By Don Wright
The Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley held a meeting at the Jordan Agricultural Research Center at Fresno State University on Wednesday, June 17th, 2026. The meeting was actually two meetings as the Blueprint has an education and an advocacy fund with two different boards. Although most of the members of one board are on the other with a few specialists thrown in for spice and wit.
The Meeting
Chairman Eddie Ocampo started things at 9:00am with roll call and there was a quorum of directors. The consent agenda was the first item and there was one edit of the minutes – Director Dianna Jackson attended the last meeting online and not in person as the
minutes recorded.
Treasurer Kassy Chauhan gave the financial report and one of the highlights was James Irrigation District’s General Manager Manny Amorelli was in attendance. James ID is now a Blueprint member. Good for them.
Strategic Planning
Austin Ewell, Interim Executive Director, informed the board that it’s time for another strategic plan review and update. The facilitation firm, Mujeres Ponderosas will continue in this capacity at $250 per hour with a maximum of $10,500 total. The board was good with this and approved the deal.
Unified Water Plan
Bill Swanson of Stantec Engineering didn’t have a presentation but to say the draft of the Unified Water Plan has been released for review and comments. The deadline is June 26th so it can be prepared for publication. This includes cleaning up the graphics, abbreviations and ADA compliance. Comments should go to the California Water Institute. It is a large document but has a six-page executive summary of the six chapters. A PDF version is available as a Word document is too large to email. 
J. Scott Petersen said he hasn’t had a chance to fully review the document but he’s concerned since the westside of the San Joaquin Valley is so dependent on Delta exports, will those water rights be honored throughout the UWP. And he should be concerned since he represents the San Luis Delta Mendota Water Authority. Before any new water use is included the existing use is already figured in the plan. Director Scott Hamilton and Swanson will work on clarifying this position.
Sam Schaefer of GEI Engineering said former GEI engineer Larry Rodriguez has moved and is now on staff at Semitropic Water Storage District in Kern County. Rodriguez is on the advisory committee to help form the California Water Plan, a result of State Senator Anna Caballero’s SB 72. Good for him and good for the San Joaquin Valley.
Technical Work Group
Hamilton said it’s time to start thinking about formalizing the Technical Work Group. This was an informational item but it sounded good to everyone. Ocampo asked how soon he’d like to see this put up for a vote. Hamilton said send him comments and he’ll have a proposal for next month’s meeting. It hasn’t been a hard rule, according to Interim Executive Director Austin Ewell, that someone has to be a voting member to be on the committee. There are folks who don’t have the financial where withal to contribute money but they can contribute time and talent.
Hamilton said there are participants such as employees of the Department of Water Resources who due to state legal and regulatory matters can’t be voting members but are very helpful. Hamilton also pointed to Rick Iger of Provost & Pritchard Engineering who has been contributing a great deal of work pro-bono and he’d like him to be able to vote. A committee slate will be prepared.
Advancing Projects
Next Hamilton spoke about how to advance Blueprint projects in a structured, repeatable process. He said there are lots of plans out there and many if not most sit on the shelf. Amen brother. We don’t want that to happen with the Blueprint. Amen brother. He posted a graph showing benefit and costs of proposed projects. He said while raising San Luis Dam will help the Blueprint’s goals it isn’t a project the Blueprint will lead. The US Bureau of Reclamation and San Luis Delta Mendota as well as DWR all have their hands in it. 
Hamilton said Stantec has done a good job on the Unified Water Plan to prioritize the feasibility of a project. There is a six-point framework for sorting through projects. Having this reviewed in stages will allow a comprehensive review at each point. It is a commonsense approach but too involved to layout in detail in this report. For example, a joint powers authority could be set up on a case by case basis for stakeholders who invest in a project. He went over some of the legal benefits of having a JPA. This item was also for discussion and will be adopted (or not but probably will) at a future meeting.
Petersen and Ewell both commented on how much the Blueprint should or could facilitate a project. This is a good point that needs to be discussed more to be sure everyone is on the same page. Petersen said timing is a challenge when considering the amount of water available. Ewell said it is basically an incubation situation and Hamilton agreed.
Hamilton said there are many projects that need to be scheduled logically. He cited the Cross Valley Canal as an example. Until more water is moved from the Delta this canal wouldn’t be an immediate priority and use of resources could go elsewhere.
Aaron Fukuda, GM Tulare ID suggested a two-track system – one for ongoing and one for proposed projects. Hamilton said he doesn’t see the Blueprint getting involved in local projects to much extend. He said the Blueprint could always benefit from learning how local projects are successfully implemented and there is a secondary role for the Blueprint Tech Committee. As Fukuda pointed out the Blueprint supports the locals and the locals support the Blueprint. He suggested this cooperation will also help the funding all round. Chauhan and Petersen said there is already a process to sort out some of this. I believe the concern is to not spread the Blueprint too thin but to still be able help everyone.
I’m not sure who but some gentleman suggested another avenue might be to layout the projects and invite the locals to commit. Ewell said it is a value question – whoever benefits will have to pay more.
Laura Ramos, Executive Director of the California Water Institute said there is a great need to tell the Valley’s story and the Blueprint is positioned for this. She said having the Blueprint amplify the local stories and weave them together was pointed out as a need at the recent UWP conference.
Fukuda reminded everyone the political landscape in California is changing continually such as the Voluntary Agreements and climate change. He asked if this proposed process takes this shifting foothold into account. Hamilton said a good example is recharge’s regulation. He said the process will be adoptive and able to evolve.
Reports
Ewell updated the board on the coordinated groundwater recharge investigation with Metropolitan Water District. This has a mid-July kick off. Good deal. A steering committee will be formed and things will move along. He thanked Ramos and Fresno State for hosting the UWP summit and other events. There will be a meeting with the Public Policy Institute of California to discuss Phase II of the economic impact on the Valley from SGMA. You may recall the Phase I portion of the economic impact report.
Ocampo also thanked Ramos for the UWP summit and how that raised the Blueprint’s profile and expertise. He said the Blueprint is being approached more and more for its input.
Fundraiser Wendy Lauchland spoke next and thanked Jackson, Don Cameron and Clayton Smith for the introductions provided her. She encouraged all the board members to contact her and there is a lot of opportunity. She said the Blueprint’s story is incredible and the fundraising opportunities are definitely out there.
Petersen said the Endangered Species Act is touching the USBR on how much Sacramento River water is needed for temperature control to keep salmon healthy. There is $50 million federal for subsidence on canals in drought prone areas. There is a proposed study to link Valley Fever with USBR allocations. There are also requests for emergency funds to fight golden mussels. There is even some money to fund bridges over major canals. He said the main thing on the farm bill is the sound of crickets from the Senate.
Michael Boccadoro updated the board on the state side of legislation. He said the legislative process is about halfway through. The budget deadline is very soon and that will impact the water policy from Sacramento. Petersen added Laural Firestone, Director on the State Water Resources Board announced yesterday was her last meeting. Hmm? Wonder where live is taking her.
Brandon Souza, California Farm Water Coalition reported there is a need for an August blog author. He said he’ll be reaching out and willing to help with the piece. Social media growth has been successful. He said the Blueprint’s profile has been improving and the open rates from e-blasts are exciting and above industry averages. He also said improvements on the Blueprint’s website is an ongoing effort.
Kyle Jones pinch hit for Sarah Woolf on the Collaborative Action Plan. He said CAP’s priorities are being developed and organizing response to DWR, the legislative space and what’s going on in the Kaweah Subbasin. Ocampo welcomed and thanked Jones.
Advocacy Meeting
As noted the Blueprint has been set up as two separate non-profit entities and this is the meeting of the second one. Ewell said he was stepping in to chair this portion of the meeting as Geoff Vanden Heuvel is hanging out with his family for his birthday. The consent calendar was passed and Chauhan gave the treasurers report and she is working with Lauchland to bring in more commodity groups as paying members.
That pretty much was it for the advocacy fund group and it adjourned. Ocampo took up the education fund portion of the meeting again. As all good things do, this meeting also came to an end at 10:50am. The next meeting will be July 15th at the same Bat time, same Bat location.
DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY; Waterwrights.net strives to provide its clients with the most complete, up-to-date, and accurate information available. Nevertheless, Waterwrights.net 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.net’s clients therefore rely on the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of information from Waterwrights.net 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 2026 by WaterWrights.net
The Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley is a coalition of water users, water districts, farmers, commodity groups, and municipalities engaged with environmental non-governmental organizations, community-based groups, and academia to advance common sense water solutions for our state. For more information go to: www.waterblueprintca.com
