HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - September 22, 2015 SSLODI CITY COUNCIL
SHIRTSLEEVE SESSION
CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2015
A. Roll Call by City Clerk
An Informal Informational Meeting ("Shirtsleeve" Session) of the Lodi City Council was held
Tuesday, September 22, 2015, commencing at 7:03 a.m.
Present: Council Member Kuehne, Council Member Mounce, Council Member Nakanishi,
Mayor Pro Tempore Chandler, and Mayor Johnson
Absent: None
Also Present: City Manager Schwabauer, City Attorney Magdich, and City Clerk Ferraiolo
NOTE: Council Member Kuehne left the meeting at 8:10 a.m.
NOTE: Council Member Nakanishi left the meeting at 8:15 a.m.
B. Topic(s)
B-1 Receive Information on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (PW)
Public Works Director Wally Sandelin provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Sustainable
Groundwater Management Act. Specific topics of discussion included legislation, why
groundwater is important, explanation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA),
water rights, definition of "sustainable," where Lodi fits in, Lodi historical groundwater use, SGMA
timeline, definition of Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), function of GSAs, authority of
GSAs, definition of Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP), options for governance, staff
recommendation, and shared responsibility.
In response to Council Member Mounce, Mr. Sandelin stated the Urban Water Management Plan
was last updated in 2011 and staff is currently working on the next update. In further response,
Mr. Sandelin stated staff used data from the 2006 Urban Water Management Plan, rather than
the 2011 Plan, to determine Lodi's sustainable yield of 14,600 to 15,800 acre feet because the
groundwater model had expanded in size and added agricultural and City wells, which caused a
decrease in the yield by 10 to 15 percent due to increased irrigation pumping.
In response to Council Member Mounce, Mr. Sandelin stated the purpose of this presentation
was to provide Council with different pathways the Council may take in creating the GSP, adding
that if the City does not develop a plan, the State will create one for the City. City Manager
Schwabauer explained groundwater is governed by State law; however, there is no regulatory
board to oversee how much water is pumped from the basins, other than the court system.
SGMA is the State's effort to allow local government entities to make those determinations,
instead of the courts, and this is Lodi's opportunity to determine how local its agency will
be. Mr. Sandelin added that the League of California Cities has been very active on this piece of
legislation to positively influence the outcome.
Mayor Johnson questioned how the City can control the impact of outside pumping and water
flow, particularly when Lodi manages its groundwater so well. Mr. Sandelin agreed it is a
challenge, stating agricultural pumping outside of the City influences how the plumes move under
the City, and staff is utilizing that information to manage how the City pumps water out of the
wells in order to decrease the need for granular activated carbon filters. An earlier analysis
suggests that agricultural pumping increased by 15 percent, and there are lower groundwater
levels in the outside areas. In further response, Mr. Sandelin stated he believed it would be wise
for the City to form its own GSA and not join with other agencies, such as Cal Water or Stockton
East Water District.
In response to Council Member Nakanishi, Mr. Sandelin stated currently there is no pumping
restriction on farmers and they can take as much water as they want; however, under SGMA, an
agency will have the power to control pumping, or the State will do so if the agency does not
create a sustaining condition within 20 years. In further response, Mr. Sandelin stated it is
allowable that each agency can implement different conditions.
In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Chandler, Mr. Sandelin explained it is difficult to monitor wells
on private properties because most property owners are reserved about divulging how much
groundwater is in their wells and some of the data is held by the State.
Council Member Nakanishi stated landowners should volunteer their data on groundwater and a
GSA can require them to do so.
Mr. Sandelin explained the options for governance, which include a Centralized GSA, Distributed
GSA, or a combination thereof, and he stated that the North San Joaquin Water Conservation
District (NSJWCD) opted against a Distributed GSA, primarily due to cost, and is planning to
move forward under a Centralized GSA. He stated the Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) Board
extended an offer to both Lodi and NSJWCD to form a local GSA.
In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Schwabauer stated there are different ways of viewing the
various governance options and that Mayor Johnson's comment to ensure NSJWCD does not
pump Lodi's water is a valid point. Staff believes both Lodi and WID are sustainable agencies.
Because of the obligation to prove sustainability, if Lodi were to join an agency that included
entities with sustainability issues, Lodi could be outvoted and forced to give its water to apply to
their overdrafts, which is of major concern to staff. If these other agencies form their own GSA,
they would be obligated to prove sustainability on their own without taking Lodi's oversupply.
Mr. Schwabauer further explained that a majority vote on a GSA would be two-thirds of a quorum
and, as an example, if the GSA included Lodi, WID, and NSJWCD, the board would consist of
three individuals. Mayor Johnson stated Lodi has historically had a positive relationship with WID,
and he hoped that would continue because that would be a majority vote in this example.
Council Member Mounce stressed that it is Council's responsibility to oversee and protect Lodi's
most valuable commodity of water and believed the City should form its own GSA and not
depend on anyone else. Lodi is prudent in conserving water and should not lose control of it. She
further stated citizens would lose oversight and transparency with any other board.
Council Member Nakanishi expressed his concern that this process will be costly if Lodi forms its
own GSA and believed that the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors would ensure nothing
harmful happens to Lodi if countywide safety factors were built into the agency. He added it is
difficult to create a law that will tax everyone, but Lodi should be a part of the decision-making
process.
Council Member Mounce argued that water will be costly either way moving forward and any
decision to tax the public must be done locally and not by other agencies, over which Lodi would
have no control.
Council Member Kuehne believed the City should be proactive in its approach and not place itself
in a negative position. He stated it may behoove the City to join WID; however, it may also be
beneficial to join with the larger entities as part of a Centralized GSA instead of answering to
them. He stated he would like to hear further from WID regarding this matter.
Mayor Pro Tempore Chandler requested information on WID's decision behind inviting other
agencies to join, and Council Member Mounce requested that the potential costs be provided to
Council.
Mr. Sandelin stated the basin boundaries are San Joaquin County and partially into Stanislaus
and Calaveras Counties. The staff recommendation is to form a GSA as a partner with WID with
further participation in the Centralized GSA. The model of a Centralized GSA is that it performs
2
investigations and each agency would be a funding partner. SGMA requires that, if there are
multiple GSAs, they are planned and coordinated. Mr. Schwabauer added staff is looking for a
Centralized GSA to handle the majority of investigations, in which Lodi would participate, but
in proving sustainability, Lodi would have that right and not cede it to the Centralized GSA.
Andy Christensen with WID stated he concurs with staffs recommendation, adding that the goal
behind the letter of invitation was to retain local authority over the most onerous portions of the
legislation, which are local control over use and cost of water into the future, and this
recommendation works toward that end. The letter of invitation included NSJWCD and Lodi to
form its own GSA primarily because of the positive, long-standing working relationship with Lodi,
the shared river source, and Lodi's responsible management of its groundwater basin. The
County model is largely sustainable at this time, but beyond Lodi and WID, there is an issue with
sustainability and water flowing out of the area. The concern is who ultimately controls the local
resources, and both Lodi and WID have done an outstanding job conserving water in this area.
Mr. Christensen stated the Groundwater Banking Authority recently discussed forming a GSA that
could manage groundwater for the entire area. The law allows agencies, such as Lodi and WID,
to form a GSA, and if it chooses not to form its own agency, the responsibility goes to the County;
however, the County has indicated it will not do so and is working with the Groundwater Banking
Authority to form the agency. The staff recommendation will allow the City to retain local control
on wells, how much water to take out of the ground, costs, and definition of sustainability, while
also participating with the larger GSA. He stated that being controlled by a larger GSA will reduce
Lodi's voting ability and leave it in a defensive position. Mr. Christensen stated partnering with a
larger GSA will not save costs; those costs will be the same either way, but Lodi would also lose
its local control.
In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Chandler, Mr. Christensen stated that at this point the
legislature is addressing groundwater only, but in the future this could expand to surface water or
connectivity, and he stressed the importance of maintaining local control while the ability exists
and to prohibit larger groups from making sustainable agencies help them meet the goals that
they cannot meet on their own.
Council Member Mounce shared her negative experience when attempting to find out who serves
on the WID Board and the unreceptive response she received when she contacted one of the
members. She stated her overall concern with joining another group is that a board, other than
the City Council, will be unaffected by community input on this issue.
Council Member Nakanishi stated he favors the concept of controlling Lodi's water and of a larger
GSA handling the major details. He questioned if there has been any discussion about this before
the groups vote on it.
In response to Mayor Johnson, Mr. Sandelin stated the next step would be Council action to file
the City's intention to form a GSA with the State, which can be rescinded or modified at a later
date. He suggested, however, that it would be worthwhile to gather and present Council with
additional information about the scope of the GSP, the cost of going in that direction on its own or
with a partner, and working with the Groundwater Banking Authority to see what it anticipates in
funding participation. Currently, the City pays $20,000 a year for the Groundwater Banking
Authority joint powers agreement. Mr. Sandelin stated he anticipates there would be a sizable
initial payment to a larger GSA for data gathering, but he believed more investigating and
information gathering was necessary.
Mayor Johnson requested that a subsequent Shirtsleeve Session be held to further discuss this
matter before it comes to Council for action.
In response to Mayor Pro Tempore Chandler, Mr. Sandelin explained a GSA has the power, if
needed, to limit pumping as measured by meters, but those are provisions of the authority of
SGMA and not necessarily what Lodi would demand. SGMA requires that the sustainability goals
provided in the plan be achieved 20 years from 2020. With regard to extraction, Mr. Sandelin
stated some agencies impose a groundwater charge for water extracted from the ground, and this
would be an allowance that could fund activities of the GSA.
In response to Council Member Nakanishi, Mr. Christensen stated WID is in a similar situation as
Lodi in trying to determine how it will deal with this legislation, while still protecting its
groundwater. The WID board voted to send a letter to other agencies as an invitation to discuss
the possible formation of a GSA, yet WID continues to cooperate with the County. The primary
goal is to retain the power to make its own decisions and not be at the mercy of the vote of a
larger agency on sustainability matters. Council Member Nakanishi stated this plan should be for
the entire county and the intentions should be shared with the other entities and the Groundwater
Banking Authority.
Myrna Wetzel expressed support for gathering additional information before making a final
decision on the matter.
Mike Lusk questioned if the groundwater reserve takes into account the increase in residential
expansion in Lodi, as well as industrial; if Lodi would assume authority of groundwater from
NSJWCD if the sphere of influence is increased; and how the salt water intrusion from the twin
tunnels will affect the water in Lodi's basin, because it is currently dependent upon fresh water.
He believed that many of the groundwater requirements today will be negligible to Lodi in the
future when trying to utilize surface water.
Council Member Mounce agreed with the premise that the twin tunnels will allow salt water to
seep into Lodi's system, stating that it will likely ruin Lodi's groundwater source once they are
built.
RECESS
At 8:15 a.m., Mayor Johnson called for a recess, and the City Council meeting reconvened at
8:21 a.m.
B-2 Tour of City Hall Annex Office Space (PW)
At 8:21 a.m., City staff provided a tour of the City Hall Annex office space.
C. Comments by Public on Non -Agenda Items
None.
D. Adjournment
No action was taken by the City Council. The meeting was adjourned at 8:32 a.m.
ATTEST:
Jennifer M. Ferraiolo
City Clerk
0
AGENDA ITEM -w I
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Receive Information on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
MEETING DATE: September 22, 2015 (Shirtsleeve)
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive information on the Sustainable Groundwater Management
Act.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Historically, groundwater has been managed in California by a
combination of special districts, Special Act Districts, court-appointed
water -masters, and cities and counties without an enforceable set of
statewide groundwater management standards. The State previously allowed local agencies to voluntarily
develop groundwater management plans in defined basins and sub -basins pursuant to Assembly Bill 3030.
The basin boundaries are established in State Bulletin 118-2003.
This past year the Governor and the Legislature identified groundwater as an important component in the
State's water system and decided to move from voluntary to mandatory regulation. Three bills were
enacted establishing statewide standards intended to protect groundwater elevations, quality, and surface
water -groundwater interactions. These standards are to be implemented through locally adopted plans.
By January 31, 2020, all groundwater basins designated as "high or medium priority" basins and identified
as having critical overdraft conditions, must be managed under a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP)
adopted by a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). Lodi is located in the Eastern San Joaquin
Groundwater sub -basin and this sub -basin is identified by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) as
being in a critical overdraft condition. The purpose of the GSP is to achieve sustainable groundwater
management in accordance with the States sustainability goal.
Any local agency or a combination of agencies overlying a groundwater basin may elect to be a GSA after
providing notice and conducting a public hearing. If a GSA is not established by June 30, 2017, the county
becomes the GSA unless the county declines by submitting written notice to the DWR.
The GSA is given broad authority to adopt and enforce the GSP to achieve the state's sustainability goal.
Some of the actions authorized by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) are listed
below.
1. Investigate surface waters, surface water rights, groundwater and groundwater rights
2. Inspect property and facilities
3. Require registration of all wells
4. Require metering of all wells
5. Regulate extractions of groundwater except the regulation is not a determination of water rights in
the basin's groundwater
6. Acquire property
APPROVED:
City Manager
K:\WP\Water\CC SGMA GSA Shirtsleeve 9-22-15.doc 9/15/2015
Receive Information on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
September 22, 2015
Page 2
7. Authorize_ temporary and_permanent_transfers of groundwater allocations subject to city and
county ordinances
8. Impose spacing requirements on new wells
9. Adopt regulations on existing wells to minimize well interference
10. Impose fees for permits, extraction, and development of the GSP
11. Monitor compliance and enforce the GSP
Agencies that have expressed an interest in forming their own or joining other agencies to form a GSA
include Stockton East Water District, South San Joaquin Irrigation District, and Woodbridge Irrigation
District. Staff recommends the City Council also consider this alternative. North San Joaquin Water
Conservation District board has stated their preference for a regional approach citing the high costs of
going it alone. Pertinent factors leading to staff's recommendation are provided below.
1. Lodi has funded ($50 million) a conjunctive water supply program through its partnership with
Woodbridge Irrigation District.
2. Lodi has substantially reduced its dependence on groundwater as a supply and, as a result,
groundwater levels under the City have risen.
3. Lodi is a Mokelumne River centric water agency that is shared with only Woodbridge Irrigation
District and North San Joaquin Water Conservation District.
The purpose of the GSP is to adopt policies, rules, and regulations intended to achieve the State's
sustainability goal within 20 years with interim milestones at five year increments. SGMA contains an
extensive description of the content of the GSP. Basically, the GSP must include a physical description of
the basin, information on groundwater levels and quality, subsidence, information on surface water -
groundwater interactions, data on historical and projected water demands and supplies, monitoring and
management provisions, and a description of how the plan will affect other plans, including city and county
general plans.
DWR must publish best management practices for sustainable management of groundwater by January 1,
2017, and must adopt regulations about the various components of the GSP by July 1, 2016. Each GSA
must adopt a GSP no later than January 31, 2020. By June 1, 2016, DWR must adopt guidelines for the
review of GSP's. Annually, each GSA will submit a report on the implementation of the GSP.
The state can accept multiple plans for one region as long as those plans are coordinated. It remains to be
seen how difficult such coordination might be.
Note: Much of the above information was compiled by the League of California Cities, Jason Rhine,
Legislative Representative.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
F. Wally delin
Public Works Director
Prepared by F. Wally Sandelin/Public Works Director
FWS/FWS/tb
K:\WP\Water\CC SGMA GSA Shirtsleeve 9-22-15.doc 9/15/2015
The City of Lodi
Public Works
Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act
Shirtsleeve Meeting
September 22, 2015
Legislation
On September 16, 2014, Governor Brown Jr. signed a
three -bill package known as the Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act (SGMA).
The three bills include:
Assembly Bill 1739
State Bill 1319
State Bill 1168
Amendment — September 4, 2015
State Bill 13
Why is groundwater important?
➢ Groundwater aquifers provide about 40% of the state's water
supply in normal years.
➢ During times of drought, aquifers provide up to 60% of the
supply.
➢ Until November 2012, the City of Lodi water supply was
100% dependent on groundwater.
➢ Groundwater currently accounts for 53% of Lodi's supply
(July 2015) with surface water accounting for the remainder
(47%).
➢ Without water conservation measures in effect groundwater
accounted for 75% of Lodi's supply (July 2014) with surface
water accounting for the remaining (25%).
What is the SGMA?
SGMA gives local agencies the authority to manage groundwater in
a sustainable manner and allows for limited state intervention when
necessary to protect groundwater resources.
The SGMA specifically:
➢ Establishes a definition of sustainable groundwater management.
➢ Establishes a framework for local agencies to develop plans and
implement strategies to sustainably manage groundwater
resources.
➢ Prioritizes basins with the greatest problems (high- and medium -
priority)
➢ Sets a 20 -year timeline for implementation.
Water Rights?
Does SGMA change existing water rights?
SGIVIA does not change existing groundwater rights.
Groundwater rights will continue to be subject to
regulations under article 10, section 2 of the
California Constitution. SGIVIA includes numerous
provisions to protect both groundwater and surface
water rights.
"Sustainable" Defined
"Sustainable yield," according to SGMA, means the
maximum quantity of water calculated over a base
period representative of long-term conditions in the
basin and including any temporary surplus — that can be
withdrawn annually from a groundwater supply without
causing an undesirable result.
In the 2006 Urban Water Management Plan, Lod is
sustainable or safe yield was determined to be between
14,600 and 15,800 AF.
- Calculation by Treadwell & Rollo Inc.
I
Ll' VE& (] (IF
DU
CASGEM Basin Prioritization —June 2014
i
5twm L
r yy
Y }
_ � w
bf -tleG dwahr baso PrlarlllwN9n kummary
Derrearaltgal ler $IBW
P�kln9 . Oe�A.mkl GWVg! � 0.@9yeng PoyWatwn
xtgN 5995 a1%
Mldwm Aa ]]�
Very tow 3fiF IK
in�m,mmn,s,aNs-m rLLo oon
xo 1
art
Y 3
TM1 J
�a_yl -y�y ��SJ Ci"a
Groundwater Basin Pi antral on
.+,
----- Hydrologic Reg'wn 8auntlary
County boundary
._. Lor Highway
� 1 '
Major Canal
®Mlles !
� �•
9141 ■ i 16441 to] I IM01 IMI 901111 to
Production,Total Water
Year
Total
Percent
.
2006 16,310
16,310
100%
2007 17,137
17,137
100%
2008 17,171
17,171
100%
2009 16,059
16,059
100%
2010 15,005
15,005
100%
2011 14,848
14,848
100%
2012 15,251
15,157
99%
2013 15,961
10,142
64%
2014 16,079
11,705
73%
2015 12,060
7,597
63%
Sustainable Yield
15,800 AF
Note:
Surface Water Treatment Plant startup November 2012
2015 projections based on 25% water conservation effort and WID surface water allocation of 4,500 AF.
SGMA Timeline
Sept. 16, 2014: SGMA became law
Jan. 1, 2015: Legislation goes into effect
Jan. 31, 2015: DWR established initial groundwater basin priority
June 30, 2017: Deadline to form a Groundwater Sustainability
Agency (GSA)
Jan. 31, 2020: Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) required for
all critically overdrafted basins
Jan. 31, 2040-2042: Basins must achieve sustainability
What are GSAs?
Any local agency or combination of local agencies, overlying a
high- or medium -priority groundwater basin, may form a
Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) for the basin.
Local agencies eligible to form a GSA include any local public
agency that has water supply, water management and land
use responsibilities within a groundwater basin.
Examples of agencies that can form a GSA:
Cities, Irrigation Districts, Joint Power Authority, etc.
What is a GSA's function?
The GSA is the primary agency responsible for achieving the
SGMA's sustainability goal within the timeframe prescribed.
SGMA provides GSA's with new authority to manage
groundwater. GSA's may choose among numerous new tools
and authorities.
SGMAalso requires the GSA to consider the interests of
different stakeholders, including beneficial users of water,
environmental interests, disadvantaged communities, tribes
and others. The agency must provide outreach to these
stakeholders.
What is a GSA's authority?
GSA's may conduct investigations, measure and
limit extractions, require registration of wells,
impose fees for groundwater management, and
enforce the terms of the Groundwater
Sustainability Plan (GSP).
What are GSPs?
All GSAs must prepare a Groundwater
Sustainability Plan (GSP), which can build on the
region's existing groundwater plans. SGIVIA lays
out the contents of a GSP, such as basin
conditions, measurable objectives for
sustainability, and measures to meet the
sustainable yield of the basin.
Options for Governance
Centralized GSA
➢ Covers entire basin
➢ Assumes all authorities and responsibilities
➢ New or existing agency
Distributed GSA
➢ Each GSA assumes all responsibilities for their service
area
➢ Requires Coordination Agreement (MOU)
Combination of centralized and distributed
➢ Centralized GSA: assumes some shared responsibilities
➢ Multiple GSAs: assume remaining responsibilities
Staff Recommendation
A combination model centralizes some authorities and
tasks and distributes others among multiple agencies.
For example, one approach could place general tasks
related to planning, public outreach and coordination
with centralized GSA, and the management and
enforcement tasks split among multiple GSA's. This
model offers maximum flexibility for distributing the
authorities and responsibilities.
➢ Central GSA could be GBA
➢ Multiple Agency GSA could consist of Lodi and
Woodbridge Irrigation District
Pq
40 ze�� 0 • 916011$
Authorities
Local Agency
Basin
Investigate surface waters, surface water rights,
groundwater and groundwater rights.
Inspect property and facilities
Require registration of all wells
Require metering of all wells
Regulate extractions of groundwater except the
regulation is not a determination of water rights in
the basin's groundwater.
Acquire property
Authorize temporary and permanent transfers of
groundwater allocations subject to city and county
ordinances.
Impose spacing requirements on new wells
Adopt regulations on existing wells to minimize well
interference
Impose fees for permits, extraction, and
development of the Groundwater Sustainability
Plan
Monitor compliance and enforce the Groundwater
Sustainability Plan
Questions?
4D MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Public W WJ
eparlinent
To: City Manager
From: Public Works Director
Date: September 24, 2015
Subject: Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin
At the September 22„ 2015 Shirtsleeve Meeting, the City Council requested an exhibit
showing the boundary of the subject. It is attached for their information.
Also, I thought it would be informative to provide a copy of the Woodbridge Irrigation
District letter sent to the City following their Board's action to pursue formation of a
Groundwater Sustainability Agency.
F. Wally%andeifn
Public Works Director
FWS/fws\
Attachments
CM MEMO - EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN GROUNDWATER BASIN.DOT
1210 30'
t, X 1) L k.N.
iris arca%
GOI-)
1"'astern San Joaquill
t'plands
(N,SJ-(.)[)C')
A.
raof
CIRCY)
ANO
SACRA-MENJOC(
Saertamento-S-.m) Joaq lin
Delta boundan C
'duke
Northern
Saxe ,Joa-qLlill
fBasiti bOLITI
J,
1 J
- - ---t --_- 4—
k
D(RECTORS
WILLIAM STOKES
PPESIOEN T
EO LUCCHE6'I
VICE PRESIDENT
BILL SHINN
KEITH BUBSMAN
HENRY P. VAN EKEL
August 14, 2015
WOODBRIIDGE IRRIGATION DISTRICT
18750 N. LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD
P.O. BOX. 5B0
WOODBRIDGE, CALIFORNIA 95258
PHONE; (2091 625-8438
FAX. [209] 62S-93663
F. Wally Sandelin
Director of Public Works
City of Lodi
221 West Pine Street
PO Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-191.0
Joe Valente,
President
North San Joaquin Water Conservation District
5490 E. Bear Creek Road
Lodi, CA 95240
Dear Wally and Joe,
STAFF
1kNOEg6 CHRI6TEN8EN
Ma'jf FR
SECRETARY-REASUFI-ER
TOC]O VER+STEEO
Sl IPFRNT=1,P.FN
The Woodbridge Irrigation District Board of Directors met yesterday in regular session and discussed the
agenda item of Woodbridge Irrigation District forming its own Ground Water Sustainability Agency (GSA)
to adopt its own Ground Water Sustainability Plan (GSP) to meet the three legislative bills that propose to
regulate ground water in California, via the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
The WID's Board proposal to form its own GSA and develop its own GSA is considered to be the best way
to protect our District growers who depend an their groundwater for 2 j3rds of all the water used within
the Woodbridge Irrigation District boundaries. Growers within our District desire a locally responsible
water agency (not the County or the State), to represent their property right interests in their ground
water supply, while maintaining local control and meeting the minimal mandates of the legislation. Our
40,000 acre District has consistently served approximately 13,000 acres with its Mokelumne River surface
water supplies while approximately 27,000 acres are served by ground water. Nearly all the lands in the
District are irrigable lands and have a long history of surface and ground water usage. In recent years,
more efficient irrigation methods and considerable infrastructure investments have reduced the total
demand of water that has allowed us to serve Lodi and even Stockton with conserved surface water. This
has helped grow the local agricultural economy and has helped to stabilize ground water levels in a short
time, beneath Lodi and Stockton and reduced the overall reliance on ground water.
The Lodi -Woodbridge area is blessed with the water supplies that we have available by past actions taken
by both agencies to build facilities to utilize surface water to the maximum amount possible and by
conserving the groundwater. The huge investments made by Woodbridge ID and Lodi in facilities to divert
August 14, 2015
Page 2
and treat surface water need to be protected. Woodbridge Irrigation has spent over $18 million in its dam
and fish screen projects alone. Lodi recently has invested 3 to 4 times as much in its system to treat and
distribute surface water within the City.
The SGMA laws give authority first to local water agencies (WID, NSJWCD and Lodi) to develop the GSP.
If the local agency does not respond, the responsibility then falls upon the county, if the county does not
act to implement a GSP, then the State of California will take control of the groundwater. We feel that
local control of the most important regulatory powers governing the use of ground water in the legislation
should be retained by our local jurisdictions such as Lodi, NSJWCD and WID.
WID urges the City of Lodi and the North San Joaquin Water Conservation District to join together with
WID and form its own GSA. This GSA will retain the most important regulatory powers of a GSP for our
areas under our local control. We will plan to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the
Eastern San Joaquin Ground Water Basin Authority (GBA) for a GSP for the entire Eastern San Joaquin
Ground Water Basin. Our three agencies share a common interest in the Mokelumne River and have
invested heavily in our Mokelumne water systems. The formation of our small GSA would act together
with the Ground Water Basin Authority (GBA) and develop a shared GSP, since SGMA permits the sharing
of powers between our proposed GSA and the County.
The County Flood Control Agency has proposed that the County be the GSA to develop the GSP. The GBA
has already been given authority by its members to hire consultants and advisors to begin develop of a
GSP. We must act now to protect our jurisdictional interests in our ground water basins or it will be
decided by others. A GSA is required to announce its intentions before January 1, 2016 and develop its
plan by mid -2016. WID will take up the matter at its September 10, 2015 Board meeting and if passed,
file a notice of intent with the State.
I have enclosed a July 23, 2015 memo and a power point presentation on requirements and implications
of Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) that was prepared for our Board.
Since ely,
VAKZA1 � Y:
Anders Christensen, Manager
Enc: PPT on SGMA
July 23rd Memo on SGMA
Cc: Roger Masuda, NSJWCD Counsel
WID Board of Directors
Memo
To: WID Board of Directors
From: Andy Christensen
Date: July 23, 2015
Re: SGMA Legislation content outline and WID Discussions among local agencies
regarding impacts of SGMA in the Eastern San Joaquin Sub -Basin.
Glossary:
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
DWR
California Department of Water Resources
GBA
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin Authority
GSA
Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP
Groundwater Sustainability Plan
SGMA
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SWRCB
State Water Resources Control Board
SGMA Legislation Background:
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of September 16, 2014 is a
comprehensive three -bill package to regulate groundwater in California. SGMA requires
the formation of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) that must assess
conditions in their local water basins and adopt locally -based Groundwater management
plans (GSP). The ultimate purpose behind the implementation of the GSPs is to achieve
sustainability of the sub -basin within 20 years. DWR defines "sustainability" or
"sustainable yield" as "the maximum quantity of water, calculated over a base period
representative of long-term conditions in the basin and including any temporary surplus,
which can be withdrawn annually from a groundwater supply without causing an
undesirable result." It is important to keep' in mind that the SWRCB may intervene if a
GSA is not formed or fails to operate appropriately.
GSA Authority:
SGMA provides in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 10725) and Chapter 8
(commencing with Section 10730) local GSAs with broad and extensive powers, in
addition to the local agency's existing powers and authorities, including but not limited to
the following:
• Conduct investigations of surface waters and surface water rights as well as
groundwater and groundwater rights.
• Inspect property and facilities.
• Require registration of all wells.
• Require metering of all wells.
• Acquire and hold property of all kinds.
• Appropriate and acquire surface water and groundwater and the rights thereto.
Import surface and groundwater into the GSA.
• Conserve and store surface water or groundwater within or outside of the GSA.
0 Adopt a program for voluntary fallowing of agricultural lands.
• Transport, reclaim, purify, desalinate, treat, or otherwise manage and control
polluted water or wastewater for subsequent use.
Impose spacing requirements on new well construction to minimize well
interference.
• Impose reasonable operating regulations on existing wells to minimize well
interference.
• Regulate, limit, or suspend groundwater extractions, construction of new wells,
expansion or reactivation of wells.
• Authorize transfers of extraction allocations within the GSA.
• Determine and issue groundwater extraction allocations and establish accounting
rules for their use and transfer.
• Impose permit fees, groundwater extraction fees, and fees for regulatory
activities to fund the costs of the GSA program.
GSP Elements:
GSAs responsible for high-priority basins must adopt GSPs within five years
(1/31/2020). Our basin, the East San Joaquin Sub -basin (5-22.01), is a high-priority
basin in critical overdraft. Agencies may adopt a single plan covering an entire basin or
combine a number of plans created by multiple agencies. Preparation of groundwater
sustainability plans is exempt from CEQA.
Plans must include a physical description of the basin, including groundwater levels,
groundwater quality, subsidence, information on groundwater -surface water interaction,
data on historical and projected water demands and supplies, monitoring and management
provisions, and a description of how the plan will affect other plans, including city and
county general plans.
GSPs will be evaluated every five years by DWR.
State Involvement and Technical Assistance:
DWR has several tasks under SGMA:
• Designate basins as high, medium, low or very low priority by Jan. 31, 2015
• Adopt regulations for basin boundary adjustments by Jan. 1, 2016
• Adopt regulations for evaluating adequacy of GSPs and GSA coordination
agreements by June 1, 2016
• Publish a report estimating water available for groundwater replenishment by
Dec. 31, 2016
• Publish groundwater sustainability best management practices by Jan. 1, 2017
State Review and Intervention:
The State Water Resources Control Board may intervene if a GSA is not formed or it
fails to adopt or implement compliant plans by certain dates.
DWR is tasked with reviewing GSPs for adequacy after they are adopted at the local
level. If DWR determines in its review that a GSP is not adequate, the SWRCB may
designate the basin as "probationary." If the local agency does not respond within 180
days, the SWRCB is authorized to create an interim plan that will remain in place until
a local GSA is able to reassume responsibility with a compliant_ plan.
Financial Assistance:
Proposition 1 provides $100 million in competitive grant funding to GSAs to
assist in governance, management, and develop and implement sustainable
groundwater management plans.
Key Implementation Dates:
June 30, 2017: Local GSAs formed.
• Jan. 31, 2020: GSPs adopted for critically overdrafted basins.
• Jan. 31, 2022: GSPs adopted for high- and medium -priority basins not currently
in overdraft.
• 20 years after adoption: All high- and medium -priority groundwater
basins must achieve sustainability.
Considerations in Favor and Against WID involvement in a GSA:
Note: DWR has made clear that the finer points of establishing GSAs, adopting and
implementing GSPs, and the requirements therein, are not fully developed or determined.
Requirements and guidelines will morph over time.
IN FAVOR of WID`s partnership role in a GSA
• Potential to deny the right to an outside agency to exercise power and authority
over groundwater wells within our district.
• Possible opportunity to set groundwater management policy before the SWRCB
does (provided our policies and methods are acceptable to the state).
• Potential to exercise additional authority and impose fees on groundwater
extractors.
AGAINST WID's partnership role in a GSA
■ Exercise additional administration and management efforts over all groundwater
wells in the District. This would involve requiring the registration, metering,
monitoring, and reporting of all groundwater wells.
• Increased expense to WID in exercising these controls over private property
groundwater extractions. Financial benefit (if any) remains undetermined.
• WID would be under direct control of the state in the maintenance and
implementation of the GSP.
■ Strong potential to attract the ire of property owners whose wells we would
regulate.
Eastern San Joa uin Groundwater Basin Authority GBA
The Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin Authority (GBA) was established in
2001 to collectively develop local projects to strengthen water supply reliability in
Eastern San Joaquin County. Formed as a joint powers authority, led by San Joaquin
County, and made up of various local agencies, including WID, GBA members work
cooperatively in the effort to achieve reliable water supplies for the region.
The GBA is currently positioning itself to act as the GSA for the Eastern San Joaquin
Sub -basin. This effort would dovetail into the duties and responsibilities that the county
already possesses; exercising property controls, permitting and compliance of
groundwater wells, as well as maintaining and gathering the groundwater level
monitoring (CASGEM) data. Furthermore, DWR states that in the absence of an official
GSA formation for a particular area, the responsibility would then default to the county.
This effort of the GBA to serve as the GSA would essentially result in County control of
the sub -basin with de facto input from the member agencies; both water agencies and
municipalities. If WID elected not to establish its own GSA or even enter into a GSA
alliance with a handful of neighboring agencies, then WID would still have some input as
to how the sub -basin is managed, albeit more limited.
Recent Meetings involving VVIR and other local agencies in consideration of SGMA:
Meeting at SEWD office among SEWD, SSJID, CDJWCD, & WID, (7-10-15): At the
request of SEWD, Andy Christensen and Doug Heberle joined Scot Moody (SEWD), Jeff
Shields (SSJID), and Reid Roberts (CSJWCD) in the attendance of a meeting to discuss
matters related to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), and the
possible impacts to and ramifications of the legislation on our local Districts. Joe Valente
of NSJWCD was invited to this meeting by Scot Moody, but was unable to attend. This
unofficial meeting was organized by Scot Moody in an effort to determine the thoughts,
concerns, potential directions of advancement, and to exchange ideas among SEWD,
WID, SSJID, NSJWCD, and CSJWCD regarding the potential formation of a
Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). Scot Moody expressed concern that
considering future groundwater management schemes, and without a strong and
preemptive presence of agricultural interests, urban interests may be overrepresented
resulting in an inequitable groundwater arrangement at the expense of the local
agricultural community. His concerns for this scenario were based largely on the
membership of the Groundwater Basin Authority (GBA) which has a contingent of
municipalities as member agencies, and is positioning itself to assume the role of the
GSA in this area. The discussion primarily centered on possible impacts to groundwater
users resulting from state mandated groundwater management methods. No decisions
were made other than to keep dialogue open among the agencies in attendance and
schedule another meeting for discussion of SGMA developments (if any) in the near
future.
Meeting at WID office among NSJWCD, WID, and City of Lodi, (7-17-15): At the
request of NSJWCD, Andy Christensen and Doug Heberle met with Roger Masuda
(attorney) and Walt Sadler (engineering consultant), both representing NSJWCD, and
Wally Sandelin (Public Works Director) with the City of Lodi, to discuss NSJWCD's
desire to take the lead in local groundwater management efforts as suggested in SGMA
legislation. NSJWCD desires to be the first in our area to identify themselves to the
SWRCB and DWR as a GSA in our sub -basin, and try to set policy precedent with the
state in managing local groundwater sustainability.
NSJWCD took the step to suggest a Mokelumne River -centric GSA alliance among our
three agencies, including EBMUD involvement in an advisory capacity. Roger Masuda
provided a draft, 14 -page handout detailing an implementation scheme of SGMA in the
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Sub -basin, and a possible GSA structure therein,
consisting of NSJWCD, WID, Lodi, and EBMUD. This draft handout was based in part
on scholarly efforts recently conducted at U.C. Davis, to create an effective groundwater
sustainability plan (as contained in the appendix of the handout).
Possible GSA boundaries were also briefly explored, which could roughly adhere to the
existing district boundaries of WID, NSJWCD, and the City of Lodi, as well as lands
owned by EBMUD. A GSA boundary would not necessarily have to precisely mirror
existing district boundaries and city limits, but could be streamlined and expanded to
include nearby pockets that are unrepresented by any of these three entities.
Naturally, no firm commitment from WID to form a GSA alliance was made at this
meeting; only to further explore the possibilities for future cooperation if deemed to be in
the best interest of each agency.
The WID Board of Directors will be asked to consider if the District should participate
collectively in a GSA with other local agencies, or refrain altogether from involvement in
the SGMA process.
/ V
WOODBRIDGE
IRRIGATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT REVIEW
AUGUST
t
}
�A94ABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT O
2014 (SGMA)
T:I E. SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT OF SEPT. 16, 2014 (SGMA) IS A
COMPREHENSIVE THREE -BILL PACKAGE TO REGULATE GROUNDWATER IN CALIFORNIA.
T'RE ACT REQUIRED DWR TO PRIORITIZE THE BASINS AS HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, OR VERY
L'O'W RRIORITY USING THE CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MONITORINI
YT:E -(CASGEM) BY 1/31/2015.
r��' A:R�EQ=UJRES THE FORMATION OF LOCAL GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
(SAS) THAT MUST ASSESS CONDITIONS IN THEIR LOCAL WATER BASINS AND
Y-BASE'D MANAGEMENT PLANS.
EACT7� RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD MAY INTERVENE IF A GSA IS
FAILS TO OPERATE APPROPRIATELY.
\ �
HASED | OF DGROUNDWATE
SUSTAINABILITY AUNDER S
_
_
» ■, & 3:± z
��t \� „ ;�2 « ■,
,•99»6�&i2k;
� \#<
■« £■.f: _' ,ff: § ,�. a ,
, ,;) , ■ « o . _Budgets
�«■` ••,> R �� � � �� � k� ® # � ¥
S ( b i,!'�•r ;.■
1%w �
0f!#
ME
\
ReSAN JOAQUIN SUB
BASIN (5-22.01)
in the northern section sub basin 5-22.01 (707,000
,105 sq. mi.)
issified 5-22.01 as HIGH PRIORITY via California
le Groundwater Elevation Monitoring System
-ments over the past 40 years show a continuous
n groundwater levels in Eastern San Joaquin County
20013
outer levels have declined at an average rate of 1.7
yew andhave dropped as much as 100 feet in some ,.
4,.
d_ '70A, a#/year of overdraft occurs in
$W0 n Comty (USBR 1996).
\Nllmm
r WHAeT IS A GSA AND WHAT AUTHORITY DOES IT
HAVE?
REQUIRES THE FORMATION OF LOCAL GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES (I.
D ,AIS] OTHER AGENCIES) THAT MIDST ASSESS CONDITIONS IN THEIR LOCAL WATER BASIL'
Q' " LOCALLY -BASED MANAGEMENT PLANS.
,AND ADOPT A GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN (GSP)
!jf'ANT RULES AND REGULATIONS
0
dBGISTRATION OF WELLS
IN;G AND COLLECT FEES
.WLkANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
WELL TO BE MEASURED BY A WATER MEASURING DEVICE, AT THE EXPENSE OI
.r-
Gy�
ATOR TO FILE AN ANNUAL STATEMENT SETTING FORTH THE TOTAL
WWATER FROM THAT WELL FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR
KEY IMPLEMENTATION DATES
lf 2'016: DWR WILL ADOPT REGULATIONS WITH WHICH TO EVALUATE A GSP.
"i,3,0t 2017: LOCAL GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES (GSAS) FORMED.
3. 2020,-. GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLANS (GSPS) ADOPTED FOR CRITICALLY
BASINS.
ADOPTION,: ALL HIGH AND MEDIUM -PRIORITY GROUNDWATER BASINS
Si M-AJNABILITY.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT?
THE EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY GROUNDWATER BASIN AUTHORITY (GBA) IS CURRENT[
PSaT•ICONING ITSELF TO ACT AS THE GSA FOR THE EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN SUB—BASIN,
ESSENTIALLY RESULTING IN COUNTY CONTROL OF THE SUB—BASIN WITH INPUT FROM THE
BvER AG E N C.I•ES.
THIE GBA WILL CONVENE A SGMA WORKGROUP TO GUIDE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GB)
T�H!E�GSA FOR THIS SUB—BASIN
t
:.=
4AGENClES THAT WISH TO SERVE AS THEIR OWN GSA WITHIN THIS SUB—BASIN MUST
B005 E THE GBA FULLY ESTABLISHES ITS ROLE AS A GSA.
v
11
�4
v
11
0
i
Requests for
boundary
modifications
accepted by
DWR for 90
days
Dvvx adoprtg
gulatiaass for
adequacy of
GSA's and GSA
Coordinate
agreements
Sustainable
Groundwater
Management Act
Key Dates
Draft approval
agettdes'
DWR
Adopt
of bounda"
available water
publishes
for
GSP9 and
changes
groundwater
been
submUted to
sustainability
managing
CWC
best practices
mnler GSPs
IAKW
deadline far
estab�hing
G�SAs
DWR pubihhes
agettdes'
report
estimatin g
available water
for
gromawater
rep�sjmtent.
SWRCB designate
probationary
where GSPs are
inadequate, not
being
implemented, and
extractions result
in significant
depletions of
interconnected
surface water
MENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION BY WID
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
GO'NS-.IDE'R THE FORMATION OF A GSA OVER A LIMITED AREA OF THE SUB BASIN. POSSIBLY
IIhVOLVING PARTNERSHIPS
WITH OTHER LOCAL
AGENCIES THAT HAVE A COMMON
INTEREST IN
SUTIRFACE WATER FROM THE
MOKELUMNE RIVER
THEREBY PROVIDING A BENEFIT TO
THE
G'RZUNDWATER LEVELS IN THE DISTRICT.
W.[D.S'HOULD ESTABLISH A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE CENTRAL GSA (GBA/SJ
COUN-TY) THAT WOULD ALLOW THE WID GSA TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER THE GROUNDWATE
I TH;$''N�4fJU.R COLLECTIVE BOUNDARIES, WHILE LEAVING OTHER TASKS LIKE DATA GATHERING, AN
Y TO THE GBA, WHICH WILL SERVE AS THE -COUNTY -WIDE GSA.
PUMPERS IN THE WID DISTRICT ARE AT AN ADVANTAGE DUE TO WID'S
''-OF--:S.URFACE WATER, AND LOCAL GROWERS WOULD BENEFIT FROM LOCAL
�%fD) BY BEING PROTECTED FROM EXCESSIVE RESTRICTIONS AND CHARGES.
9AIA�S�IFDER 'PARTICIPATION FROM LODI AND NSJWCD IN A GSA.
AGENDA ITEM
FAMCITY OF LODI
%V COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Tour of City Hall Annex Office Space
MEETING DATE: September 22, 2015
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Tour of City Hall Annex office space.
B•2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Public Works staff will host the City Council and members of the
public to a walking tour of the new City Hall Annex office space for
Fire Administration and Parks Division.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
Lad..=.
F. Wally Ondelin
Public Works Director
Prepared by F. Wally Sandelin/Public Works Director
FWS/FWS/tb
APPROVED:
St eri Schw16gW, City Manager
K:\WP\PROJECTSWIISC\City Hall Annex 1st Floor Remodel 201=NARP Phase 2 Projwt10C Annex Tour Shirtsleeve 9-22-15
9/15/2015