5e) Discussion and Possible Action Including Acceptance of Attachments and Report Out Regarding Potential Grant Opportunities, Currently Funded Water Projects Through California Department of Water Resources (DWR), Workshop Presentation from California Department of Water Resources and California Water Boards Outlining New Legislation SB 552, Memo from Supervisor Mulheren, and Memo from Supervisor Gjerde; and Direction to Staff as Determined
(Sponsors: Supervisor Mulheren and Supervisor Gjerde)
Thank you, Supervisors, for considering water issues in the County. As our drought years continue it behooves us to give attention to water storage and availability. To that end it would be wise to consider the inefficiency of so many water districts in the County. In fact, I understand that there is a state offer to pay $60,000 to any water district that merges with another water district in an effort to streamline the patchwork of water districts across the state. Might that be an effort the BOS can promote?
Not only addressing the inefficiency of multiple, small water districts the County might also call for equitable pricing across those districts. Some water districts charge very little and others charge much higher rates. Isn’t there some way to merge the districts at an incentive of $60,000 and normalize rates?
The Potter Valley Project is a huge endeavor. Funding for a grant writer or other funding investigations should be paid for by the users of the Russian River Watershed who benefit from the PVP. As grants and other potential avenues become available water rates could be adjusted accordingly.
One matter that concerns those of us working on County Carbon Reduction is the continuing reference to using the Carbon Reduction fund for exploring water issues. The County has set aside the Carbon Reduction fund as seed money for grants to put solar on County buildings, which may need a lot of seed money. Also the fund was earmarked to buy EV buses for the MTA, and even address the suggestions the County private auditor listed as easy carbon reduction actions. It is hopeful that the County will be transitioning to EVs as soon as the leasing contractor, Enterprise, can purchase them.
Please continue your efforts to consider water in our County, especially ways for water districts, homeowners, and agriculture interests to store water as well as water district mergers and equitable water rates across the County. However, please do not rob the small sum set aside to make some big changes in the County’s carbon footprint, which is imperative in these life-threatening times of climate change.
Thank you for considering my comments,
Eileen Mitro
3780 King Ranch Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
The GrassRoot Institute’s - Climate Crisis Workgroup agrees with the decision the Board made at it’s June 21st meeting not to place a new sales tax before the voters on the November ballot to fund future water initiatives.
It is clear, water is an important concern to the entire county. But the County has not forged a consensus regarding what role it should have in addressing water issues vs. what role other stakeholders should have.
All of the water concerns raised in the Board’s discussion to date are intrinsically specific to water users and stakeholders in specific water basins and as such very significantly from basin to basin throughout the county. In many cases, users have competing interests, which can only be resolved through research, discussion, education and ultimately consensus building among the competing water interests.
At this point in time, the Board and our county simply does not have adequate information or agreement to make a realistic determination about what are the right solutions, who should be responsible for implementing those solutions, what the funding role of the County should be, or what new taxing instrument (if any) are needed to equitably ensure those that benefit from water initiatives pay their costs.
Therefore, the GrassRoots Institute recommends the Board defer any determination about raising new taxes or redirecting existing funding for water initiatives, until it completes a more detailed assessment about the scale, scope and best practices for addressing water concerns. And further, we strongly recommend developing a county wide consensus on water management before the County begins raising taxes or committing existing resources to future water initiatives.
Sincerely yours,
Peter McNamee, On Behalf of the GrassRoots Institute
Thank you, Supervisors, for considering water issues in the County. As our drought years continue it behooves us to give attention to water storage and availability. To that end it would be wise to consider the inefficiency of so many water districts in the County. In fact, I understand that there is a state offer to pay $60,000 to any water district that merges with another water district in an effort to streamline the patchwork of water districts across the state. Might that be an effort the BOS can promote?
Not only addressing the inefficiency of multiple, small water districts the County might also call for equitable pricing across those districts. Some water districts charge very little and others charge much higher rates. Isn’t there some way to merge the districts at an incentive of $60,000 and normalize rates?
The Potter Valley Project is a huge endeavor. Funding for a grant writer or other funding investigations should be paid for by the users of the Russian River Watershed who benefit from the PVP. As grants and other potential avenues become available water rates could be adjusted accordingly.
One matter that concerns those of us working on County Carbon Reduction is the continuing reference to using the Carbon Reduction fund for exploring water issues. The County has set aside the Carbon Reduction fund as seed money for grants to put solar on County buildings, which may need a lot of seed money. Also the fund was earmarked to buy EV buses for the MTA, and even address the suggestions the County private auditor listed as easy carbon reduction actions. It is hopeful that the County will be transitioning to EVs as soon as the leasing contractor, Enterprise, can purchase them.
Please continue your efforts to consider water in our County, especially ways for water districts, homeowners, and agriculture interests to store water as well as water district mergers and equitable water rates across the County. However, please do not rob the small sum set aside to make some big changes in the County’s carbon footprint, which is imperative in these life-threatening times of climate change.
Thank you for considering my comments,
Eileen Mitro
3780 King Ranch Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
The GrassRoot Institute’s - Climate Crisis Workgroup agrees with the decision the Board made at it’s June 21st meeting not to place a new sales tax before the voters on the November ballot to fund future water initiatives.
It is clear, water is an important concern to the entire county. But the County has not forged a consensus regarding what role it should have in addressing water issues vs. what role other stakeholders should have.
All of the water concerns raised in the Board’s discussion to date are intrinsically specific to water users and stakeholders in specific water basins and as such very significantly from basin to basin throughout the county. In many cases, users have competing interests, which can only be resolved through research, discussion, education and ultimately consensus building among the competing water interests.
At this point in time, the Board and our county simply does not have adequate information or agreement to make a realistic determination about what are the right solutions, who should be responsible for implementing those solutions, what the funding role of the County should be, or what new taxing instrument (if any) are needed to equitably ensure those that benefit from water initiatives pay their costs.
Therefore, the GrassRoots Institute recommends the Board defer any determination about raising new taxes or redirecting existing funding for water initiatives, until it completes a more detailed assessment about the scale, scope and best practices for addressing water concerns. And further, we strongly recommend developing a county wide consensus on water management before the County begins raising taxes or committing existing resources to future water initiatives.
Sincerely yours,
Peter McNamee, On Behalf of the GrassRoots Institute