Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Domestic Well Mitigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madera Subbasin GSA advances $35,000 domestic‑well mitigation framework, asks for refinements
Summary
GSA staff proposed rules for a domestic well mitigation program with a $35,000 cap per well and one‑time mitigation recorded on title. Directors approved a letter to DWR, contracted David's Engineering for program management, and asked staff to return with eligibility date, sale‑reimbursement language and reporting details.
Directors of the Madera Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agency on Nov. 18 advanced a framework to implement a domestic well mitigation program intended to help landowners whose domestic wells go dry as groundwater levels decline.
Key elements: the draft rules require applicants be landowners within the Madera Subbasin GSA and to demonstrate a well went dry because of declining groundwater levels or casing collapse (an inspection by a qualified professional will be required). The program would provide up to $35,000 per well to repair, re‑drill, deepen, or connect a household to an adjacent water system if available; costs over $35,000 would be the landowner’s responsibility. Participation would be limited to a one‑time benefit, and mitigation would be recorded on the property title.
Board actions and procurement: the board voted to sign a letter to the State Department of Water Resources summarizing the approach and to finalize grant‑agreement elements covering facilitation and geographic coverage (roll‑call approval). Directors also approved a program‑management contract with David’s Engineering, Inc., not to exceed $513,896, to handle intake, technical assessments, driller solicitation and payment process for the mitigation work (roll call 5–0).
Policy questions left open: During lengthy discussion and public comment, board members and stakeholders asked staff to return with additional rule language to address (a) eligibility timeframe — whether the program should limit eligibility to wells that went dry after a particular date (Grower groups recommended 2020 as a cutoff tied to CIGMA implementation); (b) resale/reimbursement provisions — several directors proposed a graduated reimbursement if a homeowner sells within a specified period (suggestions ranged from 1–3 years and a sliding scale such as 100% repay within one year, 75% in year two, 50% in year three); and (c) reporting and transparency — stakeholders asked for a public dashboard or quarterly reporting and for staff to obtain the interim‑solutions list from Self‑Help Enterprises to verify existing cases.
Public input: Grower associations and community groups attended and asked the GSA to keep the program simple, to address fairness for older wells, and to add protections against investor 'flips.' Self‑Help program experience was cited as precedent for sale restrictions; advocates emphasized accessibility for older residents and non‑English speakers.
Next steps: Staff will return at the board’s next meeting (scheduled in three weeks) with refined language on eligibility dates, a recommended approach for reimbursement on sale, reporting mechanisms (including a potential online dashboard), and additional information requested about interim‑solutions lists and cost implications. The GSA approved contracts necessary to stand up the program but held off finalizing all rule details.
