Paso Robles council approves joint groundwater authority after lengthy public hearing

The City of Paso Robles on March 4 approved a joint-powers agreement (JPA) to create the Paso Robles Area Groundwater Authority, authorizing the interim city manager to sign either a four- or five-party version of the contract. The vote was 4-1: Council members Gregory, Beal and Strong and Mayor Mary Hammond voted yes; Council member Chris Bausch voted no.

The JPA formalizes long-running cooperation among the five locally designated Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) that cover the Paso Robles subbasin to implement the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) required by the state'level Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Utilities Director Christopher Luckle presented the agreement and said the authority would handle administrative tasks, regulatory compliance, and specific GSP implementation actions delegated by member GSAs.

Why it matters: SGMA requires local agencies to end chronic groundwater declines or risk state intervention. The JPA is designed to create a single governance body to manage implementation, share technical and legal costs among pumpers and agencies, and adopt extraction-based fees to pay for monitoring, demand management and potential projects.

Key points from staff and council discussion

- Scope and limits: The authority would receive only the powers delegated by member GSAs. It is not intended to change a member's municipal water rights, acquire appropriative rights to surface water without approval, or exercise land-use authority.

- Initial delegated powers: preparing annual reports and five-year evaluations for the Department of Water Resources (DWR); serving as GSP manager; carrying out outreach specified in the GSP; addressing monitoring data gaps; and developing voluntary—and if necessary mandatory—groundwater demand reduction programs and other management actions.

- Funding and costs: The JPA is expected to be funded primarily by groundwater extraction fees. Staff estimated the city's share at roughly 2% of total basin extractions, based on recent pumping; that would make Paso Robles' contribution proportionally smaller than some other users. A draft budget shown to the basin committee included line items such as a domestic well mitigation program and administrative costs, but the council emphasized those budgets would be set later by the authority.

- Governance and voting: Each member GSA gets one vote on the authority. Most actions require a simple majority; major items'including adoption of fees, mandatory pumping limits, budget amendments and real property acquisitions'require a supermajority (four of five in a five-party body or three of four in a four-party version).

- Exit and contingency: Members may withdraw under terms in the agreement. Staff told the council the JPA would terminate automatically on June 30, 2026 if it had not established fees to fund required activities.

Public response and concerns

More than three dozen residents, landowners and water-district members spoke during a nearly four-hour public hearing. Speakers included local growers, rural residents and elected water-district representatives. Common themes were strong opposition to charging small domestic well owners (de minimis users), worry about large agricultural pumpers purchasing or exporting water, requests for more detail on likely fees and budgets, and demands for protections for private well owners.

- Darsha Stebbins, a rural resident who described herself as an overlier, said: "I am an overlier of the Paso Robles Basin. As an overlier, I have a priority." She asked the council to delay action and criticized ongoing litigation and expense between local agencies and and private parties.

- Supporters including representatives from the Estrella El Palmar Creston Water District and the EPC Water District argued a coordinated authority is the most efficient way to comply with SGMA and avoid state takeover.

Council action and next steps

Councilmember Chris Strong moved, and Councilmember Gregory seconded, to approve the staff recommendation authorizing the city manager to sign either the four- or five-party JPA, with non-substantive edits allowed. The council voted 4-1 in favor.

If members sign, the authority will be formed, then will develop a budget and the extraction-fee proposals required to fund GSP implementation. Those fees and any mandatory measures would be adopted by the authority under the voting rules in the JPA. Staff noted that if an individual GSA declines to participate, that agency would either need to fund and administer its own GSP activities or risk losing local control if DWR or the State Water Board determines local agencies are not implementing an approved plan.

Ending

Council members who voted in favor said participation preserves local control and distributes the cost of compliance; those opposed said the finance and program details were not sufficiently developed for a final decision. The authority's budgets and extraction-fee schedule will be decided after the JPA is formed, and councilmembers said they expect additional public outreach and scrutiny once specific fee scenarios are available.