Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Groundwater Monitoring topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board delays vote on Salinas Valley groundwater monitoring fees after contested equity debate
Summary
Supervisors put off adopting a new groundwater monitoring program fee schedule and accepted staff's request to return in August after a contentious discussion about whether small (de minimis) well users would be fairly charged; staff proposed standing up the program for a year with grant funding and returning with refined options.
Monterey County supervisors on July 8 declined to adopt proposed groundwater monitoring program (GMP) regulatory fees and directed staff to return at the board's first August meeting with a date-certain resolution after a heated debate about fairness to small "de minimis" well users.
The water-resources presentation described five proposed GMP services: (1) an initial well registration fee for wells not already in agency databases; (2) an annual registration/maintenance fee; (3) extraction reporting for wells pumping more than the state's de minimis threshold (about two acre-feet/year); (4) groundwater-level monitoring using a representative network of wells; and (5) groundwater-quality monitoring for subbasins that have called for it in their Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs).
Agency staff said the total annual program cost would be approximately $800,000. Proposed per-well annual fees range by subbasin and by the mix of services required; for example, some northern subbasins with comprehensive monitoring needs were estimated around $280 per well annually while parts of the Upper Valley could be around $140 per well because some services would not apply. To minimize up-front community impact, staff said they had secured a subgrant from the Salinas Valley Basin GSA that could fund the program's first year; that would allow property owners to register at no charge in year one.
Several supervisors and members of the public raised equity concerns: they argued that many small domestic and de minimis well owners would pay the same or nearly the same annual fee as large agricultural production wells but would not be required to report extraction amounts, creating a perceived imbalance. "They're in the program. Is there any data anywhere in there and it it'd be in the program that they're contributing?" Supervisor Church asked. Staff responded that the registration captures well depth, location and construction characteristics that are critical for management and that groundwater-level monitoring benefits smaller well owners most because their wells tend to be shallower and at greatest risk.
Supervisor Alejo moved to continue the item to the board's first August meeting (date certain) to allow further work on equity and program design; Supervisor Askew seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll call. Staff said they will return with a refined proposal, a budget amendment if needed and a plan for outreach. They also reiterated that, if the subgrant proceeds as planned, the initial-year program could be stood up with grant funding and offer a no-cost registration option to property owners for that year.
Background: the GMP grew out of the county's role supporting groundwater sustainability and state-required monitoring under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Staff emphasized that robust well registration, groundwater-level and quality monitoring are necessary to help local GSAs meet GSP requirements and to avoid larger management actions later.
