By Don A. Wright
The board of directors of the Consolidated Irrigation District met at the University of California Kearny Agricultural Research and Extension Center located between Parlier and Reedley. I got the message the night before about the venue change and that the meeting would begin at 10:00am instead of the usual CID 1:00pm start time. The Central Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency is developing a Landowner Floodwater Recharge Program that has garnered a tremendous amount of interest from – well landowners. The CKGSA is the same board as CID and the CID office’s boardroom in Selma doesn’t have the space for more than half a dozen members of the audience to attend comfortably.
I showed up at 9:30am to get the seat next to the one available electric plug. Until 9:57am I was the only one in the room. About a dozen folks showed up and we all found out there would be a board of equalization meeting at 11:00am followed by a regular GSA/Board meeting at 1:00pm all at the Kearny Ag Center. Well, board of equalization meetings are not usually the most interesting thing you can sit through. But I’m here. And I’m here early and that opens up an opportunity to ask some questions you normally wouldn’t get to ask during a meeting.
CID General Manager Phil Desatoff kindly explained a board of equalization hearing is held so anyone wanting to have their land included in a district (or removed from a district) can have a hearing to present their case to the district’s board of directors.
In this age of SGMA, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, lenders want growers to show two sources of water. This is usually groundwater and surface water. There may be some folks with riparian or appropriative rights who have a source of surface water and are not in a district. But most folks not in a district are considered in a white area, an area with no surface water. If you’re dependent on only pumping getting loans can be more difficult.
There were 14 applications to have land added to CID, making that land eligible for surface deliveries. Four of them aren’t going to be happy after today’s meeting. They are going to be denied. Mostly due to lack of canal capacity. There might be water available but getting it to the property would end up being too expensive.
This is also a meeting where rates are set. For many years CID wasn’t able to pass a 218 Election. Prop 218 was passed some years ago and it requires local districts to put any fee increases to a vote by the people paying them.
As an example; Bob’s ID passed a 218 Election three years ago authorizing it to raise assessment rates up to $5 per acre. BID wasn’t obligated to raise the rate, just authorized to do so if necessary. So the first year BID raised the assessment by $3 per acre at the Board of Equalization hearing. The next year it was raised another $1 per acre at the hearing. That only leaves a one dollar increase if needed. Good news this past year was a good one for the district. It had plenty of water to sell and was able to reduce the assessment $2 per acre. This gives districts the flexibility to fund itself and also adjust what it is charging its clients.
A few years back CID had a string of failed 218 Election attempts. It finally broke through that barrier and now has the capacity.
The Meeting
The CID Board of Equalization meeting was called to order at 11:11am by Chairman Ray Moles. There were no changes to the agenda or conflicts of interest. Director Paul Sihota stated while many of the applicants are his “countrymen” meaning Punjabi and he may attend temple and parties and such with them he doesn’t have any business dealings with any of them.
Assistant GM Mike Carbajal took over the presentation because he’s “easier on the eye” than Desatoff – according to Desatoff. He said there are 391 acres in play by application and 260 acres will be included. All of the denied properties save one were on the far west side of the district on the Harlen Stevens Canal.
Director Tom Chandler asked about new turnouts being metered. Carbajal said all the approved properties will have to have their turnouts metered. The board approved the lands recommended for inclusion.
All four of the denied properties are owned by Punjabi growers and as there was a contingent of Punjabi American farmers in attendance, they were recognized and asked to speak.
One gentleman named Dhillon said he missed the deadline to be approved last year because he couldn’t get the necessary right of way secured in time. His property was right at the end of the canal. There is a ponding basin right there. He believes the situation has changed. Some walnuts were removed and he asked the CID management to please take a look at the differences now available to increase the capacity of the pipes and canals moving water.
Carbajal said there isn’t capacity to add more water to the existing canal. There is flood water available sometimes. There were 20 days of flood event last year. Desatoff said he’ll have the pipes double checked and if the district has been in error it will admit it and change the recommendations for approval and revoke the denial. CID will work with Dhillon.
Next Carbajal addressed the matter of two adjacent parcels that want to add on to a private lateral and those landowners on that lateral would have to give their permission to allow the new user to run water. Carbajal said getting cooperation from landowners on a private lateral isn’t easy. The concern about capacity stops things. Sihota commented those laterals were designed when everything was running on flood irrigation. There could be extra capacity in some cases.
Moles and Director Tony Lewis suggested setting up a tiered system that would allow deliveries under certain high/low flow events. If someone agrees to use the water as flood irrigation, the existing users receive all of their allocations and there is capacity they should be allowed to take the water.
Desatoff said the regulation is CID gives 2 cfs for 24 hours for each 10 acres. Moles said he wants to see some research as to how that came about. He said some of the folks who don’t have delivery may be living on land that was back in history owned by someone unpopular with the board at that time and that’s why the land doesn’t get water today. He was pretty passionate about this. Chandler said the goal is to get as much land as possible receiving and recharging surface water.
The last parcel denied was 37 acres on the Gordon Ditch, located on the eastside of the district. Carbajal said there have been requests in the past and the Gordon Ditch is small and needs a lot of work to get anymore water down it. A gentleman spoke on behalf of this landowner saying 90 percent of the other landowners are on drip and no longer able to flood. He pointed out the amount of available capacity needs to be updated and was favorable for tiered allocation. He added this will also add value to the land. Finding out what irrigation systems are being used on the conveyance associated with an annexation request could be a valuable study.
Desatoff said the existing clients have water rights they can call on anytime they want. He said the reason the Gordon Canal is full is these folks are calling for the allocation. He said the headgates are fine and most of the canals east of Highway 99 are fine. The canals west of Highway 99 are the choke point. They are smaller. Chandler said perhaps a 218 Election or grant could fund a study to determine the best course of improving these canals and including more growers.
Desatoff said he’s hearing from the board CID needs to start a study on tiered capacity. Moles asked what’s needed to get this study started. Desatoff said funding. The good news is some of the canals have had a flow study that will help set up the next step. I believe small boats or floatation gizmos were released in CID canals at 48 locations. The time it took for them to travel a set distance showed the flow rate. You figure this in with the volume of the canal over the course you can get some idea of capacity. But that is only a small portion of the CID system and didn’t take into consideration choke points like siphons, road crossings or other impediments to flow.
Grower Arshdeep Singh asked about growers with water rights not using them. Desatoff said sometimes growers take their water and sometimes they don’t. With that the Board of Equalization meeting was adjourned at 12:18pm. The regular board and Groundwater Sustainability Agency meeting will commence at 1:00pm.
The Next Meeting
Chairman Moles called the Central Kings GSA meeting to order at 1:03pm. He invited Desatoff to give a report on the annual SGMA update. Desatoff said it’s going to be ready in time.
Next attorney Lauren Layne reported the Tule Subbasin probation hearing took place last month. The State Water Resources Control Board placed the entire Tule Subbasin on probation. But it carved out an exemption to the Delano Earlimart ID and the Kern Tulare ID. Staff said the agreement to place monitors on wells automatically was the tipping point to give those districts a waiver. The State Board indicated it might also let the Teapot Dome ID and the Lower Tule River and Pixley IDs off the hook after another GSP review.
The State Board has made statements that without an adequate Groundwater Sustainability Plan there would be no provisions made for the Good Actor clause for GSAs within a subbasin. Although they didn’t specifically refer to DEID and KTID as good actors, for all practical purposes they are applying good actor provisions to the districts. It looks to me like the State Board is tacitly acknowledging it has to abide by the law and allow the good actors clause.
At first, when SGMA was just getting started the state was urging fewer GSAs per subbasin but now it is encouraging division. GSAs up and down the Valley are kicking white areas out, districts with surface supplies are pulling out of overarching subbasin groups and charting their own path independently. This is fracturing Subbasins under the current version of State Board influence and demonstrating how the legislature’s preference for one size fits all regulatory schemes is – I’m just going to state it – lazy bill making. Many if not most of the laws passed in Pyong Yang, I’m sorry, I meant one party Sacramento are full of unintended consequences. State Senators and Assembly men and women go there and act like it is their badge of honor to attempt to place anything and everything under legislative control.
Why the State Board changed course is a valid question. Well, as Layne reported the Tulare Lake Subbasin sued the State Board after it was placed on probation and won a preliminary injunction halting the State Board from collecting fees. That is going to be further dealt with in January as the State Board plans to appeal this ruling.
It is easy to point fingers at the government. I do so regularly, particularly at the State Board. But it would be the opposite of equality and in the realm of equity to omit the fact that this is everyone’s first rodeo when it comes to SGMA. It’s a complex deal to set up an entirely new layer of government dealing with what happens underground with liquids.
SGMA puts the State Board in the position of having to evaluate paperwork, i.e. GSPs and not results. How would State Board staff or the GSAs writing the GSPs know what is going to work in 2040? They don’t. The first five years of SGMA implementation was sold as the time to fill in the data gaps and prepare a sound plan with this new information. Then two years of crippling drought hit followed by a very wet and then a so called normal year.
That’s the conditions with which SGMA launched. As much as we want wet years, California doesn’t deliver many of them. Now that I think about it – having two dry years in a row is a more likely SGMA scenario than two wet years back to back. So even though some folks in Sacramento, particularly the legislature, believe their spider-bark-opinions may resemble the scent of roses, they don’t. Overreacting to drought, heat and all the other common climate conditions in California for the past several millennia is not a good way to respond. It’s not a reason to move the SGMA regulatory goal posts. Climate change is real, it is taking place, it has always been taking place. Hysteria over climate change is counterproductive and harms not only people but in the long run the state’s ecology as well. Having more dry years than wet during SGMA’s first quarter of implementation is probably a better guide to what will work in the future. The State needs to quit fighting in court and work cooperatively.
Several NGOs have been extremely vocal about holding GSAs responsible for water quality in ways SGMA didn’t cover. It’s the same claim that racist/greedy/industrial (take your pick) agriculture is the cause of all problems. The domestic well mitigation programs are now consuming as much time, effort and money as bringing about a sustainable aquifer. I’ve heard less than three/fourths of the domestic wells going dry are doing so because of declining groundwater levels. Many of these wells are failing due to their age. The casings are collapsing, the screens are clogged and in some cases the depths are very shallow. Yet all domestic well failures are attributed to over pumping under the state’s accounting policy.
See here how equity is ranked at FEMA and ask yourself if this is has anything to do with reality. Do hurricanes like Milton care what NGOs think? Don’t forget the State Board’s former Executive Director stated equity was the most important goal for managing the state’s water.
The Next Next Meeting
Moles called the regular board of directors meeting to order at 1:18pm. There were no public comments and the consent calendar was approved.
The water report was given by Desatoff and he said the district should be able to carry over 22,000 a/f at Pine Flat. Some folks in the audience asked why not deliver that water. Desatoff said the district has to provide 14,000 a/f in the reservoir for a temperature control pool and the left over 8,000 a/f wouldn’t be enough to even recharge the system.
Next Desatoff gave an update on the land acquisition the district is undertaking to increase its recharge capacity. Things are going well in that area.
However, there was a check structure on the Fowler Switch south of Highway 180. Evidently it’s just all messed up, collapsed. It’s going to cost about $760,000 to fix according to Floyd Johnson Construction. This has to be repaired before the next water year. Layne said this is an emergency since life and property could be jeopardized without prompt action. This ushers in an emergency declaration that must be renewed every 30 days. This emergency declaration allows the district to waive the legal requirements to go out to competitive bid and the timely process that can entail. I have faith CID will find the best contractor to do the work even without the bidding process.
Flood Water Recharge Program
The board has told Desatoff previously it is in favor of it – until it wasn’t. Director Greg Thonesen said he hasn’t found any growers in favor of this and can’t support this as written. He said the problem is about moving credits outside of the district. Moles said there are many checks and balances in the policy and it can be stopped on a dime. He asked for public comment and there wasn’t any – until there was.
Moles said a while back the district tried to get landowners to voluntarily recharge on their own property and no one signed up. The credit was intended as an incentive. It includes a 30 percent leave behind with a five year window to use the 70 percent credit. Many of those in attendance were opposed to this. The situation with groundwater credits in the Tule Subbasin was on folks’ minds.
Moles said this program is to keep the Kings River water from going down stream and is temporary until the district can get its recharge pond program fully operational. There were references to the Apex project that is under suit for pumping water out of the district. The belief is this pumping is drawing on CID groundwater.
A gentleman said it would be reckless to allow any water to leave the district. He said there are folks in the room willing to pay twice what they are paying now to keep the water in the area.
Someone asked if the district has a hydrogeologist. Desatoff is a hydrogeologist. He was asked if he works in the capacity. Well, Desatoff is the general manager and has expertise in this area. However, he is the general manager as well. So, the district employs Provost & Pritchard which in turn employs subcontractors such as Dr. Ken Schmidt.
The grower who asked was concerned that a hydrogeologist hasn’t reviewed this plan. He believes the pumpers on the western periphery of the district have to stop. One old boy started yelling and telling Desatoff he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He was mad and told the board there were more farmers in the room than CID staff. Fortunately for him cooler heads prevailed and his words weren’t taken as the threat I believe he implied.
Grower Steve Jackson suggested focusing on sustainable yield and establishing a recharge policy and pay for it with a 218 Election. He said CID has a blessed opportunity to recharge but the growers only understand there is overdraft in the area.
A grower said everyone in the room wants to protect the water and land values in CID. He said he built a ditch and two reservoirs on his property and took more water than he would have had he not done so. He said the discussion is about a voluntary program with a sunset expiration date. He said if he never puts another drop in his reservoirs because CID has built in enough, he’ll replant faster than you can spin your head.
Grower Jon Reiter said everyone recognizes there needs to be more recharge and the claims against the Kings River are real. He said the focus needs to be CID first. He said the volunteer program didn’t work without incentives. And under this program no water leaves the district, only paper credits.
Another gentleman said he and many of his peers weren’t aware flood water was available. He said the problem was poor communications. Director Lewis said the voluntary program didn’t work because it wasn’t designed to work. He said getting the word out properly will make the voluntary recharge work.
It was asked how many private irrigation ponds could be used. The district doesn’t know but many of them are lined and not suitable for recharge. Chandler moved to deny the program and Lewis seconded it. Moles and Sihota voted to support the program but lost.
With that Lewis made a motion to do away with the ad hoc committee can move this onto a full board with workshops and public participation. Layne said the ad hoc committee dissolved automatically when its purpose ended. Since the program was voted down the ad hoc no longer exists.
Sihota said he’s hearing CID first and the credits don’t leave the district. He said there needs to be an incentive and he believes that can be arrived at by the end of the year. Layne suggested making the voluntary program policy part of the workshop and see if it would now be viable.
Funding Options
Layne gave the board and those in attendance about how things are funded and how they may be funded in time. She said CID is funding the CKGSA along with some money from the City of Selma and grants. Of course, some public entities like schools don’t pay. She said the California Constitution allows for two Prop 218 fees, regulatory fees and grants.
Under SGMA a GSA can impose fees for limited matters. If I understand Water Code 10730.2 gives authority for imposing volumetric flow fees. She said CID just went through a 218 Election a few years ago but with inflation the need for such efforts are popping up all over. An engineering report is required.
There could be a GSA wide special benefit assessment that also requires an engineering report. This could lower the CID assessment by moving those charges to the GSA assessment. Measuring the amount of water pumped (volumetric) needs to be well thought out. Layne gave many reasons quicker than I can type.
Reiter asked what happens if the board has needs but none of the funds discussed today come to pass. Layne said the district and the GSA are two different organizations. If the funding doesn’t come through CID will survive but the GSA may not. Well, almost but if the GSA can’t raise enough money to fund the SGMA the state will possibly step in. She said the Tule Subbasin just received a probation notice from the State Board this week.
A grower said for the district to put in 1,000 additional acres of ponds in 10 years is an $80 increase in 218 costs provided the money is spent nowhere else. He said the fastest way to educate a grower is send a bill. Layne agreed with that but she said she doesn’t want to sour the 218 milk. Reiter said it is better to act now when the gun is to your head than after the trigger is pulled.
Desatoff was asked if he has figured the final price to get CID where it needs to be. Desatoff said he does but isn’t ready to disclose that amount.
Grower Austin Hubbell said in his opinion you’re looking at $150 an acre. He said he applauds Desatoff and Carbajal for keeping costs down. But, he said the days of low cost water are over. Thonesen said if Hubbell had said that even a few months ago he’d been carried out of the room. But there is enough awareness now that that figure doesn’t sound so farfetched.
Chandler said going from $50 to $150 assessment is going to be a tough sell. A grower said many of the smaller growers won’t be able to afford it and many of them don’t get surface water. Chandler asked how much 1,000 extra recharge acres is going to help. Desatoff said it will help the district take 500 cfs of flood water during irrigation season.
Jackson asked what’s happening on the Kings River flood water battle. He said he’s concerned. Layne said nothing has changed. The Kings River Water Association still holds the rights. The State Board has been sitting on the application for the flood waters for like four years. Desatoff said the Upper Kings has the best shot of retaining its rights.
Reiter said the State Board could step in. SGMA has been rolling for more than nine years. He asked how long it will take with the alarm bells ringing in our ears before something is done. Layne said CID has made some great advancements. And she is correct. The Kings Subbasin has so far been able to keep the State Board off everyone’s back.
Chandler said on farm recharge is growing in awareness and hopefully more funding will become available.
Closed Session
The meeting then went into closed session at 3:22pm and although six items were listed, it was a long meeting and those items weren’t pressing. Also the room was going to be locked up at 4:00pm. So we left. I’d say a lot of the folks who attended learned something and left feeling like they were heard. So, that’s that. Go be good to each other and yourselves.
DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY; Waterwrights strives to provide its clients with the most complete, up-to-date, and accurate information available. Nevertheless, Waterwrights does not serve as a guarantor of the accuracy or completeness of the information provided, and specifically disclaims any and all responsibility for information that is not accurate, up-to-date, or complete. Waterwrights’ clients therefore rely on the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of information from Waterwrights entirely at their own risk. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not represent any advertisers or third parties.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2024 by Don A. Wright
CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DISTRICT – 2255 Chandler St, Selma, CA 93662 Telephone; 559/896-1660
CID covers 145,000 acres mostly in South Central Fresno County. Surface water supplies: Kings River CID is its own GSA
General Manager – Phil Desatoff, Attorney – Doug Jensen, Water Master – Walt Frost, Controller – Tonya Ruiz
Board of Directors – President Ray Moles, Tony Lewis, Tom Chandler, Greg Thonesen, Paul Sihota
