Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - October 17, 2000 SSCITY OF LODI INFORMAL INFORMATIONAL MEETING "SHIRTSLEEVE" SESSION CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2000 An Informal Informational Meeting ("Shirtsleeve" Session) of the Lodi City Council was held Tuesday, October 17, 2000 commencing at 7:04 a.m. A. ROLL CALL Present: Council Members — Hitchcock, Land, Nakanishi, Pennino and Mayor Mann Absent: Council Members — None Also Present: City Manager Flynn, City Attorney Hays and City Clerk Blackston B. CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR UPDATE Review of the Mayor's and Council Member's Weekly Calendar (filed) was waived. C. TOPIC(S) "Update on Water Supply Issues" Public Works Director Prima reported that the City is entirely a groundwater user and the system relies 100% on its wells. The City has been working with other agencies to improve the groundwater supply. The groundwater table in this area is declining, and has been since the turn of the century. Staff is looking at long-term solutions that involve trying to make the most use of surface supplies when they are available, which is typically during the winter months. "Conjunctive use" is an arrangement where an irrigation district or a city uses more surface water when it is available, and stores the groundwater for use in a dry year. Lodi makes all of these efforts through a variety of entities. The East San Joaquin Parties Water Authority (ESJPWA) is a consortium of Lodi, Stockton, Woodbridge, North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD), Stockton East Water District, and Central San Joaquin Irrigation District. These are the primary groundwater users in the basin in the eastern part of the county. Primarily the ESJPWA is a planning agency and is not set up to do projects. Their Board recently reaffirmed its position that it does not intend to take on any projects and has encouraged members to do so on their own or in groups. The San Joaquin Water Advisory Commission was established by the County a few years ago to advise the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors on water issues. It consists of representatives from all water entities, and has 17 members that meet once a month to review water supply issues. They are now reviewing the modification to the State Water Code as it pertains to export. They feel that the Water Code should be amended if we are going to do an export project as part of a conjunctive use scheme in San Joaquin County. Through the CalFed process, they have identified empty groundwater basins as a potential storage reservoir for surface water that could be managed and used in dry years. At its last meeting, Tom Shephard, Counsel for the Water Advisory Commission, had a number of alternatives, which could be very restrictive in terms of doing a project with East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and Mokelumne River water. The City's position has been that that is not appropriate, because we do look at EBMUD as a potential partner and we should be modifying state law to make a project simpler to implement, not more difficult. Lodi is involved in the planning effort of the Integrated Storage Investigations and Countywide Groundwater/Surface Water Management Plan. The Integrated Storage Investigations is a program that the State initiated as part of the CalFed process to look at conjunctive use opportunities in groundwater basins. The County has been looking at doing a groundwater management plan countywide. One of the outcomes of these Continued October 17, 2000 studies is an updated groundwater model that will be a useful tool for anyone planning on doing a project in the area. It will set a framework and identify possible projects that could be pursued. Mr. Prima stated that staff wants to make sure the plan includes conjunctive use projects as some of the alternatives to meet our groundwater shortage, and to also include conservation and recycling. Locally, ESJPWA has encouraged its members to go forward with projects. Referring to Exhibit D in the staff report (filed), Mr. Prima explained that the Groundwater Banking Project concept was formerly called the 10 -Well Project. The basis of the project is that EBMUD would provide surface water during wet years to NSJWCD. They would provide water to be taken out of the river that would not ordinarily be used by NSJWCD. If they can cut back on groundwater usage, and use this surface water in wetter years, that is a form of banking. The other element would be to actually inject surface water from the aqueduct into the ground and then later take it out during a dry year. The prospect that EBMUD would take groundwater and send it to Oakland in a drought time is an important issue to the Farm Bureau. Their concern is for the potential localized effect which may occur to a farmer's well adjacent to large well being pumped heavily during a long dry season. This concern led staff to look at alternatives to reduce that situation, and to possibly use the City's system as part of the export. Benefits include local control of the export wells. Mayor Mann questioned if it has been determined whether or not this procedure can be done safely, meaning that contaminated water not be injected, thereby contaminating the whole basin. Public Works Director Prima responded that staff feels it can be done safely; however, there are still concerns about it, as to how much filtering should be done before water goes in. That is part of the next level of the project development. Mr. Prima showed an overhead demonstrating the City's 1999 water production (filed). He explained that if all the wells were running at 75% capacity, instead of 35%, it would represent 19,000 -acre feet of water in terms of additional capacity, however, he noted that there is evidence that running a well continuously can cause some decline in the production of a well. The mechanics of connecting the City's system to the aqueduct still need to be worked out. The need that EBMUD has for dry -year water is far more than 19,000 -acre feet. Mark Williamson, with EBMUD, replied that they need 70,000 -acre feet. Public Works Director Prima commented that staff has considered the opportunity for Lodi to use surface water during a wet year and, in effect, bank even more groundwater. There are some technical issues in terms of mixing groundwater and surface water. The 10 -Well Project with NSJWCD was approximately $25 million. Almost half of that budget included filters for the groundwater that was extracted. There is concern because of the dibromochloropropane (DBCP). The filters used for DBCP are granular activated carbon filters that need to be run nearly continuously. Mr. Prima suggested that a feasibility study be done to determine whether the City's system could be used as part of this project. He noted that the City now supplies drinking -quality water out of its system, and conceptually the $15 million saved on filters could go toward a surface plant. In response to Council Member Hitchcock, Mr. Prima explained that NSJWCD already has two diversion points on the river: one going to the north, one to the south. The amount of water taken out that is provided "in lieu" would be measured, and the injection is metered. In reply to Council Member Hitchcock, City Attorney Hays responded that any agreement at the outset would deal with costs to the parties because there are certain infrastructure items that need to be built. Injection and extraction systems are both capital costs, and the agreement would contain both elements. In the long term, it is a banking 2 Continued October 17, 2000 circumstance where you account for water (or dollars) going in and account for it coming out. Council Member Hitchcock asked if the City would have the first right in drought times, and if we could cancel if problems occurred. City Attorney Hays replied that the answer is yes; although, it would most likely be a group project and not just solely Lodi's. Council Member Pennino commented that in 1993-94 the City talked about digging out Lodi Lake, keeping it filled year-round, and using the water for recharge. Mr. Prima explained that the CalFed project, which is supporting Woodbridge in terms of placing the dam with a new fish passage facility, included an element to consider dredging the Lake. CalFed was interested in creating habitat along the river, and had looked at Lodi Lake as a potential detriment to fish rearing. As part of the studies that have been done so far, they have not ascertained that the Lake really is a problem when it comes to salmon. However, there is a benefit in increasing the additional riparian habitat by building the causeway from the west side of the lake over to the north point that would allow the circulation trail around the lake. It is assumed that this project would include taking material out of the bottom of the lake, although, CalFed studies are not yet complete. Council Member Pennino questioned why we cannot go forward on our own with the lake and asked what it would take to keep Lodi Lake filled year-round. Mr. Prima explained that over the course of the winter, if the level in the river drops, it may not be possible to keep water in the lake year-round without a substantial makeup supply. If it is being done for recharge purposes, that means it is draining, and water would need to be supplied to it. The results of the CalFed studies should determine the best way to operate not only Lodi Lake, but the entire impoundment. Mayor Mann stated that several years ago discussions took place about dredging a foot or more of soil from the bottom of the lake in order to make it deeper and less hospitable for bacteria. Mr. Prima responded that the lake was re -graded and some of the high spots were removed. He indicated that he did not recall the issue of bacteria being brought up at that time in terms of the depth; however, he stated that he would check into it. The bacteria issue at Lodi Lake has been perplexing. The beach has had a problem; however, when the levels are measured further out in the lake, the bacteria level is acceptable in terms of swimming. In the river, the bacteria level is often higher, so staff is unsure what is causing it. It has been suggested that circulation from the river into the lake should be improved; although, the data received thus far has indicated the opposite. In summary, Mr. Prima reported that the City intends to continue working with NSJWCD. Staff would like to develop a scope of work for a consultant to work on outlining and detailing the kind of questions discussed today and determine if it is feasible for the City to pursue a project with NSJWCD and EBMUD. The NSJWCD has been successful in getting a CalFed grant to do a recharge project. Also, NSJWCD will appear before the State, along with EBMUD, before the end of the year to try to get the water rights permits renewed, and they have asked for the Citys support. Staff will come back to Council next month with a recommendation on this matter. In response to Council Member Land, Mr. Prima stated that the water flow into Lodi Lake varies considerably. The amount of water that gets released at Camanche, minus what gets taken out for irrigation by farmers, and what percolates into the ground, is what flows through. When the water reaches the lake it slows and fans out through the lake and the river. Woodbridge measures the flow at their dam and EBMUD measures where they release it. Continued October 17, 2000 D. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMENT No action was taken by the City Council. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:40 a.m. ATTEST: Susan J. Blackston City Clerk WEEK OF OCTOBER 17, 2000 Tuesday, October 17, 2000 7:00 a.m. Shirtsleeve Session. The topic(s) is: 1. Update on Water Supply Issues Reminder: Please bring your calendars to review with staff. 7:00 a.m. Special City Council meeting. The topic(s) is: 1. Closed Session a) Actual Litigation — Government Code §54956.9(a) Albert Thurman v. City ofLodi_ California Public Employees' Retirement System, Case No. 2850 6:30 p.m. Mann. Lodi Business and Professional Women/USA dinner celebrating National Business Women's Week, Salvation Army Headquarters. Mayor to present proclamation. Wednesday, October 18, 2000 7:00 p.m. City Council meeting. Summary of meeting of follows: 4 Presentations 13 Consent Calendar items One Public Hearing 2 Regular Calendar One Ordinance One Closed Session item Thursday, October 19, 2000 Friday, October 20, 2000 7:00 a.m. Economic briefing featuring John Mitchell, Chief Economist, U.S. Bancorp, Sacramento Capitol Club. 7:30 a.fn. Mann, Nakanishi, Land, Pennino. Mayor's "State of the City" breakfast, Hutchins Street Square, Crete Hall. 6:30 p.m. Mary Graham Guild Benefit Art Auction, Best Western Stockton Inn. Saturday, October 21, 2000 Sunday, October 22, 2000 Monday, October 23, 2000 Disclaimer: This calendar contains only information float was provided to the City Clerk's office councillmisclmcaindr.doc OF 1CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION OgIIFpR��Q AGENDA TITLE: Update on Water Supply Issues MEETING DATE: October 17, 2000 (Shirtsleeve Session) PREPARED BY: Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: None — information only. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Following previous Council direction, City staff has, 1) continued to work within its membership in the East San Joaquin Parties Water Authority (ESJPWA), and 2) held discussions with North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD) and East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD) on possible conjunctive -use water supply projects. The purpose of this meeting is to update the Council and the public on these activities and describe upcoming activities. The fundamental element of a conjunctive -use project is that excess surface water supplied from one entity would either be stored in the local groundwater basin, or provided as additional surface water replacing present groundwater use by a local entity, and then, in a drought, the "stored" groundwater would be available to the supplying entity. While the concept sounds simple, issues surrounding the details, both legal and technical, are complex and controversial in some minds. These issues are being addressed as described below and our planned policy direction is shown in italics: ■ ESJPWA — This entity has served as a forum for local urban and agricultural water suppliers and users, including EBMUD, to continue discussions and plan for future projects. ESJPWA has confirmed its role as a planning authority and has formally stated that any specific projects are to be undertaken by individuals or groups of members. The ESJPWA has continued the Beckman Test Project to learn more about the fate of injected water into the groundwater basin to assist members in planning a larger scale project. We intend to continue this participation and strongly agree that actual projects would be best handled by the ESJPWA's members. ■ San Joaquin Water Advisory Commission — This countywide commission is currently considering one element related to implementing the recently revised County groundwater export ordinance. That element has to do with possible amendments to State law regarding groundwater export. A memorandum describing possible amendments has been drafted by legal counsel and is attached as Exhibit A. Without getting into the myriad of details, we intend to support changes that simplify and make conjunctive -use projects more likely to be implemented while allowing for a reasonable degree of local control. APPROVED: H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager Water Issues Shirtlseeve 10/11/00 Update on Water Supply Issues October 17, 2000 (Shirtsleeve Session) Page 2 Integrated Storage Investigations and Countywide Groundwater/Surface Water Management Plan — This ambitious and important study is a joint effort among the County, State and local water agencies to develop a comprehensive water supply plan for San Joaquin County. The effort is being assisted by a large steering committee in which we participate. A "Principles of Participation" statement is attached as Exhibit B. One outcome of this work will be an updated computer model of the groundwater basin, which includes surface water flow and use impacts. But the key outcome is a preferred alternative consisting of a package of options, including projects, programs, policies and/or operational strategies that offer a means for achieving plan objectives (see Exhibit C). We intend to continue participation in this effort and work toward including conjunctive -use, conservation, and recycling as potential elements of the Plan. Potential project with Lodi and NSJWCD and/or EBMUD — Following ESJPWA's direction that members actually implement projects, and past Council direction, staff has continued to work on a possible project, focusing on what was formerly called the "10 -well project". The updated project concept is attached as Exhibit D and would mainly involve EBMUD and NSJWCD. The concept includes two elements that have led City staff to suggest that additional elements (and City participation) be considered. One element is the concern over pumping wells within the agricultural areas for export — that the increased pumping during a dry year could have an adverse impact on adjacent ag wells. The other element is that the exported water will need to be filtered to remove potential contaminants, mainly DBCP. Of the $25 million budget, nearly half is for filters. The additional elements suggested would include the City as part of the project by using excess (off- peak) capacity in our wells as all or part of the export wells, thereby minimizing the impact to agricultural areas. The next element would include the City as one of the conjunctive users. The City would use some surface water when it is available, thereby "banking" groundwater for export in dry years. There are numerous feasibility and technical details to consider, as well as legal/institutional ones to work out on these elements. An updated conceptual outline is attached (Exhibit E). Staff intends to continue to work with NSJWCD and EMBUD on this project, including the additional elements, and develop a scope of work for a study to address these details. This will be brought back to the Council in the future for discussion and action. We also intend to continue to work with NSJWCD in its efforts to secure surface water for direct use andlor recharge. FUNDING: None needed at this time. Richard C. Prima, Jr. Public Works Director RCP/Im Attachments cc: Fran Forkas, Water/Wastewater Superintendent Ed Steffani, North San Joaquin Water Conservation District Anthony Saracino, East San Joaquin Parties Water Authority Mark Williamson, East Bay Municipal Utility District Andy Christensen, Woodbridge Irrigation District Jack Sieglock, San Joaquin Board of Supervisors Bob Johnson, Water Advisory Commission Representative Water Issues Shirtlseeve SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL CONSERVATION P.O. BOX 1810 1810 EAST HAZELTON AVENUE STOCKTON. CALIFORNIA 95201 TELEPHONE (209) 4683000 FAX NO. (209) 4682999 September 22, 2000 MEMORANDUM & WATER DISTRIC4 S'EP2 5 2000 �CITYn.. TO: Richard C. Prima, Jr. City of Lodi FROM: Manuel Lopez Director of Public Works Peet,: "' C Op �RKSOEPiRTyENT SUBJECT: LEGISLATION TO CLARIFY STATE WATER CODE SECTIONS 1220 AND 1011.5 EXHIBIT A MANUEL LOPEZ DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS FLOOD CONTROL ENGINEER The attached letter was presented at the September 20, 2000, meeting of the Advisory Water Commission. During that meeting, it was requested that a copy of this letter be sent for review and comment by the Commission members and their respective organizations' Boards and Councils. This item will again be placed on the Commission's October 18, 2000, meeting Agenda for discussion and to receive comments. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 468-3100, or Tom Gau, Deputy Director/Development at 468-3101. ML:TO AWCIWTRCODES.MEM Attachment c: Thomas M. Gau Deputy Director/Development September 19, 2000 TO: ADVISORY WATER COMMISSION San Joaquin Flood Control and Water Conservation District FROM: THOMAS J. SHEPHARD, SR. AND DEEANNE WATKINS RE: Water Code Sections 1220 and 1011.5 The purpose of this memorandum is to outline possible amendments to Section 1220 and Section 1011.5 of the Water Code and to assist the Commission in determining what amendments, if any, to recommend to the Board of Supervisors. Summary of Water Code Section 1220 Currently, Water Code Section 1220 places specific restrictions on exporting groundwater outside the portions of San Joaquin County that are within the Delta -Central Sierra Basin. The Delta -Central Sierra Basin is defined in Department of Water Resources Bulletin 160-74, and contains the eastern portion of San Joaquin County, as well as other territory. Water Code Section 1220 prohibits the exportation of groundwater from this area of the county unless the pumping for exportation complies with "a groundwater management plan that is adopted by ordinance ... by the county board of supervisors, in full consultation with affected water districts, that is subsequently approved by a vote in the counties or portions of counties that overlie the groundwater basin." Subsection (c) of Section 1220 requires the prior agreement of all local agencies supplying water in the affected area before the county board of supervisors can adopt a groundwater management plan pursuant to this section. The application of various parts of this section is unclear. In addition, complying with the requirements of Water Code Section 1220 is uncertain and difficult. The Advisory Water Commission and the Board of Supervisors are considering possible ways in which legislation could amend and clarify the uncertainties and difficulties of Water Code Section 1220. It is recommended that any proposed changes that are made to Water Code Section 1220 should be specific to San Joaquin County and should not attempt to broadly apply our local preferences to the other areas and counties that are affected by Water Code Section 1220. 314673-1 Possible Amendments to Water Code Section 1220 1. Limit, but do not prohibit, exportation of groundwater that is part of a conjunctive use project. Section 1220 can be amended to allow for the exportation of groundwater within certain limitations. For example some portion of the water that is placed in the groundwater basin as a part of a conjunctive use project could be allowed to be pumped for exportation. If this option is pursued various limiting factors could be imposed such as the following: (a) Limiting the amount of water allowed to be withdrawn for exportation to a certain percentage (for example, 50%) of the water placed in the groundwater basin as part of the conjunctive use project. (b) Limiting the arnount of water allowed to be withdrawn for exportation from a conjunctive use project to a certain numeric number such as x acre feet per year, or acre feet per year not to exceed y acre feet over or 3 or 5 year period. (c) Limiting the amount of water allowed to be withdrawn for exportation as part of a conjunctive use project by a certain migration percentage each year. (d) Limiting the type of conjunctive use project eligible for exportation to one involving imported water that would not otherwise or naturally flow through the Basin. For example, water from the American River that is injected or stored in the groundwater basin would qualify for exportation; however, water from the Mokelumne River that would naturally flow through the County would not qualify as water that could be stored in the groundwater basin and then exported. (e) It will be necessary to define conjunctive use, which can include injection, in - lieu irrigation, recharge, and possibly other methods. Conjunctive use projects can be combined with export or can be used locally. 2. Entirely exempt conjunctive use projects from the limitations of the section. Section 1220 could be amended so that it does not place any limits on the exportation of injected water or non-native water that is part of a conjunctive use project. Some argue that Section 1220 was never intended to apply to water which is non-native groundwater or water that is artificially stored in the groundwater basin. This option would require defining non-native groundwater, injected water and/or conjunctive use projects that would be eligible for exportation. This option may require a technical study for identification of non-native or injected water. 3. Draft project specific legislation that allows for exportation consistent with a planned project. Draft legislation that specifically applies to a proposed conjunctive use project within San Joaquin County. There are currently many efforts within the County to develop a conjunctive use project that involves some element of exportation. Rather than generally drafting legislation 2 314673-1 that later may prove to be too restrictive or too broad, an alternative is to develop a specific project and then draft legislation to allow for exportation of groundwater consistent with the local project. This approach could require specific legislation for each project if there is more than one. 4. Clarify the existing terms concerning adoption of a groundwater management plan. The terms and application of the existing legislation are confusing and unclear. Legislation could be drafted to further describe how the limitations of Section 1220 apply within San Joaquin County. The following terms of Section 1220 could be clarified: (a) Clearly define the boundaries of Delta -Central Sierra Basin. The boundaries of the Delta -Central Sierra Basin are unclear. The boundaries of the Basin are currently identified as lines on a map that appears in Department of Water Resources Bulletin 160-74. It is believed that the southern boundary line is the southern border of the Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District and the western border includes the Delta and portions of Alameda, Contra Costa and Solano counties. The Basin extends to the east into the foothill counties and includes a portion of Calaveras, Stanislaus, Amador, and El Dorado counties. To the north, the Basin includes much of Sacramento County. Legislation could more accurately describe the boundaries of the Basin as it applies to San Joaquin County, while at the same time not affecting the other counties. In addition, the Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin has been defined by the Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118-80 and is a much smaller area than the Delta -Central Sierra Basin. Some argue that the boundaries of the Eastern San Joaquin County Basin better define the local areas that are limited by Section 1220. This includes the county line on the north, the San Joaquin River on the west, the county line and the Stanislaus River on the south, and the edge of the alluvium along the foothills on the east. In any event, legislation should clarify the relationship of the Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin to Section 1220 and the Delta -Central Sierra Basin. (b) Define requirements of the groundwater management plan. Currently, section 1220 allows for exportation of groundwater if in compliance with a "groundwater management plan." The requirements and type of groundwater management plan required are not specified. We are now familiar with groundwater management plans, referred to as AB3030 plans, adopted pursuant to Water Code section 10750 et seq. However, the legislation authorizing AB3030 plans was not enacted until 1992, six years after Water Code Section 1220 was enacted in 1984. Traditionally AB3030 plans have been adopted with little practical application or control over the management of groundwater. Clarifying legislation could specifically identify the type of groundwater management plan or the components of a groundwater management required by Section 1220. 3 314673-1 (c) Define the eligible voters and voting method necessary to approve the groundwater management plan. Currently, Section 1220 requires the "groundwater management plan" adopted by the county board of supervisors to be subsequently "approved by a vote." It is unclear from the existing legislation the type of vote that is necessary to approve the groundwater management plan. The various interpretations could require an election of all registered voters or an election by all landowners. It is also unclear whether the vote must occur at polling places during a general election, if the vote can occur by mailed ballot, or if a protest hearing is sufficient. New legislation should clarify the eligible voters and the voting method required by Section 1220, if a vote is to be required. (d) Clarify the portions of the counties that must approve the groundwater management plan. Currently, Section 1220 requires the "groundwater management plan" adopted by the county board of supervisors be subsequently "approved by a vote in the counties or portions of counties that overlie the groundwater basin." The existing legislation does not clearly identify the geographic area that must approve a groundwater management plan that has been approved as an ordinance by a county board of supervisors. Some argue that the phrase "approved by a vote in the counties or portions of counties that overlie the groundwater basin" can be interpreted to require a groundwater management plan that applies to a portion of the basin to be approved by a vote of the entire Delta -Central Sierra Basin or alternatively by the entire Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin. This task would be difficult as these boundaries include many political jurisdictions. Others argue it is more reasonable that the plan must be approved by a vote within the county that the plan applies. Legislation should clarify the geographic areas of the required vote approving the groundwater management plan. (e) Clarify the requirement that all agencies supplying water approve the plan. Current legislation requires that all water agencies that supply water within the area of the groundwater management plan must agree to the plan before the Board of Supervisors may adopt the plan by ordinance. Some argue that this would be a difficult and possibly impossible task and the Board of Supervisors should have the ability to adopt a groundwater management plan without first obtaining agreement from all agencies supplying water in the area. Legislation could address this concern. Water Code Section 1011.5 The basic purpose of Section 1011.5 is to provide protection to the holders of appropriate rights who engage in a conjunctive use program and thus at times do not use their appropriate rights. A portion of 1011.5, in effect until December 31, 2006, provides 314673-1 for special conditions applicable to the Eastern San Joaquin Basin as defined in Department of Water Resources Bulletin No. 118-80. Section 1011.5 is secondary to the issues of Section 1220. Our recommendation is that any amendment of Section 1011.5 be based on amendments, if any, of Section 1220. We will be happy to answer any further questions you may have. 3(4673-1 EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCOPE Development of the San Joaquin County Water Management Plan comprises several major tasks, all conducted within the framework of an open process of on-going stakeholder involvement: • Collection and review of available data and studies related to San Joaquin County Water Resources; • Development of objectives and criteria for evaluation of various "packages" of water management options including projects, programs and operational strategies (alternatives); • Development of technically feasible water management alternatives; • Evaluation of the alternatives according to stakeholder objectives and criteria; and • Recommendation of a preferred alternative to the Counry Board for consideration; • Development of a countywide water management plan document based on the selected alternative; and • Development of financing and implementation plan documents. To achieve these goals, the project team is asking stakeholder workshop participants to: 1. Learn about countywide water management issues and the respective roles of the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, its consultants, local water agencies and regulating agencies in this effort. V 2. Become familiar with the decision making process used by the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 3. Use the meetings as a forum for each organization/community representative to work cooperatively, to consider a range of options, and to communicate specific concerns to other participants and the project team. 4. Report back to constituents and organizational colleagues on the goals and progress of the planning e ffort. 5. Provide input to the project team on stakeholder objectives, concerns, and values that it should consider in making its decision. Work hard to assure that all participants' concerns have been documented. 6. Make an effort to reach a consensus with other participants, where possible. Attend the series of currently planned workshops; and Listen courteously to other points of view and consider alternatives before making recommendations. CDM Camp Dresscr & McKcc Inc. Page 1 of 2 DISCUSSION PROCESS All stakeholder perspectives are valued. The preferred deliberation process is collaborative problem solving. In the cases of non -consensus, all viewpoints will be documented and communicated to decision -makers. SUPPORT A neutral facilitator, as well as the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District staff and consultants, will provide technical information and assistance to participants during discussions. y AGENDA AND TIMETABLE Participation in the establishment of agendas and matters for discussion'wiIf be encouraged. The facilitator will be responsible for preparing the agendas in collaboration with participants. At the conclusion of each meeting, staff will recommend items for inclusion in the next agenda. MEETING RECORDING ivleetings will be audio taped to assist in the preparation of meeting summaries that will be distributed to participants. SUMMARY MEMORANDUM A summary memorandum containing participants recommendations will be prepared for consideration by the County Board when selecting an alternative to be developed into the Management Plan. It is suggested that this summary memorandum contain the following: ■ The scope and content of the discussions; ■ Recommendations and conclusions on the issues considered; and ■ Individual opinions and observations that may not be reflected in the main body of the Nater Management Plan document or implementation plan. CDM Camp Dresser& McKee Inc. Page 2 of Z 1� EXHIBIT C Decision -Making on the Final Plan I Constituents I Steering County Board Committee of Supervisors I Technical Analysis Steering Committee Decision -Making Process Document Major Goals, Goals and Objectives I Weight the Goals Identify Performance Measures I Measure the Alternatives' Performance I Select a Preferred Alternative I Some Definitions Option: A project, program, or policy or operational strategy that offers a means for achieving plan objectives Alternative: A package of options * Major Goals: The essential goals in developing a plan, in broad, overarching terms * Goals: Further elaboration on/explanation of the major goals a Objectives: Detailed breakdown describing the goals * Performance Measures: Indicators or indices of the degree to which water management alternatives meets the objectives CDM (:.imp Drc xr S McKee EXHIBIT D EAST SAN JOAQUIN PARTIES WATER AUTHORITY Central San Joaquin WCD City of Lodi Woodbridge Irrigation District California Water Service Co. Anthony M. Saracino Executive Director/Secretary (916) 329-9199 San Joaquin County Stockton East Water District City of Stockton N. San Joaquin WCD 555 Capitol Mall, Ste. 1550 Sacramento, CA 95814 Groundwater Banking Project Concept 1) Project name a. Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Bank No.l 2) Project goals a. Increase local water supply reliability, reduce overdraft, and provide dry year benefits for project partner 3) Project participants a. ESJPWA or subset of member agencies and EBMUD for Bank No. 1 b. Other potential partners for Bank No. 2, 3, etc. 4) Bank No. 1 Project location a. Project will be bounded by Mokelumne River to the north, Highway 99 to the west, 8 -mile road to the south, and Jack Tone Road to the east 5) Project scope a. In lieu and injection components b. Mokelumne River water to NSJWCD c. Three extraction wells south of Mokelumne River d. Seven injection/extraction wells near aqueduct e. Average annual recharge: 7,000 acre-feet f. Average annual extraction: 3,500 acre-feet 6) Project costs a. Approximately $25 million 7) Project schedule a. Develop project design b. Public outreach and education c. Preparation of application under Groundwater Ordinance EXHIBIT E September 2000 CONCEPTUAL OUTLINE GROUNDWATER STORAGE/CONJUNCTIVE USE PROJECT NORTH SAN JOAQUIN WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT CITY OF LODI EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT OBJECTIVES • Develop a consensus understanding of the groundwater system south of the Mokelumne River and north of the Mokelumne Aqueducts • Develop a comprehensive community outreach and education program to ensure the public is informed and their concerns fully addressed • Develop a groundwater banking project which: ➢ provides a net benefit to North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD) and City of Lodi (City) ➢ provides a net benefit to East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) ➢ fully protects the overlying land uses, including the right to utilize groundwater ➢ fully protects all water rights and entitlements BENEFITS • Benefits sought by NSJWCD: ➢ net recharge to groundwater basin ➢ provide incentive for NSJWCD water users to utilize NSJWCD surface water supplies ➢ increase firm supply to NSJWCD water users ➢ upgraded water conveyance systems • Benefits sought by City of Lodi: ➢ net recharge to groundwater basin ➢ access to future surface water supply via surface water treatment plant ➢ revenue stream through potential use of City wells and treatment works • Benefits sought by EBMUD: ➢ groundwater storage of wet year entitlements to allow dry year extractions ➢ high quality supplemental water source LANDOWNER PROTECTIONS • Community outreach program • Involvement of Chamber of Commerce, Farm Bureau, and other organized groups • Formation of a Community Advisory Task Force • Monitoring well network • Willing landowners • County Groundwater Export Permit applied for jointly • NSJWCD/Lodi/EBMUD operating agreementicontractual guarantees • Monitoring Committee KEY SUCCESS MILESTONES • 2x2x2 elected officials meetings • Cooperative agreement for exploration, engineering feasibility and alternatives development • Public outreach/Community Advisory Task Force • Exploration program GWSTORAGEAGREE.doc 1 10/11/00 September 2000 • Formation of Joint Powers Authority (or other arrangement) for project • Monitoring well network • Inclusion in County Water Plan • Water Code 1220 and 1011.5 modifications • Project engineering • Environmental documentation • Groundwater Export Permit • Project construction • Project operation/recharge starts GWSTORAGEAGREE.doc 2 10111/00 Update on Water Supply Issues October 17, 2000 •.. East San Joaquin Parties Water Authority • Planning agency only • Coordination among main groundwater agencies in basin • Contact with Farm Bureau Continue participation & agree that projects should be undertaker: by members outside of ESJPWA ❖ San Joaquin Water Advisory Commission • Representatives from all water agencies in County • Makes recommendations to Board of Supervisors • Considering suggesting amendments to State Water Code re groundwater export Y Continue participation & support legislation making conjunctive -use projects more likely to be implemented while allowing for a reasonable degree of local control • Integrated Storage Investigation & Countywide Groundwater/Surface Water Management Plan • Participation by all water agencies in County in Steering Committee • Supported by State of California • Updated groundwater/surface water model • Will make recommendation to Board of Supervisors ➢ Continue participation & support conjunctive -use, conservation and recycling as elements of the plan Project with North San Joaquin County Water Conservation District & East Bay Municipal Utilities District • Combination injection and in -lieu use w/NSJWCD • Possible participation by City of Lodi Continue discussions and develop scope of work for study to examine alternatives for Lodi participation Support NSJWCD in their efforts to secure water 3 66-0a0 66-AON oc 66-400 66-daS a� o 0 LL m o 0 66 -find Q CO � �. L v L CO 0 66-Inp CD CO LL a. 66-unp O 0 L. 66-AeW (� a 66 -add LO >. U- � Co C 0�ik. U += O ¢ 66-aeW D +3 V co Q0 N O U- pj 66-gaj 66-uer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U') o LO o LO o U) M C'7 N N r— �— }aa�-aaa�/ 3