Groundwater Authority adopts Resolution 01-25 to create second transient pool; Director Griffin votes no

The Groundwater Authority on a recorded vote adopted Resolution 01-25, establishing a second transient pool intended to provide temporary groundwater storage and allocation to support an import project and ease the transition to sustainability.

Board members voted after public comment and a period of debate. Chairman Heyman, Vice Chair Peters, Director Ettinger (also recorded as Ettinger/Etnier in the record) and Director Vallejo voted to approve the resolution; Director Griffin recorded a dissenting vote. The motion carried.

The resolution formalizes authority for a second transient pool. Staff said the pool includes a pricing scale and that small farmers may request participation; staff described an available allocation of 4,000 acre-feet to be divided among participants based on acreage returned. A staff presenter said the recitals in the staff report document historical reasons the Groundwater Authority believes imported water is needed and argued that the recitals provide context for the policy change.

Public commenters and board members raised a range of concerns. Director Griffin said he would abstain from prior related actions and objected to language in the recitals that he called slanderous toward the local water district; he said the recitals unfairly blamed the water district for historical matters and that the language would impede cooperation. In response, staff said the recitals record historical background and are not intended to impugn current district leadership.

Several members of the public addressed the board during item 9. Judy Decker urged the board to review historical technical reports and said past studies (including a Bureau of Reclamation Indian Wells Valley study) support the need to explore imported water; she also urged that some additional pooled water be offered to small well owners. Wes Katzenstein, a domestic well owner and PAC member, thanked the board for the settlement work and warned the board against guaranteeing water or quality to large users, saying protections for shallow wells must remain available. A caller identifying as Darren Keith (on behalf of Meadowbrook Dairy) asked the board to delay action, arguing that the draft resolution and supporting materials had been released with less than 48 hours’ notice and that the Groundwater Authority should provide at least 30 days for public review and release full technical analysis, including whether the second transient pool requires an amendment to the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP).

Board members and staff responded that the second transient pool was a policy choice tied to available funding and that it had enabled settlements with some parties; staff stated the pool was not driven by any single settlement. Staff also said the pool represents about 20% of a previously discussed quantity tied to overdraft calculations and that the pool could be revisited if future conditions required modification.

Votes at a glance • Agenda adoption (opening): motion approved by recorded voice roll call; motion carried (all members recorded “Aye”). • Consent agenda: motion approved by recorded voice roll call; motion carried (all members recorded “Aye”). • Resolution 01-25 — Establish second transient pool: motion to approve carried. Recorded roll-call responses in the transcript show Chairman Heyman — Aye; Vice Chair Peters — Aye; Director Griffin — No; Director Ettinger/Etnier — Aye; Director Vallejo — Aye. (Motion made from the floor and seconded; motion carried.)

Why it matters: The second transient pool changes how available imported or stored water can be allocated during the transition to sustainability and was described by staff as part of the overall strategy to reduce “shock” to small farmers and other pumpers as the basin moves toward sustainable pumping limits. Several speakers asked for clearer technical documentation and a public comment period before implementation, and at least one board member urged mediation to reduce acrimony between the Groundwater Authority and the water district.

Next steps and context: Staff indicated the pool and its use can be revisited if conditions change and noted the pool was enabled by recent funding opportunities tied to the import project. Several speakers urged additional outreach and written analyses on the pool’s interaction with the GSP and on protections for shallow-well users and small farmers.