Ukiah Valley Groundwater Agency Takes On Sustainability Challenges and Fee Dilemmas

In a recent meeting hosted by West Yost Associates, the consulting firm overseeing the Ukiah Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (UVBGSA), stakeholders gathered to discuss the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) and the local efforts to manage groundwater resources. With 40% of California’s water sourced from the underground aquifer, the UVBGSA plays a crucial role in ensuring sustainable management to avoid state intervention. As uncertainties, including the Potter Valley Project’s impact, loom, the community grapples with the impending fees to fund the agency’s operations, sparking questions about allocation, funding sources, and the timeline for implementation.

It was a full house at the meeting hosted by West Yost Associates, the consulting firm that administers the UVBGSA. Catherine Hansford, of Hansford Economic Consulting LLC, presented methods used for the fee study, Adam Gaska, Agricultural Representative on the UVBGSA Board added clarification to many points. Gaska is running for First District Supervisor. Candidates Carrie Shattuck and Madeline Cline were also at the meeting.

In 2014 California enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to establish local management of groundwater resources. The UVBGSA is one of hundreds of GSAs in California. The underground aquifer provides 40% of California’s water. 85% of the population relies on groundwater. Many portions of the state have suffered critical depletion of groundwater. By the year 2042 groundwater in these basins must be sustainably managed. The Act provides for local management of each basin. If the local basins do not adequately manage their groundwater, the State of California will step in and manage it for them, setting the fees with no local input. 

The GSA is authorized to meter wells, except for wells that produce less than 2 acre-feet per year used for residential use. There are no plans at this time to meter the wells in the Ukiah. The GSA does not maintain or repair wells, and the agency cannot make land use decisions. The UVBGSA submitted its Groundwater Sustainability Plan to the State, and it was approved in July 2023. The Plan establishes standards for the health of the groundwater and determines how the basin will achieve the standards. To achieve sustainability by 2042, the State requires that GSAs demonstrate progress by submitting annual reports on the state of the groundwater. 

The Ukiah Valley Basin is generally in good condition.  Future uncertainties include multi-year droughts and climate change. A big uncertainty is what will happen to the diversion tunnel at the Potter Valley Project. For over 100 years Eel River water has been diverted into the Russian River through the Potter Valley Project. PG&E has plans to abandon the hydroelectric plant and to decommission the Scott and Van Arsdale Dams that impound Eel River water, some of which flows into the diversion tunnel. There is a possibility of maintaining some level of diversion, but it would only be during winter months, not year-round. This may result in less surface water availability in the Russian River, which could cause well owners to pump more water or more wells to be drilled. 

UVBGSA is a JPA of stakeholders: The City of Ukiah, The County of Mendocino, the Upper Russian River Water Agency (this includes the water districts in the basin managed by Willow County Water District), and the Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation District. It was formed to develop a Groundwater Sustainability Plan with grant money from the State. The initial funding covered the development of the GSP but not the administration. JPA members have committed to funding administration until FY 2025 when rate fees could be put in place to fund administration. The rate and fee study public workshop was held to make the community aware of the impending fees and the importance of the GSA. 

- Advertisement -

The presenters took questions from the audience at this point.

• How is the term “sustainability” defined?
  • The State has fixed sustainability criteria to avoid undesirable results: saltwater intrusion into the groundwater (not a problem in this basin), chronic lowering of groundwater levels, degraded water quality, depletion of surface water, and land subsidence, and reduction in the amount of groundwater storage. The Groundwater Sustainability Plan sets out metrics. In the Ukiah Valley Basin, the interconnectivity of surface and groundwater are very important. 
• Does the plan include plans for storage?
  • One possibility is raising Coyote Dam. Another is a recharge master plan, to investigate the possibility that winter rains can be stored in the aquifer for later extraction. 
• Why do anything now if the situation might change dramatically depending on the final outcome of the Potter Valley Project? 
  • This is a state-mandated timeline that we have to meet. There is so much uncertainty with the PVP, we need to be ready to act fast if things change. The GSA will be working with the Member agencies during the negotiations over the Potter Valley Project.
• Our groundwater basin is in relatively good condition. What is the baseline?
  • The baseline is the six minimum thresholds listed above. 
• How frequently will monitoring occur?
  • The rivers will be monitored from fall to springtime. Monthly measurements of the monitoring wells will be reported on a biannual basis.

Economist Catherine Hansford explained the fee study. The member agencies have indicated they would fund the GSA, if they are able, to keep going until 2026, to maintain local control and prevent the State from coming in. The GSA needs to fund its operating costs, consulting fees, management, outreach and engagement, and grant writers.  The GSA must submit an annual report on the monitoring results and the state of the groundwater. Every five years the Plan must be evaluated. 

The fee study goals are to get maximum buy-in from stakeholders. Information about the finances and budget is available on the UVBGSA website. Meetings will be open to the public. The GSA wants to find a fee structure that is fair to all water users. Hanford is analyzing available, reliable data, input from customers, resource capabilities, legal guidance, and fees created by the legislature. The fee structure goals are defensibility, understandability, simplicity, financial stability, equity and enforceability. Possible options include a wellhead fee, a parcel fee, acreage fees, point of connection fees for people with municipal water, extraction fees, and a hybrid of these.  How it will be billed is not yet determined. Possibly a property tax, or a bill from the water provider for people on municipal water, some customers might be directly billed or a combination of the aforementioned options. 

If there was no GSA, the state could come in and intervene until a local basin can regain control. There are six basins in the San Joaquin Valley that have been taken over by the state at a cost upwards of $20 million per year. Those are much bigger basins than Ukiah’s. It’s in everyone’s best interest to maintain local control. The GSA would like the fees to be in place by July 1. The GSA needs to have the fee adopted before the end of the fiscal year in June.

There were more questions from the audience about the fee study:

• Agriculture is a major contributor to groundwater because the aquifer is recharged by flooded fields. How will the fees be allotted between municipal and agricultural users?
  • Those questions will be addressed during the March 13 meeting.
• How was the UVBGSA funded so far?
  • Each member agency has contributed $68,000 annually toward funding and there was a $2 million grant from the state to develop the GSP. 
• Why do the GSAs depend on local funding and not funding from state taxes?
  • SGMA was enacted in 2014, but did not provide for tax funding.
• If you have funding through 2026 why start imposing the fees in 2024?
  • The member agencies want to fund through 2026. That is not guaranteed. The fiscal year 2026 begins in July 2025, which is not that far off. 
• You already know that you will be charging us fees, why ask for our input, it feels like you’re pandering to us?
  • We will relay your comments to the board.
• Why consider Redwood Valley the same as Ukiah when we are under a moratorium and cannot hook up new connections to Redwood Valley County Water District? I have a well, and it has not changed through all the years of drought, why do I have to pay a fee?
  • Adam Gaska, Board President of RVCWD, jumped in to answer at this point. The aquifer is interconnected and impacts can be felt everywhere, not just in Redwood Valley. Redwood Valley doesn’t have a secure water source. Redwood Valley gets water from Flood Control. During the drought, 100% of Redwood Valley water came from Millview wells. Some wells in the basin saw a net decline during two years of drought. The loss of the Potter Valley Project means people may drill more wells, and that could affect the groundwater in the basin. The UVBGSA boundaries include Ukiah and Redwood Valley. 
• What is the estimated parcel tax?
  • Many options are being developed, there is room for things to change until June. The UVBGSA Board meetings are hybrid, you can attend in person, join by Zoom, or watch a recording after the meeting. 
• Are these fees only going to be charged in Redwood Valley?
  • The fees will be charged everywhere shown on the map of the groundwater basin. 
• Are you using the studies that Ukiah has already done, so there is no duplication of effort?
  • We are working closely with Ukiah and reviewing their previous studies. 
• Some of my spring water is stored in a pond that is available for the fire department to use if necessary.  How do you assess springs?
  • We know there is a blend of different water sources in the basin, and we don’t have all the information. We are pulling in available data from County records. Currently, springs are not mapped by the County. 
• Will the GSA take land for recharge projects through eminent domain?
  • We do not believe the GSA has authority for eminent domain.
• How do you determine the difference between ground and surface water?
  • In this basin, the wells are generally shallow, less than 300 feet deep. There is a connection between surface water and groundwater here. Groundwater gets recharged quickly by surface water but can be depleted quickly during drought or by over-pumping. There is no inventory of wells in this county. The GSA’s goal is to keep the monitoring as simple as possible and will try to avoid metering due to the cost of meters and data collection from the meters. Domestic wells cannot be metered. 
• What are well spacing requirements?
  • UVBGSA does not currently have well-spacing requirements. Well spacing requirements are an attempt to prevent existing wells from going dry when a new well is drilled. There are two ways to maintain the aquifer: recharge the groundwater or conservation through reduced water use. Some of the studies we will do will give us better data to make informed decisions about that. 
• Why raise Coyote Dam, when Sonoma owns most of the water in Lake Mendocino?
  • The dam was designed to be higher. It was supposed to be built in two phases, but the second phase never was completed. When Coyote Dam was constructed, Redwood Valley voters declined to pay for it, instead letting Sonoma pay for the construction and getting most of the water. This is why the RVCWD is consolidating with Ukiah and looking at annexation into the Russian River Flood Control District because Redwood Valley has no rights to water. With the proposed New Eel-Russian River Facility (NERF), diversions will only be in the winter. Increased storage infrastructure/capacity will need to be developed.  With the challenges being presented, Sonoma and Mendocino counties must work together.

The next workshop, Fee Pathways and Structure Options, will be held on March 13 at 6:00 pm at the Ukiah Veterans Memorial Building.

- Advertisement -