
. SO THAT WAY, THE COURT KNOWS
WHAT'S IN THE G SPS. THEY'RE
LOOKING AT THE SETTLEMENT, RIGHT
? RIGHT AND I'M GONNA ASK THE
ATTORNEY. YOU GENERALLY AGREE
WITH THAT. I THINK THAT WE WANT
TO KEEP IN MIND THAT EVERY
ADJUDICATION IS DIFFERENT, AND
EVERY GSP IS DIFFERENT. AND SO
IT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO RETAIN
THE DISCRETION OF THE JUDGE IN
CONFORMING THE PHASING AND THE
TIMING TO THE SPECIFIC
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT BEING SAID, I
THINK THERE COULD BE SIGNIFICANT
VALUE IN HEARING ABOUT THE GSP
EARLY IN THE PHASING PROCESS.
THE GSA'S, IF NOTHING ELSE, HAVE
INVESTED A LOT OF TIME, UM
TECHNICAL EXPERTISE, MONEY AND
SOMETIMES SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT, AND SO BRINGING
THAT UP EARLY IN THE PROCESS
THAT COULD BE ENCOURAGED, AND
THAT COULD BE WORTHWHILE. THANK
YOU WANT TO GO TO THE STATEMENT
OF MY CO CHAIR HERE ABOUT TRYING
TO HAVE THE RESOURCES GO TO
IMPROVING THE YOU KNOW THE
SUPPLY THEIR RECHARGE AND ALL
THAT OTHER STUFF? $16 MILLION ON
ONE LITIGATION. THAT'S A LOT OF
RECHARGE. A LOT OF LOT OF THINGS
COULD HAVE BEEN DONE FOR WATER
SUPPLY. YOU KNOW WITH THAT? SO
UM, I KNOW THAT AS THE G SPS
I'VE TALKED TO SENATOR PAVLE AND
SENATOR DICKINSON AND ABOUT THIS
THEIR THEIR INTENTION, UH, WAS
TO TRY TO HAVE THE G S P S, UH,
B. YEAH. DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF
ADJUDICATION THAT WAS GOING ON
OUT THERE BECAUSE OF THIS, SO
THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE HERE
ARE ONE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
UNDER NOW, WITH WITH THE WITH
THE LITIGATION THAT'S HAPPENED
IN YOUR JUDGMENT. MR PRATT IS
THE G ESA IN A MORE DIFFICULT
POSITION TO MEET THE GOALS OF
THE OF THE STATE IN TERMS OF
SIGMA. THEY'RE GOING TO BE MORE
DIFFICULT FOR THE GSA STEW TO
MEET THOSE GOALS BECAUSE OF IN
MY OPINION, IT WILL BE GIVEN OUR
PAST EXPERIENCE WITH THE SAME
STRUCTURE PRIOR TO HIS BEING
FORMALLY ADOPTED IN THE COURT
ORDER, SO I'D LIKE YOU TO GO
ONTO THE WHAT? WHAT DID THE
JUDGMENT DO IN TERMS OF THE
BROWN ACT? DOES IT NOT NOT
FORMALLY REQUIRE THE BROWN ACT
AS IT JUST INFORMALLY SUGGESTS
THERE SHOULD BE OPEN MEETINGS
BUT INFORMALLY IN THE JUDGMENT
TODAY, AND THE RULES WILL BECOME
PART OF THE JUDGMENT AND THEY'RE
NOT FINISHED YET. WE'RE IN
NEGOTIATIONS, THE BOARD DECIDED
TO APPEAL ON THE RULES. AND SO
THERE'S A NEGOTIATION. BUT IN
THE IN THE JUDGMENT ITSELF, IT'S
IT GIVES A NOD TO THE SAYS
SOMETHING LIKE SHOCKING FORM
GENERALLY CONFORMED TO THE WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF, UH IT HAS THAT
LANGUAGE IN THE JUDGMENT. GREAT
THE REASON I WANT WANT TO TRY TO
DRILL DOWN ON THIS FOR JUST A
MINUTE IS UM THIS HAS TWO
POTENTIAL TO BECOME THE TEMPLATE
FOR LITIGATION AGAINST ALL OF
THE GSA'S ALL THE GSP PLANS THAT
ARE OUT THERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IF THIS IS VIEWED AS
FAVORABLE TO THE LARGE PUMPERS
THAT THEN WE HAVE THAT
POTENTIAL, AND I THINK THAT'S
WHY THERE'S A STATE INTEREST IN
SORT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH
THIS ONE. IF IT'S IF IT IS GOING
TO BE THE TEMPLATE. AND THERE
WAS SIGNIFICANT STATE YOU KNOW,
AROUND THE STATE, THERE WAS
SIGNIFICANT INTEREST BY MAJOR
WATER LAW FIRMS AND IN TERMS OF
THIS PARTICULAR SETTLEMENT IT IN
TERMS OF THAT, SO, UM, ONE I'M
REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER
THE PUBLIC WILL KNOW ABOUT THE
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IF THERE
ARE NO FORM SEVEN HUNDREDS OUT
THERE AND TO THE PUBLIC WILL
ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO DO THE
PROPER APPEALS. SO AS YOU AS YOU
POINTED OUT, UH, PROFESSOR THE.
THE YOU KNOW, YOU SAID, DEVELOP
REALISTIC PATHWAYS FOR
PROTECTING THE PUBLIC AND THE
UNREPRESENTED INTEREST. I THINK
WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY LOOKING
AT THIS TEMPLATE. WE HAVE TO DO
SOMETHING AT THE STATE LEVEL TO
MAKE SURE THAT ASPECT IS TAKEN
CARE OF, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T
HAVE OFFICIAL BROWN ACT IF WE
DON'T MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO
APPEAL IF WE DON'T CREATE SOME
RESOURCES FOR LOW INCOME PEOPLE
TO DO THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A
PROBLEM. SO THAT'S ONE TO THIS
IDEA OF DEFERENCE BEING LOST. IN
OTHER WORDS, YOU YOU DESCRIBE
THAT. CURRENTLY IF ANY LOCAL
AGENCY MAKES A FINDING AND
SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE IT. THE
BURDEN IS ON THEM TO PROVE THAT
THE LOCAL AGENCY ABUSE THEIR
DISCRETION. BUT NOW WITH THIS
LITIGATION THAT DIFFERENCE FOR
THE GROUNDWATER AGENCY HAS BEEN
LOST. AND NOW THEY DON'T HAVE TO
PROVE THAT THE GROUNDWATER RAGES
OR THAT THE LOCAL AGENCY ABUSE
OF DISCRETION, AND INSTEAD THE
LOCAL AGENCY HAS TO DEFEND
THEMSELVES TO SAY THEY HAVEN'T
ABUSE OF DISCRETION. SO
CONSEQUENTLY, THE LOCAL AGENCY
HAS TO SPEND MORE MONEY IN TERMS
OF LEGAL FEES MORE OFTEN. AND
WILL BE LESS LIKELY TO ACTUALLY
DO THE VIGOROUS THINGS THEY NEED
TO DO TO BRING THE GROUNDWATER
BASIN IN THE COMPLIANCE BECAUSE
PEOPLE WILL SUE THEM AND THEY
DON'T THEY WON'T HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO COUNTER
THAT. IS THAT THE POINT YOU WERE
MAKING, MR PRATT WILL DEFINITELY
SLOW THINGS DOWN. AND THAT WAS A
PATTERN WITH THE GM AS WELL.
OKAY GREAT. THANK YOU. UM AND
THEN, UM TRYING TO DETERMINE
WHETHER THE SETTLEMENT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE GROUND WITH
WITH THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN IS
A DIFFICULTY AND I THINK THAT'S
ANOTHER AREA OF LEGISLATION TO
TRY TO MAKE SURE THE JUDGES HAVE
THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO
KNOW WHETHER THIS IS
PARTICULARLY, YOU KNOW,
CONSISTENT OR INCONSISTENT, AND
THEN THE FINAL THING I WANT TO
COVER IS THIS CARRY OVER? SO
SUSTAINABLE YIELD YOU'RE SAYING
IS ABOUT 3031 31,000 ACRE FEET
IN THE IN THE SPACE AND THEY'RE
STARTING WITH 40 OR 40 42,000,
SO MORE THAN A 30% INCREASE IN
SUSTAINABLE YIELD, RIGHT AND
THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE
PEOPLE CREDIT. IF THEY DON'T
PUMP SOME OF THAT HERE, WHICH IS
ACTUALLY MORE THAN WHAT
SUSTAINABLE YIELD IS, BUT THEN
THAT CREDIT WILL CARRY OVER
INDEFINITELY. WELL, NOT
INDEFINITELY. FIVE YEARS FOR
FIVE YEARS, RIGHT SO THAT CREDIT
WILL CARRY OVER AND THEY'LL HAVE
BUILT UP THIS CREDIT SO WHEN
THEY GET DOWN TO THE CUTS 20
YEARS FROM NOW ONE. SUPPOSEDLY
EVERYBODY'S SUPPOSED TO BE AT
THIS. WHEN THEY SAY YOU'VE GOT
TO CUT YOU KNOW, 1000 ACRE FEET.
YOU CAN SAY I'M NOT GOING TO CUT
ANYTHING BECAUSE I HAVE A
CREDIT. I HAVE THIS. I HAVE THIS
MUCH IN THE CREDIT. IS THAT WHAT
WHICH? MAY I GIVE YOU A LITTLE
MORE DEFINITION? SO WE WATCHED
THAT WE WILL AT LEAST ON A FIVE
YEAR BASIS, CALCULATE WHAT THE
NEW PUMPING HAS TO BE. SO IN
THEORY, THERE MIGHT BE A RAMPED
AT THAT TIME, THE CARRYOVER
WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE RAMP
DOWN. THE 42,000 IS THE STARTING
AND WE HAVE TO TAKE 2000 RIGHT
OFF THE TOP BECAUSE THE JUDGMENT
SAYS WE'LL START THAT'S WHAT
THEY ALLOCATED. THE JUDGMENT
SAYS YOU GET 40. SO WE HAVE TO
GO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CUT 2000
IMMEDIATELY. UM BUT I THINK
EVERYTHING ELSE SO DEPENDING
UPON WHERE YOU DEVELOP THAT
CREDIT CARRIES OUT FIVE YEARS,
IT COULD GO RIGHT ACROSS THE
FIVE YEAR PERIOD OR IT COULD END
AT THE SAME AS THE FIVE YEAR
PERIOD. BUT GOD, OKAY, SO BOTTOM
LINE IS THE G S A CAME UP WITH
31,000 ROUGHLY 31,000 ACRE FEET
SUSTAINABLE YIELD. BUT BECAUSE
OF THIS LITIGATION, YOU'RE
STARTING AT THE 42,000. IN TERMS
OF ALLOCATION. YOU HAVE TO CUT
THE 40 YOU HAVE THIS
RESPONSIBILITY AND AS YOU MAKE
THESE JUDGMENTS OVER THIS NEXT
20 YEAR PERIOD TO GET TO 2040,
OR ACTUALLY, 16 YEAR PERIOD TO
GET 2040 AT ANY POINT IN TIME,
THOSE JUDGMENTS COULD BE
CHALLENGED BY THE TWO ADVISORY
COMMITTEES, WHICH WOULD THEN HOW
MUCH TIME DOES THE G S A HAVE TO
RESPOND TO THAT CHALLENGE? I
COULDN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION
RIGHT NOW THAT EACH TIME THERE'S
A SUBMITTAL THERE'S A TIME IN
THE JUDGMENT. WE HAVE TO
RESPOND. BUT IF IT GOES TO THEN
WE GO TO MEDIATION. AND IF IT
GOES TO COURT, THEN IT AUGUST,
BUT THEN IT THEN IT GOES TO
COURT AND WHEN IT GOES TO COURT,
THE GSA CAN'T DO THE THING THAT
MOST LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN DO.
WHICH IS SAY. HEY, WE DID NOT
ABUSE OUR POWER JUDGE. THIS IS
THIS IS APPROPRIATE INSTEAD, THE
G S A HAS TO JUST SAY THAT
THERE'S A REASON WHY THIS
SHOULDN'T GO TO COURT. THAT'S
CORRECT. SO THOSE THOSE ARE THE
MAJOR THINGS. I JUST WANT TO
REVIEW THAT I'M HEARING HERE IS
THAT, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING THE
COMPLETE PUBLIC HEARING,
THEREFORE NOT GREAT
REPRESENTATION IN TERMS OF THE
LESS POWERFUL PEOPLE. ALRIGHT
NOT HAVING THE FORM 700 NOT
KNOWING WHAT THE CONFLICTS ARE
HAVING DEFERENCE LOST FOR A
LOCAL AGENCY IS HUGE FOR THOSE
OF US THAT HAVE SERVED ON LOCAL
AGENCIES. YOU KNOW HOW MANY
TIMES WE COULD GET THROWN INTO
COURT AND NOT BE ABLE TO JUST
SAY JUDGE? THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT
BE SORT OF REPEATING WHAT THE
LOCAL AGENCY DOES THE SET THAT
THE ABILITY TO HAVE A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT THAT CONFORMS WITH, UH
THE CRAM DROWN RULE THAT THERE'S
SOME SOME LAWYERS USE. THAT
COULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH SIGMA
AND SORT OF NO ABILITY TO TRY TO
POINT THAT OUT. UM AND THE
CARRYOVER IF THOSE BECOME THE
TEMPLATES FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION
AGAINST GROUNDWATER AGENCIES IN
CALIFORNIA SOUNDS TO ME LIKE WE
HAVE REAL PROBLEMS THERE AND
STUFF. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR LETTING ME DO THAT. I'LL
TURN IT OVER TO MY CO CHAIR. UM
SO I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU,
UM, ARE AS ONE ATTORNEY TO
ANOTHER. MAYBE WE SPEAK THE SAME
LANGUAGE. SO MY QUESTION IS
THIS. I DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT
IT'S ALWAYS A DE NOVO REVIEW. IS
THAT CORRECT? I'M SORRY. WHAT
WAS THE FIRST PART OF THE
QUESTION? IT'S NOT. I THINK THAT
IT WAS DETERMINED IN THIS CASE,
THERE WOULD BE DE NOVO REVIEW.
BUT THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE
STANDARD. AM I CORRECT? YOU'RE
CORRECT THERE. THERE HAS BEEN A
QUESTION ABOUT THE REVIEW
STANDARD FOR GS A ACTIONS AND SO
WE'RE JUST STARTING TO FIND OUT
HOW THE COURTS ARE GOING TO
APPROACH THESE ISSUES. THERE IS
A SPECTRUM OF WHAT WE REFER TO
AS DEFERENCE OR RESPECT SO
DEPENDING ON ANY GIVEN LOCAL
AGENCIES, ACTION IN ANY
DIFFERENT NUMBER OF
CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY MIGHT GET
SOME DEGREE OF RESPECT, A LOT OF
RESPECT OR THE COURT MIGHT LOOK
AT IT A NEW RIGHT AND WE HAVE AS
YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT, UH, LEGAL
TERMINOLOGY TO REFLECT ALL OF
THOSE STANDARDS, THEN THE
CALIFORNIA STATE COURTS HAVE A
VERY DIFFERENT APPROACH TO
DEFERENCE. THEN WE MIGHT SEE AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL. SO IF PEOPLE
ARE TRYING TO COMPARE THE TWO,
THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT. SO WE I
THINK IT'S USEFUL TO THINK ABOUT
. DOES THE COURT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN ABOUT WHAT
THE G S A DID AND THIS IN THE
SOLUTION IT PUT TOGETHER IN THE
TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THAT THE
COURT SHOULD BE ABLE TO REVIEW
THAT INFORMATION. AND TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE WORK THAT THE ESSAY
DID AND NOT NOT IGNORE IT. UM
AND PERHAPS DEPENDING ON THE
ROBUSTNESS OF THE PROCESS, GIVE
SOME DEGREE OF RESPECT TO THAT.
SO I WOULD SAY IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY ALL OR NOTHING, AND
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY UM DO NOVO,
UH, ALL THE TIME OR ABUSIVE
DISCRETION ALL THE TIME. I THINK
WE'RE STILL WORKING THAT OUT. I
MEAN, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THERE.
SHOULD BE A SET POLICY. WHEN
WERE THE OTHER? I THINK THAT IS
BASING THEIR DECISIONS ON DATA.
AND SO HOLD ON ONE SECOND AND
I'LL GET RIGHT TO YOU. GO AHEAD.
I THINK THE COURTS ARE GOING IN
THAT IT WOULD BE GOING IN THAT
DIRECTION TO DEVELOP A SET OF
STANDARD AND I'M UNAWARE THAT
THERE'S BEEN ONE THAT ALL THE
COURTS ARE NOW FOLLOWING, BUT I
DO THINK THAT WHEN AN AGENCY
ENGAGES IN PROCESS AND HAS
TECHNICAL WORK THAT THE COURTS
STANDARD OF REVIEW SHOULD BE ONE
THAT ALLOWS THE COURT TO REVIEW
THAT WORK AND DECIDE WHETHER
IT'S DESERVING OF RESPECT OR
NOT. YEAH. DO YOU WANT TO ADD
SOMETHING, SIR? THANK YOU SO
MUCH. IN OUR CASE. IT'S WRITTEN
INTO THE AGREEMENT OR THE
JUDGMENT AND WE THAT THE WAY IT
WILL WORK IS THERE'LL BE THREE
EXPERTS AGAINST OUR EXPERT, AND
THAT WILL CONFUSE THE COURTS.
SURE, SURE, SURE, SURE, I
WHETHER YOU'RE SITUATION BECOMES
A TEMPLATE MAY BE CIRCUMVENTED
HERE AT THE STATE LEVEL, SO
THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO GET AT.
HEY, HOW DOES THIS WORK? BECAUSE
BOOBS I MEAN, THERE ARE VARYING
STANDARD OF REVIEW ON THE BOOKS
FOR MANY DIFFERENT THINGS. I
WASN'T TOO SURE. SO I GOT
ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU. AND
THAT IS, UM HAVE YOU EVER
THOUGHT ABOUT. THE COURTS,
REFERRING THE MATTER TO THE
WATERBOARD. HMM. YES THAT'S ONE
OPTION IS THAT'S AVAILABLE TO
THE COURT TO REFER THE MATTER TO
THE WATER BOARD, IN WHICH CASE
THE STATUTE PROVIDES THAT DWR
WILL THEN GET INVOLVED IN THAT
REFERENCE PROCESS. UM THAT
THAT'S A VALUABLE TOOL THAT'S
AVAILABLE TO THE COURTS. UM IN
THIS PROCESS. ONE OF THE ISSUES,
OF COURSE. IS THAT THE REFERENCE
, UM WILL COST TIME AND MONEY
AND THE WATER BOARD ITSELF. IT'S
COSTS ARE PAID IN THIS PROCESS
AND THEY'RE PAID. I BELIEVE BY
THE PARTIES WHEN THE REFERENCE
HAPPENS. AND THE WATER BOARD HAS
A SIGNIFICANT WORK AGENDA
ALREADY, UM AND SO YOU HAVE TO
BALANCE ALL OF THOSE FACTORS.
BUT IN MANY CASES, REFERENCES
CAN BE VERY USEFUL AND THE WATER
BOARDS INPUT CAN BE VERY USEFUL.
SO IT WON'T BE THE BE ALL END.
ALL OKAY? ALRIGHT AND THEN
ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO TALK
ABOUT IS PRE SIGMA ADJUDICATIONS
. AND WHAT DID THOSE LOOK LIKE
IN COMPARISON TO THE
ADJUDICATIONS THAT WE'RE SEEING,
AND I RECOGNIZE YOUR STARTED
BEFORE THE SIGMA PLAN HAD BEEN
ENACTED. BUT AS WE NOW HAVE SO
MUCH APPROVAL THAT'S ALREADY
TAKEN PLACE. UM HAVE YOU DO THEY
LOOK ANY DIFFERENT IS IT THAT
THERE ARE MUCH MORE INEQUITABLE
AT THIS POINT? UM WAS IT MORE
EQUITABLE IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN
THEY ADJUDICATED THINGS AND ALL
THE PARTIES WERE THERE? I THINK
THAT PRE SIGMA, THE
ADJUDICATIONS OFTEN TOOK LONGER.
AH AND, UM, YEARS AND YEARS AND
YEARS BY THE TIME AND COST
ASSOCIATED WITH ADJUDICATIONS.
PRE SIGMA WAS LEGENDARY. UM.
WE'RE JUST NOW SEEING SOME OF
THE FIRST POST SIGMA
ADJUDICATIONS. I THINK A COUPLE
OF THINGS HAVE HAPPENED. ONE IS
THAT EVEN PRE SIGMA SOME OF THE
ADJUDICATIONS, UH 2005, FOR
EXAMPLE, THE PARTIES HAVE
STARTED THE ATTORNEYS INVOLVED.
AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED
IN ADJUDICATIONS HAVE STARTED TO
BECOME MORE SOPHISTICATED ABOUT
HOW TO PUT TOGETHER PHYSICAL
SOLUTIONS AND MORE EFFICIENT
WITH HOW THEY CONDUCT THE
NEGOTIATIONS. AND SO WE WERE
SEEING SOME SHORTER JUDI CATION
TIMELINES EVEN PRIOR TO SIGMA.
BUT THE STREAMLINING STATUTES IN
2015, THE STREAMLINING THEY
CREATED IS INVALUABLE. AND SO
YOU WERE SEEING A LOT OF THE
EFFICIENCIES FROM THAT PROCESS,
SO THAT IS SHORTENING THE
TIMELINES, UM AND CREATING MORE
SOPHISTICATED PHYSICAL SOLUTIONS
FOR SURE, BUT ON THE EQUITY
POINT, I THINK THE EQUITY POINT
WAS ALWAYS AN ISSUE EVEN WITH
PRE SIGMA ADJUDICATIONS. IT'S
ALWAYS BEEN THE WATER RIGHT
HOLDERS DRIVING THAT PROCESS. UM
AND NO INVOLVEMENT FROM ANYBODY
WHO WOULD BE ADVOCATING ON
BEHALF OF THE ENVIRONMENT,
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, SMALL
FARMERS INSTEAD, YOU HAD ALL OF
THESE FORCES COMING TOGETHER
AROUND RESOURCES, MONEY,
LOCATION, WATER RIGHTS, AND THEY
WERE THE ONES THAT WERE DRIVING
THE ADJUDICATIONS. SO AND THIS
QUESTION OF EQUITY. THIS
QUESTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST WAS
JUST NOT SIMPLY NOT IN FRONT OF
THE COURT, AND I WOULD SAY, I
DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT
PEOPLE WERE NECESSARILY ACTING
MALICIOUSLY. THIS WAS THE SYSTEM
THAT WAS SET UP AND THERE WAS NO
ENTRY POINT FOR THESE CONCERNS
IN THE LITIGATION. UM AND AS I
SAID, THE COURT IS LEFT WITH THE
INFORMATION PLACED IN FRONT OF
IT. AND SO THAT'S WHY IT'S SO
IMPORTANT TO FIND A PATHWAY TO
GET THESE THIS INFORMATION IN
FRONT OF THE COURT GOING
FORWARD. SO YOU SUGGESTED
INTERVENTION, AND YOU TALKED A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT INTERVENTION
OTHER THAN INTERVENTION. WHAT
ELSE YOU GOT? I THINK
INTERVENTION IS USEFUL IN PART
BECAUSE. BECAUSE IT'S IN IT'S
IMPORTANT TO RETAIN THE COURT'S
DISCRETION AND ITS ABILITY TO BE
NEUTRAL IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND
THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF PARTIES
AND DRIVING THE LITIGATION.
THESE INTERESTS NEED TO BE PART
OF THAT PARTY DISCUSSION. SO
THEY'RE PART OF THOSE EARLY
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT MODELING AND
DATA AND PHYSICAL SOLUTIONS AND
PHASING AND STIPULATIONS ALONG
THE WAY, RIGHT. ALL OF THAT. YOU
DON'T WANT TO PRESENT AT THE END
OF THE PROCESS SOMEBODY TO COME
IN AND THINK ABOUT EQUITY AT THE
END OF THE PROCESS, THEY NEED TO
BE PART OF IT. FROM THE
BEGINNING, THERE MIGHT BE OTHER
MODELS. I'M SURE A LOT OF GREAT
THINKING HIS HAS GONE INTO THIS,
UM AS TO WHAT OTHER MODELS MIGHT
BE. ONE OF THE THINGS I
CONSIDERED WAS WHETHER THERE IS
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STATE TO
PLAY A ROLE IN REPRESENTING SOME
OF THESE INTERESTS. BUT I I'VE
HESITATED A LITTLE BIT, IN PART
BECAUSE I KNOW THE STATE
AGENCIES THAT ARE ENGAGED, HAVE
MULTIFACETED STATUTORY MANDATES
WHERE THEY HAVE TO BALANCE A
NUMBER OF INTERESTS. THEY ALSO
HAVE HEAVY WORKLOADS. BUT MAYBE
THERE'S A WAY TO INTEGRATE SOME
DEGREE OF STATE ROLE IN THIS
PROCESS. BUT AGAIN, I REALLY
THINK THE STRENGTH OF THE
INTERVENTION IS THAT YOU GET
PARTIES ENGAGED IN THIS MODEL
VERY EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND
PART OF ALL THOSE KEY DECISIONS.
PHASING. PHYSICAL SOLUTION
MODELING ALL OF THAT MATTERS.
OKAY AND IT IS. WHAT WAS IT 50%
ARE THERE REMIND ME. WHAT ARE
THE PERCENTAGES? IT'S A
SUPPORTED BY MORE THAN 50% OF
THE PARTIES. UM AND SUPPORTED BY
PARTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR AT LEAST
75% OF GROUNDWATER PUMPED FIVE
CALENDAR YEARS BEFORE THE
COMPLAINT IS FILED. NOW THIS IS
THE THIS IS PERMISSIVE FOR THE
COURT THE STATUTES AS THE COURT
MAY ADOPT A STIPULATED JUDGMENT
IF THOSE CONDITIONS ARE MET AND
THE MANDATORY STATUTORY CRITERIA
MET. IT'S NOT MANDATORY. BUT
THERE IS A STRONG INCENTIVE FOR
THE COURT TO ADOPT UNDER THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE THE COURT
IS TRYING TO MANAGE THIS COMPLEX
LITIGATION EFFICIENTLY AND TO,
UM TO BRING IT TO A CLOSE, RIGHT
? UM SO THERE IS A STRONG
INCENTIVE, EVEN IF IT'S NOT
MANDATORY. OKAY THANK YOU SO
MUCH. IF MY TWO COLLEAGUES WILL
INDULGE ME, I JUST WANT TO
FOLLOW UP REAL QUICK ON SO THAT
I THINK IT JUST IS APPROPRIATE.
UM AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS TO THE ATTORNEY, AND
SHE HAS THREE RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR US IN TERMS OF OR THREE KEY
OPPORTUNITIES THAT SHE'S
IDENTIFIED. I DON'T KNOW. SHE
PUT THEM DOWN. AND YOU KNOW, I'M
GONNA TAKE HIM IN A DIFFERENT
ORDER, BUT ASSURE APPROPRIATE
INTEGRATION OF G S G. SPS IS ONE
OF THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THAT
WE SHOULD DO. AND I WOULD JUST
POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A
CURRENT BILL THAT THE ASSEMBLY
PASSED LAST YEAR AND IS IN FRONT
OF THE SENATE RIGHT NOW. THAT
WOULD REQUIRE ALL THE SETTLEMENT
UP PURPOSE PROPOSALS TO GO IN
FRONT OF THE STATE WATER BOARD
FOR THE STATE WATER BOARD TO
REVIEW TO OFFER AN OPINION AS TO
WHETHER THE SETTLEMENT IS OR IS
NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
SO THAT THE JUDGE HAS SOME OF
SOME OF THIS. SO WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT PROVIDE MEANINGFUL
DIRECTION AND SUPPORT FOR
COMPLEX JUDICIAL TASK THAT SEEMS
VERY APPROPRIATE, AND THAT'S
WHAT THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE. IS
IT BEFORE THE JUDGE COULD ENTER
INTO THE SETTLEMENT THAT NEEDS
TO BE CONSIDERED AND THE BEFORE
PEOPLE'S SHOULD OFFER IT TO THE
JUDGE. THEY SHOULD OFFER TO THE
STATE WATER BOARD. NOW THAT IS
AN ISSUE OF RESOURCES. UM YOU
KNOW THAT THERE'S OUT THERE FOR
THE STATE WATER BOARD, BUT AGAIN
INSTEAD OF SPENDING $16 MILLION
ON LET YOU KNOW LITIGATION. WE
MAY BE ABLE TO DECREASE THAT IF
WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE GROUNDWATER
PLANT. SO THAT'S ONE. WE HAVE
THAT CURRENT BILL OUT THERE. THE
SECOND THING I WOULD POINT OUT
IS YOUR THIRD BULLET POINT,
DEVELOP REALISTIC PATHWAYS FOR
PROTECTING THE PUBLIC AND THE
UNREPRESENTED INTEREST, AND
THOSE ARE ENVIRONMENT, SMALL
FARMERS, DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. ESSENTIALLY. IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT IT IS INCUMBENT
UPON US AS BY CO CHAIR, TALKED
ABOUT THIS THAT PERHAPS WE
SHOULD DO SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE
THIS THAT THE WEEK WEEK WE
CREATE LEGISLATION TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE DON'T HAVE THIS CURRENT
LITIGATION SETTLEMENT BECOME THE
TEMPLATE FOR THE STATE. AND ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD DO
WITH THAT IS TO NOT HAVE IT BE
JUST A PAY TO PLAY SYSTEM
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, AS AS YOU
ALLUDED TO IN PREVIOUS
LITIGATIONS ALSO DISADVANTAGED
PEOPLE. PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE
RESOURCES DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A
VOICE AT THESE SETTLEMENTS, AND
SO PERHAPS I'M JUST THROWING OUT
POSSIBILITIES. PERHAPS WE HAVE A
PUBLIC SPECIALIST WHOSE STEPS IN
TO REPRESENT THEY JUST LIKE WE
HAVE A PUBLIC DEFENDER OF PUBLIC
SPECIALIST TO REPRESENT THE
DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE IN IN IN
THESE AGREEMENTS, WE COME UP
WITH SOME RESOURCES OR SOME
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE THAT WOULD BE
ABLE TO HELP PROTECT THEM, YOU
KNOW? AS THEY MOVE FORWARD, BUT
IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS SOMETHING
THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND THEN UM
SO IF WE IF WE MATCH UP IN THE
FINAL THING, I WOULD SAY IS IF
THESE THREE PEOPLE HERE ARE ALL
LANDOWNERS AND THEY'RE FIGHTING
WITH EACH OTHER, AND THEY DECIDE
THEY WANT TO FILE A LAWSUIT AND
THAT INCLUDES CALLING THE GSP IN
. I'M NOT SURE THAT STATE LAW
SHOULD SAY OH, THEY'RE ALL EQUAL
. UM THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE
INDIVIDUALS, PARTIES, AND NOW
YOU HAVE A LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AGENCY THAT IT HAS A
RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S DONE ITS
JOB. AND YET IF THEY'RE JUST
TREATED EQUALLY WITH EVERYBODY
ELSE, AND THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE
GIVEN TO THEM AND THEY CAN'T YOU
KNOW, AND A LAWSUIT CAN FORCE
THEM TO GIVE AWAY THEIR
DEFERENCE. UM THEN THAT IS THAT
DOES NOT SEEM TO BE IN THE
PUBLIC'S INTEREST TO TREAT THE G
S A AS THE SAME AS EVERYBODY
ELSE AND THAT THEY SHOULD NOT
HAVE THIS DEFERENCE AND IT
SHOULD BE THAT THE COURTS SHOULD
NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE THAT
DIFFERENCE AWAY FROM THE GSA
WITHOUT SOME COMPELLING REASON
OR THE G S A SHOULDN'T BE ABLE
TO JUST SIGN OFF TO SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT. BUT WITH THAT I WANT
TO TURN IT OVER TO MY
COLLEAGUES. IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT YOU
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE RIGHT GREAT.
AND TURN IT BACK TO YOU. DO YOU
HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT? I
WILL TURN ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE ON
THIS, RIGHT? OKAY ALL RIGHT, SO
WE'RE GOING TO TURN IT NOW OVER
TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON BOTH OF
THESE THINGS. I WANT TO THANK
BOTH MR PRATT, WHO CAME UP WITH
A LITTLE BIT SICK. YOU COULD
HEAR IT IN HIS VOICE AND
PROFESSOR REALLY AN EXCELLENT
JOB IN TERMS OF THIS
PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.
RESTROOM REAL QUICK. I'LL BE
RIGHT BACK, BUT YOU'VE GOT IT.
CHAIRS MEMBERS. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
YEAH DAVE RANSON COMMUNITY
ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS. UM
. SO LEGISLATURE APPROPRIATED
$10 MILLION A COUPLE OF YEARS
AGO TO TRY TO HELP SMALL FARMERS
IN THE SIGMA PROCESS. AND SO WE
HAVE WORKED THROUGH DWR, UH, AND
THE MOST OF THE MONEY HAS PASSED
TO THE WATER FOUNDATION TO PUT
OUT SO OUR ORGANIZATION AND YOU
SEE A AND R SMALL FARM PROGRAM.
AND DUDEK CONSULTING FIRM. WE'RE
WORKING TOGETHER TO TRY TO
EDUCATE AND INVOLVE SMALL
FARMERS AROUND THE STATE IN THIS
PROCESS, BUT WE ALSO PROVIDED A
MILLION DOLLARS TO U. C DAVIS
LAW SCHOOL TO SET UP A LEGAL
CLINIC TO TRY TO HELP SMALL
FARMERS IN THE ADJUDICATION
PROCESS. AND THE UNIVERSITY IS
NOW HIRED UP. DWR ATTORNEY TO
RUN THAT CLINIC. AND SO WE'RE
HOPING THAT WE CAN CREATE SOME
KIND OF CLASS COUNSEL. IN THESE
ADJUDICATION PROCESSES BECAUSE
WE SAW IN KOYAMA, FOR INSTANCE.
THAT PEOPLE WERE SPENDING ALL
THE MONEY THAT THEY HAD TO HIRE
ATTORNEYS AND THEY JUST DON'T
HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY. AND SO
WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
HERE? EQUITY ISSUES ARE REALLY
QUITE EXTREME IN THESE
ADJUDICATIONS, SO THAT'S OUR
SOLUTIONS. SO FAR, WE'RE GOING
TO SEE IF IT WORKS. BUT IT WILL
HAVE TO BE FUNDED GOING FORWARD.
AS WELL AS THE OUTREACH TO SMALL
FARMERS IN DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. AND SO WE DON'T
NEED THE MONEY THIS YEAR. BUT
WE'LL PROBABLY BE BACK NEXT YEAR
ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING SO
THAT THIS PROGRAM CAN CONTINUE.
UM SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I WANTED
TO SAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS NATALIE AND ON BEHALF
OF LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR
JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. I'M
HERE TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING
REMARKS REGARDING SEGMENT
LAMENTATION LEADERSHIP COUNCIL
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH CWC AND SEE
WH HI PROVIDED EXTENSIVE
COMMENTS SEDUCES AND THE STATE
REGARDING THE CONTINUATION OF
CRITICAL OVERDRAFT, AS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN. GSPC CONTINUE TO HAVE
SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT CRITERIA
THAT IS NOT PROTECTIVE, ALL
BENEFICIAL USES. AND USERS OF
GROUNDWATER AND AS A RESULT OF
TESTICLES HAVE CONTINUED TO GO
DRY A CONCERNING NUMBERS. EVEN
DURING LAST YEAR'S HISTORIC
STORMS, DOMESTIC WELLS WERE DE
WATERED. THE STATE MUST DIRECT
ACCESS TO SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT
CRITERIA THAT PROTECTS
GROUNDWATER LEVELS FROM
CONTINUING TO DROP AND PROTECT
GROUNDWATER ACCESS FOR DOMESTIC
WELLS AND DRINKING WATER
SYSTEMS. ADDITIONALLY, THE STATE
SHOULD PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO
THE EXISTING GAPS IN MONITORING
NETWORKS AND ENSURE GSA'S ARE
PROACTIVELY ADDRESSING GAPS THAT
GSS ARE USING THE BEST AVAILABLE
DATA FOR CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSIS
AS THEY MAKE CRITICAL DECISIONS
ON WATER BUDGETS AND HYDROLOGIC
MODELS, AND THAT BOTH THE STATE
AND DOCS ARE MONITORING.
ADDRESSING GROUNDWATER QUALITY
IMPACTS RELATED TO CONTINUE
DEPLETION OF GROUNDWATER OR GS
EGGS ACTIVITIES LIKE RECHARGE.
REGARDING FEES AND SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATION. THE STATE HAS
PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL RESOURCES
TO GSS THIS FAR TO SUPPORT SIGMA
RELATED ACTIVITIES. THE STATUTE
PROVIDES BROAD POWERS TO JESUS
TO ENACT THESE AS SUCH, SHOULD
WORK TO FUND SIGMA ACTIVITIES
LOCALLY AND NOT ACTIVELY DEPEND
ON STATE FUNDING FOR
IMPLEMENTATION. LAST WEEK, LIKE
TO ECHO ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BENNETT'S CONCERNS REGARDING
LOCAL GOVERNANCE, GSS CONTINUE
TO FAIL TO EQUITABLY ENGAGE ALL
STAKEHOLDERS, WHICH IS REFLECTED
IN DSPS EMPHASIS ON PROTECTING
GROUNDWATER INTERESTS OF ALL ALL
OTHER GROUNDWATER USERS. IF THE
USSR TO TRULY TAKE ON THE
STEWARDSHIP ROLE THAT SIGMA
ENVISIONS FOR THEM, THERE ARE
CRITICAL CHANGES TO LOCAL
ENGAGEMENT THAT NEEDS TO TAKE
PLACE. THANK YOU. ABRAHAM AND
DOES IT WITH THE COMMUNITY WATER
CENTER, ALIGNING OUR COMMENTS,
UH, WITH OUR COLLEAGUES WITH
LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ALSO JUST
WANTED TO THANK THE PANELISTS
FOR THE ROBUST DISCUSSION ON
SIGMA AS WE TRY AND MAKE SURE
THAT THE FUTURE OF GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT CALIFORNIA DOESN'T
LOOK LIKE THE PAST. IT WAS APTLY
NOTED BY THE LAO EARLIER THAN
THIS HEARING. HOW MANY RURAL
AREAS OF THE STATE GROUNDWATER
MAKES UP 100% OF THE DRINKING
WATER SUPPLY. G SPS, AS PROPOSED
WOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR 1200
WELLS PROVIDING WATER FOR OVER
127,000 PEOPLE TO GO DRY, WHICH
WOULD HAVE REQUIRED SIGNIFICANT
STATE RESOURCES TO ADDRESS SO WE
PERSONALLY FEEL THAT PROBATION
IS APPROPRIATE AND THAT BEING
SAID AS OUR COLLEAGUES MENTIONED
1600 WELLS WERE REPORTED DRY IN
2022, AND EVEN IN A WET YEAR,
LIKE 20 23-14 DRILLED WELLS WERE
REPORTED DRY. THESE NUMBERS DO
NOT INCLUDE THE NUMBER OF
CONTAMINATED WELLS WHERE
COMMUNITIES ARE FACING HEALTH
RISKS FROM DRINKING WATER
CONTAMINATED WITH NITRATES.
ARSENIC 123, TCP HEX, CHROME P.
FOX PESTICIDES AND OTHER
CONTAMINANTS AND AS ONE OF THE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDES
DIRECT AID AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE TO MANY COMMUNITIES
AT GROUND ZERO OF THE WATER
CRISIS WE CALL ON THE STATE
WATER BOARD WR AND OUR
LEGISLATIVE PARTNERS TO ENSURE
THAT DRINKING WATER WELL,
MITIGATION REMAINS A PRIORITY
DURING PLANNED REVIEW AND DURING
PROBATIONARY HEARING SO THAT
JESUS ARE ADDRESSING THE DRY AND
CONTAMINATED WELLS CAUSED BY
CONTINUED OVER PUMPING, NOT THE
STATE OR IMPACTED COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MADAM
CO CHAIR MR CO CHAIR, BRITAIN
WITH THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
WATER ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE
PUBLIC COMMENT THIS MORNING AND
YOUR STAFF'S GREAT WORK ON
PULLING TOGETHER SUCH AN
IMPORTANT HEARING. WE REALLY
WANT TO EXPRESS OUR GRATITUDE
TOWARDS DEPUTY DIRECTOR PAUL
GOSSELIN AND HIS STELLAR TEAM
THEY'VE REALLY PUT IN A LOT OF
EFFORT TO IMPLEMENTING THE
SUCCESSFUL AND THE SUCCESSFUL
IMPLEMENTATION IS SIGMA NOT ONLY
IN THE STATE, BUT ESPECIALLY IN
THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY WITH OUR
EXPERIENCE. WE REALLY APPRECIATE
THE TIME AND THE ACCESSIBILITY
TO THEIR EXPERTISE THAT WE'VE
BEEN ABLE TO UTILIZE TO WORK
THROUGH OUR MEMBERS WITH IN THE
SACRAMENTO VALLEY WITH MEMBER
MANAGERS AND ALSO A REALLY
IMPORTANT STAKEHOLDERS TO
COLLABORATIVELY, DEVELOP,
PRAGMATIC AND RESPONSIVE DSPS
THAT MEET THE LETTER IN THE
INTENT OF SIGMA IS MOST
ASSOCIATIONS. DO WE HAVE A LOT
OF LITERATURE AND HANDOUTS THAT
DIVE INTO MORE DETAIL ABOUT HOW
WE'RE DOING THIS? SO I LOOK
FORWARD TO FOLLOWING UP WITH
YOUR RESPECTIVE STAFF AND
SHARING THAT INFORMATION AND I'M
REALLY SHARING THE STORY OF THE
SACRAMENTO VALLEY WHEN THE TIME
IS APPROPRIATE, SO THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME THIS MORNING. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS CHRIS
ANDERSON WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES ALSO
WANT TO EXTEND OUR THANKS FOR
HOLDING THIS IMPORTANT HEARING
WHEN SEGMENT WAS PASSED IN 2014.
I THINK THERE WAS SOME LEVEL OF
SKEPTICISM ABOUT LOCALS ABILITY
TO COME TOGETHER AND PUT BASINS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE ON A PATH
TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY. AND AS
WE'VE HEARD TODAY, 10 YEARS
LATER, GSA'S HAVE ACCOMPLISHED A
LOT IN A RELATIVELY SHORT AMOUNT
OF TIME. WHETHER THAT'S JUST AS
FORMING ALL ON TIME AND MEDIUM
AND HIGH PRIORITY BASINS THAT
WERE REQUIRED TO BE COVERED BY
SIGMA, UM, SUBMITTING PLANS ON
TIME DWR PROVIDING
DETERMINATIONS FOR ALL BASINS
THAT WERE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT
PLANS. WE'VE SEEN THE INCREDIBLE
AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S ALREADY
BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. UM AND THEN,
OBVIOUSLY, AS WE ALSO HEARD
TODAY, YOU KNOW, I THINK THESE
NUMBERS ARE IMPORTANT TO
REITERATE. 62 BASINS HAVE PLANS
APPROVED, ONLY SIX PLANTS HAVE
BEEN DEEMED INADEQUATE AND 13
BASINS WITH INCOMPLETE PLANS ARE
WORKING WITH THE STATE,
HOPEFULLY, BRING THEM INTO
COMPLIANCE. UM YOUR AGAIN SO YOU
KNOW, WANT TO NOTE THAT THESE
THAT THESE GSA'S ARE DOING A LOT
OF WORK TO CORRECT DECADES OF
OVERDRAFT, AND THAT'S NOT A
CHORE THAT'S ACCOMPLISHED
OVERNIGHT. UM ALSO WANT TO THANK
DWR THE STATE WATER BOARD FOR
THEIR THE INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF
WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE TO HELP
HELP GSA'S THROUGHOUT THE STATE
AND OBVIOUSLY THE LEGISLATURE
FOR THE SIGNIFICANT
APPROPRIATIONS THAT YOU ALL
PROVIDE IN RECENT YEARS. UM AT
THIS STAGE, IT IS CRITICAL THAT
THE STATE CONTINUES TO GIVE
LOCALS THE TIME AND RESOURCES
NECESSARY TO SUCCESSFULLY
IMPLEMENT SIGMA ONE WAY TO DO
THAT, WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED
THIS YEAR IS A RESOURCE IS BIND.
AQUA CONTINUES TO ADVOCATE FOR
7.85 BILLION BOND INVESTMENT IN
WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, AMONG
OTHER THINGS WERE REQUESTING $1
BILLION. RELATED TO GROUNDWATER,
INCLUDING MONEY FOR DWR
COMPETITIVE GRANTS FOR
GROUNDWATER STORAGE PROJECTS.
GROUNDWATER BANKING RECHARGE, UM
AND OTHER GROUNDWATER PROJECTS
TO IMPROVE WATER. RESILIENCE UM,
THIS WILL OBVIOUSLY BE CRITICAL
AS WE DEAL WITH CLIMATE CHANGE
GOING FORWARD. SO AGAIN. THANK
YOU. UM AND YEAH, APPRECIATE
HEARING. WHAT ELSE YOU CAN TELL
US ON BEHALF OF THE COACHELLA
WATER AUTHORITY. WE ARE ONE OF
FOUR GS ASSESSED THAT MANAGED
THE INDIA OF SUB BASIN AND ARE
EXCLUSIVELY RESPONSIBLE FOR
MANAGING SIX WELLS THAT SUPPLY
THE WATER NEEDS OF THE CITY OF
COACHELLA IS SMALL,
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY IN THE
COACHELLA VALLEY. THEIR
REQUIREMENTS OF SIGMA RESULT IN
FIXED THAT ADMINISTRATIVE AND
REPORTING COSTS THAT FOR A
SMALL, JUICY LIKE OURSELVES OR
UNSUSTAINABLE BECAUSE WE LACK
THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE TO SPREAD
OUT. FEES IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T
RESULT IN EXORBITANT COSTS ON
THE END CUSTOMER. WE CERTAINLY
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE, BOTH COMMITTEES AS
THE BUDGET IS DEVELOPED AS WELL
AS THE POTENTIAL CLIMATE BOND SO
THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY
ADDRESS THIS ISSUE THAT IS VERY
UNIQUE TO SMALL. GSA'S THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME. BYE BYE. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU TO BOTH
CHAIRS FOR CONVENING THIS
HEARING ABOUT SUCH AN INTEGRAL
TOPIC, AND I AM REALLY MCKAY ON
BEHALF OF THE UNITED WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AND I
JUST WANTED TO SHARE A VERY
BRIEFLY A FEW ITEMS ABOUT
SHOWING SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS
WITHIN OUR SERVICE TERRITORY
NUMBER ONE GROUNDWATER USE, AND
THEN BOTH THE OXNARD'S AND
PLEASANT VALLEY BASINS HAS
DECLINED APPROXIMATELY 20%
ACROSS SECTORS SINCE 2 2009.
THANKS IN LARGE PART TO LOCAL
CONSERVATION EFFORTS, AS WELL AS
PUMPING LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY
THE F C G. M A THE PATIENT
DESIGN, DESIGN OF DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION FOR UNITED WATERS,
RECHARGE CONJUNCTIVITIS AND
SEAWATER INTRUSION MITIGATION
PROJECTS HAVE INCREASED RAPIDLY
FOLLOWING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
G SPS FOR OXNARD AND POSIT
VALLEY BASINS, AND THE GSP IS
NOW INCLUDE A SUITE OF PROJECT
THAT THAT MEAN THAT WE CAN
CHANGE ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY
YEARS BEFORE THE 2040 DEADLINE
VIA SIGMA AND FINALLY, UNITED
HAS HAD A RECORD YEAR FOR
MANAGED AQUIFER RECHARGE
OPERATIONS IN 2023, PARTIALLY
DUE TO WHAT CONDITIONS OF
COURSE, BUT LARGELY ALSO AS A
RESULT OF FOCUS EFFORTS TO
OPTIMIZE RECHARGE OPERATIONS
WITH INVESTMENTS IN KEY
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. SO
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME
TODAY CONTINUE LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS AS WE UM
ATTEMPTED TO ACHIEVE
SUSTAINABILITY. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. UH, MADAM AND SIR,
CHAIR, MR. CHAIR I'M BRENDA BASS
WITH CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE AND I JUST HAVE A
COUPLE OF HIGH LEVEL COMMENTS ON
WHAT HAS BEEN A VERY INTERESTING
AND IN DEPTH DISCUSSION TODAY ON
GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT IN
CALIFORNIA, WHERE WE SIT TODAY
IN 2024 BUSINESSES HAVE REALLY
HIGH INCENTIVE TO KNOW EXACTLY
HOW MUCH WATER THEY WERE USING,
PARTICULARLY IN THE GROUNDWATER
SECTOR, AND PARTICULARLY FOR AG,
BECAUSE AH, COMING. GROUNDWATER
REQUIRES ENERGY AND ENERGY AND
WATER ARE SOME OF THE HIGHEST
AND MOST IMPORTANT COSTS IN THAT
SECTOR. UM I WOULD ALSO JUST
LIKE TO AGREE WITH MR GOSLIN
THAT SIGMA CAN'T BE A PAPER
PROCESS AND THEN WE REALLY NEED
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FOCUSED
ON MAKING THE SYSTEM WORK FOR
WATER USERS OF ALL KINDS AT THE
WORLD AG EXPO RECENTLY UNTIL
LARRY IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE
MOST RECENT ESTIMATE IS THAT
ABOUT 900,000 ACRES OF
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION WILL
COME OUT OF PRODUCTION AS PART
OF THE CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION
OF SIGMA AND WELL, IT NEEDS TO
HAPPEN, AND THERE'S PAIN NEEDS
TO OCCUR IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE
SUSTAINABILITY. THAT'S A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF JOBS AND
ECONOMIC LOSS, ESPECIALLY IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY, WHICH IS
DEPENDENT ON AG AS A KEYSTONE IN
THEIR ECONOMY. AH SO I JUST WANT
TO SAY THAT WE'RE HERE TO, YOU
KNOW, WORK TOWARDS A FUTURE
WHERE WE CAN GET TO
SUSTAINABILITY IN A WAY THAT
ENSURES THAT AG BUSINESS AND
COMMUNITIES CAN CONTINUE TO
EXIST IN CALIFORNIA,
PARTICULARLY IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
THE TIME IN THE HEARING TODAY.
CHAIR PAPIN AND CHAIR BENNETT.
THANK YOU FOR HOLDING THIS
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION TODAY.
REALLY APPRECIATE IT. MY NAME IS
TIM PARKER. I'M A CONSULTING
HYDRO GEOLOGIST AND I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF SONOMA. VALLEY GS A.
I'M HERE KIND OF ECHO WHAT WAS
HEARD EARLIER FROM COACHELLA
WERE ONE OF THOSE BASINS, UH,
THAT IS PUMPING A RELATIVELY
SMALL AMOUNT OF GROUNDWATER AND
AS A RESULT, WE ARE FACED WITH
PASSING ALONG HIGH COST AND
EQUITABLY HIGH COSTS TO OUR
RESIDENTS AND CUSTOMERS BECAUSE
SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION COMES WITH
FIXED COSTS AND THESE FIXED
COSTS. I THINK, AS YOU KNOW OUR
ADMINISTRATIVE AND REPORTING
TASKS, INCLUDING MAINTAINING
MONITORING NETWORKS, DATA
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, BUDGETING
AND LEGAL REVIEW. AND THEY ARE
UNAVOIDABLE. BUT FOR LARGE
BASINS, THEY COME OFF AS MINIMAL
. BUT FOR US, THEY ARE QUITE
LARGE. AND I THINK, BY EXAMPLE,
I'D LIKE TO SHARE THAT OUR
ANNUAL FIXED COST EQUATES TO
ABOUT $87 PER ACRE FOOT IN THE
SONOMA VALLEY FOR PETALUMA
VALLEY, A NEIGHBOR, IT'S 100 AND
$89 PER ACRE FOOT. BUT YOU GO TO
THE SANTA ROSA PLANE AND IT'S
$41 PER ACRE FOOT. SO WE'RE
WORKING AT THIS ON A LOCAL LEVEL
, BUT WE REALLY NEED STATE
ASSISTANCE TO HAVE A VIABLE
PATHWAY FORWARD AND SIGMA
IMPLEMENTATIONS, A SHARED STATE
LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY, SO WE NEED
TO HAVE THE STATES CONTINUE TO
SUPPORT TO MAKE THIS A SUCCESS.
A REALITY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
YOUR TIME. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME
IS JENNIFER CLARY, CALIFORNIA
DIRECTOR FOR CLEAN WATER ACTION.
THANK YOU FOR HOLDING THIS
HEARING TODAY. I ALWAYS LOVE
TALKING ABOUT GROUNDWATER. I'VE
BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A VERY
LONG TIME WAY BEFORE SIGMA JUST
HAD TO HAVE A FEW COMMENTS. UM,
FIRST THINKING ABOUT THE PLANS
AND LOCAL CONTROL. OUR
ORGANIZATION. READ EVERY SINGLE
PLAN AND LET ME TELL YOU, A LOT
OF THEM SOUNDED VERY MUCH ALIKE.
SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THERE'S
LOCAL CONTROL AND THERE'S
CONSULTANT CONTROL AND MAYBE
WHAT WE'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT
HERE IS KIND OF TAKING OUT THAT
CONSULTANT MIDDLEMAN HAVING DWR
STEP UP AND DO SOME OF THAT WORK
BECAUSE WHERE WE SAW WHERE THEY
WERE DWR PROVIDED DATA OR
SPECIFIC DIRECTIVE. THE GSA'S
DID IT AND SO WHAT WE WANT IS
FOR DWR TO HAVE SUFFICIENT
FUNDING AND STAFFING SO THAT
THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DO THAT
WORK SECOND. WE REALLY WE REALLY
APPRECIATE DWR S EMPHASIS ON
ANNUAL REPORTS BECAUSE THIS
EVERY FIVE YEARS UPDATE THEY'RE
A LONG WAY APART, BUT ON AN
ANNUAL BASIS, WE CAN LOOK AT
MONITORING WELLS AND PROXIMITY
TO DRY WELLS AND SAY, OKAY, ARE
WE MONITORING? DO WE KNOW AS
PART OF YOUR SUSTAINABLE
MANAGEMENT CRITERIA IF THOSE DRY
WELLS ARE BEING CAPTURED?
MONITORING NETWORK. IN FACT, A
LOT OF THE MONITORING NETWORK
WELLS AREN'T ACTUALLY BEING
MONITORED, AND THAT'S SOMETHING
WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND AS WELL.
SO JUST KIND OF WANT TO PING
THAT. AND FINALLY, FOR
ADJUDICATION. YES, THE EQUITY
QUESTION IS A BIG DEAL AND THE
STIPULATED JUDGMENT. THOSE
THINGS I'VE SEEN SO FAR KIND OF
SUCK BECAUSE THE WHOLE IDEA OF
ADJUDICATION IS YOU END UP
EVERYONE GETS TO REDUCE BY THE
SAME AMOUNT AND NATURE KIND OF
GETS LEFT OUT ALTOGETHER. SO
WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO MAKE THE
GSA SMUDGE SPS BIGGER PLAYER IN
THAT AND TO NOT SAY TO SOMETHING
LIKE BORREGO SPRINGS, THE
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY THAT
THEY NEED TO CUT THEIR WATER USE
BY 65% EVEN THOUGH THEY ONLY USE
10% OF THE WALL. IN THE BASIN.
WELL, AG. AT 70% HAS THE SAME
65% CUT. I THINK THAT WE CAN ALL
AGREE THAT WE NEED TO FIX THAT A
LITTLE BIT. SO LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH ALL OF YOU AND ALSO
ALSO FORGOT TO SAY EVERYTHING MY
COLLEAGUES AT COMMUNITY WATER
CENTER AND LEADERSHIP COUNCIL IS
SUPER IMPORTANT AND I TOTALLY
AGREE WITH IT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIRS HAPPENING.
BENNETT AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. PLEASURE TO BE HERE.
MY NAME IS CHRIS ONLY FROM THE
SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES, GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER WITH OVER
25 GS AZZAN, SACRAMENTO COUNTY.
OUR REGIONAL PARTNERS HAVE
WORKED VERY HARD TO SUCCESSFULLY
GET OVER THE FIRST GSP HURDLE
AND ALL FOUR OF OUR LOCAL G SPS
WERE SUCCESSFULLY APPROVED
CONDITIONALLY, OF COURSE. UM AS
WE ENTER THIS IMPLEMENTATION
PHASE, SOME OF OUR PARTNERS HAVE
SUCCESSFULLY ATTAINED OBTAINED
STATE DWR GRANT SUPPORT TO WORK
ON BOOTS ON THE GROUND PROJECTS
TO HELP MOVE TOWARDS GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY. THREE LOCAL
EXAMPLES INCLUDE A NEW AQUIFER
STORAGE AND RECHARGE WHILE PILOT
TEST AT OUR SACRAMENTO COUNTY
WATER AGENCY SERVICE WATER
TREATMENT PLANT. A LOCAL WATER
DISTRICTS FLOOD MARK PROJECT AND
A SEPARATE GSA'S INNOVATIVE
APPROACH OF BUILDING A LARGE
MONITORING WELLS IN A REGION OF
GROUNDWATER DEPLETION THAT CAN
LATER BE CONVERTED TO A FUTURE
SUPPLY WELLS SHOULD THAT NEED
ARISE. ONE RELATED EFFORT I'D
LIKE TO SHARE IS A MULTI AGENCY
EFFORT FOR LOCAL CASINOS RIVER
THIS WATERSHED RESILIENCY
PROJECT PARTNERS WITH LOCAL
STAKEHOLDERS IN A STATE DWR
MODELING EFFORT AND HOPES TO
FIND A SOLUTION TO OUR FEAST OR
FAMINE, WATER ENVIRONMENT THAT
WE LIVE IN. THAT WILL
INCORPORATE SOME GROUNDWATER
RECHERCHE COMPONENTS WHILE WE
RECOGNIZE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
CHALLENGES WITH GSP
IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING
FUNDING AS DISCUSSED TODAY,
THERE ARE MANY TANGIBLE AND
SUCCESSFUL GROUNDWATER PROJECTS
OCCURRING STATEWIDE. I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SHARE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME AND EFFORT. OKAY ANY OTHER?
I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER PUBLIC
COMMENT. I WOULD NOTE THAT OUR
COLLEAGUE SENATOR HER. TATO IS
IN THE HOUSE. THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE. AND WITH THAT, MR IS
ANYTHING ELSE? WE WILL STAND IN
ADJOURNMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.