Committee recommends board approve $975,272.50 amendment with David's Engineering to advance Prop 68‑funded recharge projects

Teuta Perez, a water resource specialist with Madera County GSA, asked the committee to recommend that the board enter into an amendment to contract MCC‑11686‑FDash24 with David's Engineering Inc. The amendment would add four proposals to continue engineering services for several grant‑funded recharge projects; the total of the four not‑to‑exceed amounts is $975,272.50 and all costs are reimbursed by Proposition 68 grant funds. The amendment term extends through June 30, 2027.

Perez outlined the proposals by project area. For Madera Recharge Project 1 (Madera County GSA is the grant administrator), the amendment would advance the project to 100% design, environmental permitting and incorporate construction specifications; the project description includes rehabilitation of an existing turnout, construction of three new turnouts and one 40‑acre dedicated recharge basin capable of conveying flood flows onto about 2,500 acres of farmland for flood‑managed aquifer recharge. Perez said the capacity for Madera Recharge Project 1 at full buildout is approximately 12,600 acre‑feet per year when water is available. The cost for this proposal is not to exceed $85,325.50, reimbursed by Prop 68 funds.

Chowchilla Recharge Project 1 (County is grant administrator) would include construction of three new turnouts with the capacity to divert up to 80 cubic feet per second (about 160 acre‑feet per day) to convey flood flows to roughly 1,700 acres of farmland and to deliver water to two landowner‑constructed recharge basins totaling approximately 64 acres. Perez said the full‑buildout recharge capacity is approximately 8,000 acre‑feet per year when water is available. Proposal 2 (bidding, preconstruction, construction management, inspections and post‑construction reporting) is not to exceed $383,528 and is reimbursable by Prop 68.

Chowchilla Recharge Project 2 includes an additional diversion system added after a grant amendment; work described includes a point of diversion with maximum capacity of 20 cfs (roughly 40 acre‑feet per day), a conveyance pipeline to deliver water to about 420 acres of farmland for FloodMar and to one landowner‑constructed recharge basin. Perez described a range for potential recharge at full buildout of approximately 2,000 to 6,000 acre‑feet per year when water is available; one proposal advances the design to 100% with a not‑to‑exceed fee of $180,000. A second proposal would bring the additional diversion to 60% design (fieldwork, permitting, CEQA, basis of design) with a not‑to‑exceed fee of $326,417, both reimbursed by Prop 68 funds.

Perez reminded the committee that waterways and permitting are heavily regulated and that design schedules can shift because permitting timelines often rely on outside agencies. Director McCullough asked for a more complete timeline and assurance of a viable path to project completion; Perez said staff can return with a schedule but cautioned that permitting may cause slips. Public commenter Mark Peters asked for a concise summary of total anticipated recharge benefit tied to the $975,272.50 cost. Committee members moved and seconded the recommendation; Director McCauley and Director Gonzales voted yes and the motion passed 2–0. The recommendation will be forwarded to the GSA board for action.