Committee debates $430,000 verification contract with Davis Engineering and telemetry pilot; no recommendation made

The Madera County GSA subcommittee considered an action item on April 1 to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve an agreement with Davis Engineering not to exceed $430,000 for a 2025 verification project. The project would continue comparisons of meter, Land IQ and HydroSat data and include a pilot to test telemetry for meter reads.

Stephanie Nagmanson described the contract as functionally similar to prior verification efforts and said the $430,000 figure reflects a not‑to‑exceed amount; prior years’ contracts were billed by time and often left unspent. Nagmanson said the county expects to pay only for hours used and that last year’s contract ended with unspent funds remaining in the GSA account.

Nut graf: Public commenters were split. Some growers urged shifting funds toward an online groundwater accounting platform and faster processing of recharge and appeal data; others supported telemetry pilots and verification for at‑risk sites. After discussion, committee members directed staff to return with a trimmed scope focusing on telemetry and related support rather than the full verification comparison; no motion was made to recommend the $430,000 agreement and the recommendation to the board therefore did not move forward.

Several public commenters recommended reallocating funds. Larkin Harmon and others who participated in past verification work said the verification project had run for multiple years and suggested directing more funds to a live accounting platform so stakeholders could access processed data more quickly. Other commenters, including Devin Aviles and Tim Samuelson, supported the telemetry pilot and said telemetry could reduce the burden of monthly manual reads.

Director McClellan asked whether the proposed telemetry pilot would reduce farmer time spent on monthly meter reads; staff confirmed the pilot’s purpose is to test remote telemetry to reduce site visits. During committee deliberations a member asked staff to prepare a trimmed scope focused on the telemetry pilot and to return with that narrower approach. County counsel confirmed that because no motion to recommend the contract was made, the item “dies for a lack of a motion and recommendation.”

Ending: The committee did not forward the proposed $430,000 agreement to the Board of Supervisors. Staff will return with a revised scope emphasizing a telemetry pilot and other options for trimming the verification work.