Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Sustainability Agency Board ...santarosaplaingroundwater.org › wp-content › uploads › ... · 6/11/2020 · Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Sustainability

.

Board MeetingJUNE 11, 2020

SANTAROSAPLAINGROUNDWATER.ORG 1

Roll Call


Member Agency Directors AlternatesCity of Cotati Susan Harvey Mark Landman

City of Rohnert Park Pam Stafford Susan Adams

City of Santa Rosa Tom Schwedhelm Vice-Chair Dick Dowd

City of Sebastopol Michael Carnacchi Neysa Hinton

County of Sonoma Shirlee Zane Susan Gorin

Gold Ridge Resource Conservation District Joe Dutton Mel Sanchietti

Independent Water Systems Evan Jacobs Michael Spielman

Sonoma County Water Agency Lynda Hopkins Chair Susan Gorin

Sonoma Resource Conservation District John Nagle Walt Ryan

Town of Windsor Debora Fudge Dominic Foppoli

Agenda

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

2. Public comment on matters not listed on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board

3. Consent Calendara. Approve Minutes of April 9, 2020 Board Meetingb. Approve Year-to-Date Financial Report

4. Directors/Subcommittee Report

5. Advisory Committee Report

6. Information Itemsa. Groundwater Sustainability Plan and Sustainable

Management Criteria update b. Grants Prop 1 and Prop 68 updates c. Groundwater User Registration Program


Agenda (continued)

7. Action Itemsa. Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget Adjustment for Engineer Services b. Contract for GSA Administrator. Consider authorization to

amend the contract with West Yost Associates for administrative services for the GSA from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022

c. Contract with Kronick, Moskowitz, Tiedemann and Girard, LLC. Consider authorization to amend contract for legal services from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022.

d. Contract with California State University, Sacramento, College of Continuing Education. Consider authorization to amend contract with California State University Sacramento from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022, to provide facilitation services.

8. Adjournment


Public comment on matters not listed on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board


Consent Calendar

a. Approve Minutes of April 9, 2020 Board Meeting

b. Approve Year-to-Date Financial Report


Directors/Subcommittee Report


Advisory Committee Report


Information Items

a. Groundwater Sustainability Plan and Sustainable Management Criteria update

b. Grants Prop 1 and Prop 68 updates

c. Groundwater User Registration Program

9SANTAROSAPLAINGROUNDWATER.ORG

a. Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) and Sustainable Management Criteria (SMC) update

6/11/2020 SANTAROSAPLAINGROUNDWATER.ORG 10

Status of Groundwater Sustainability Plan ActivitiesSanta Rosa Plain Sub-basin

Groundwater Flow Model & Water Balance

Representative Monitoring Point Network

Sustainable Management Criteria• Chronic Decline of Groundwater Levels (In progress)• Land Subsidence (In progress)• Water Quality (In progress)• Reduction of Groundwater Storage (On hold until water budget developed)• Depletion of Interconnected Surface Water (Preliminary activities)

Sustainable Management Criteria: Chronic Decline of Groundwater Levels

Santa Rosa Plain Sub-Basin

Chronic Decline of Groundwater Levels Technical Methodology Minimum Thresholds &

Measureable ObjectivesDescription Significant & Unreasonable Conditions

Definition of Undesirable

Results

Staff Technical Development Activities

Proposed methodology developed

Partially complete - Options for current conditions developed. Need

to be tested for future conditions which requires projected water

budget to be developed

Draft proposal developed

Options to be developed once

future conditions assessed

Advisory Committee (AC) Provided input - March 9. To be revisited July 13

Provided input on initial proposalMarch 9 - Additional review once future conditions are assessed

Provided initial input March 9Additional reviewanticipated July 13

Will review once future conditions

assessed

GSA Board Informational presentation June 1 meeting

Informational presentation June 1 meeting

Will be considered uponassessment of future

conditions & after AC review

Options will be considered upon development of

options & AC review

Sustainable Management Criteria: Land Subsidence


Land Subsidence Technical Methodology Minimum Thresholds (MT) & Measureable Objectives (MO)

Description Significant & Unreasonable Conditions

Definition of Undesirable Results


Proposed methodology developed & refined based

on AC review

Proposed MT & MO developed & refined based on AC input

Draft proposal developed & being refined based on AC

input

Draft proposal developed & being

refined based on AC input

Advisory Committee (AC) Initial input provided May

11. Additional review June 22 or July 13

Initial input provided May 11. Additional review June 22 or

July 13

AC input provided May 11. Additional review June 22

or July 13

AC input provided May 11. Review of options

June 22 or July 13

GSA Board Will be presented to Board

upon AC review & input June 11

Will be presented to Board upon AC review & input June 11

Will be presented to Board upon AC review & input

Options will be considered after

development & AC review

Sustainable Management Criteria: Water Quality


Seawater Intrusion Technical MethodologyMinimum Thresholds (MT) & Measureable Objectives (MO)

Description Significant & Unreasonable

Conditions

Definition of Undesirable Results


Draft Decision Framework presented

to AC on May 11

Proposal for MT & MO in development Draft proposal

developed

Draft proposal developed & being refined based on AC

input

Advisory Committee (AC) Initial input provided May 11

regarding decision framework. To be discussed July 13

Initial input provided May 11 on certain aspects of MT

and MO. Additional review July 13

Initial draft to be discussed July 13

Not yet discussed – pending development of MT & MO

and description of significant & unreasonable

conditions

GSA Board Will be presented to Board upon AC review & input

Will be presented to Board upon AC review & input

Will be presented to Board upon AC review

& input

Options will be considered after development & AC

review

Land Surface Subsidence: Key Points/Considerations

15

• GSAs are only responsible for managing inelastic (or unrecoverable) subsidence caused by groundwater pumping

• GSA not responsible for elastic (recoverable) subsidence nor for subsidence caused by anything other than groundwater pumping

• Limited datasets do not indicate the occurrence of historical inelastic land surface subsidence due to groundwater pumping within the Subbasin.

santarosaplaingroundwater.org

16

How Groundwater Pumping can Cause Inelastic Land Surface Subsidence

• Groundwater pumping reduces fluid pressure in pore spaces between sediment grains in unconsolidated materials

• Weight of over-burden causes collapse, particularly in fine-grained layers (aquitards)

Potential Consequences• Damage to surface and subsurface

infrastructure (eg, aqueducts, buildings, pipelines, etc.)

• Drainage issues• Some permanent loss in aquifer storage

Pre-Subsidence Post-Subsidence

Long-term decline in groundwater-levels

Leads to collapse of aquitards and unrecoverable inelastic land surface subsidence

Gallaway and others (1999); USGS Circular 1182


17

There are Other Potential Causes of Land Surface Subsidence

• Other potential causes of subsidence include:• Some land use practices that involve dewatering and

oxidation of organic soils (eg, tidal marshlands)

• Tectonic forces

• Hydrologic isostatic loading – ground surface moves up and down naturally due to seasonal water content and longer-term climate patterns (eg, droughts)

Santa Rosa Plain Watershed GMP (2014)


18

Proposed Monitoring Metric: InSAR Datasets

• Extensive satellite-based spatial coverage - nearly entire Subbasin

• Monthly high resolution measurements of total subsidence• Data made available from 2015 to present do not indicate

occurrence of inelastic subsidence• DWR intends to continue to make InSAR datasets available to

GSAs


santarosaplaingroundwater.org 19

Available Data Indicates Historical InelasticSubsidence has Not Occurred in the Subbasin

• Two special studies conducted to assess fault movement provide some insights on elastic subsidence and groundwaterlevels in the Subbasin (Funning et. al., 2007 and Jin and Funning, 2017).

Found potential evidence of land surface subsidence (approximately 0.02 feet per year between 1992 and 2001) and subsequent uplift (approximately 0.02 feet per year between 2003 and 2010) in the southern portions of the Subasin related to groundwater pumping patterns and recovering groundwater-level trends in southern Subbasin (indicates subsidence was within elastic range)

•

20

Strawman Proposal Considered by Advisory Committee

Initial strawman of proposed approach and methodology for establishing SMCs considered at May 11 advisory committee:

• Reflects desire that the basin continue to not experience inelastic (irrecoverable) subsidence due to groundwater pumping

• Accounts for measurement error• Recognizes need to develop method to correlate any potential

future subsidence with groundwater pumping


Initial Advisory Committee Input

6/11/2020 21

Initial advisory committee feedback indicated a range of opinions including support for the strawman proposal and questions regarding the methodology:• Some concerns about the variability of INSAR data, given that the straw

proposal recommends zero inelastic subsidence.• Question of whether groundwater levels can serve as a proxy for

subsidence, since the preliminary proposal for the Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels sustainability indicator is to maintain groundwater levels within or near historical levels.


Remaining Questions and Issues

6/11/2020 22

Remaining Issues/Questions:1. Further assessing the methodology and whether it’s feasible to integrate

the preliminary SMC for the Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels 2. Assessing technical methodologies for determining whether any

potential future subsidence is due to groundwater-levels or other factors 3. Develop range of options for establishing Undesirable Results for Board

consideration with AC inputAdditional discussion planned for July AC meeting



Water Quality and SGMA Considerations

• Unlike most other undesirable results, degraded water quality is the subject of robust federal, state and local regulatory regimes carried out by a number of different entities.

GSAs are not responsible for enforcing existing water quality standards or collecting data to support existing water quality programs.

However, they are responsible for avoiding “significant and unreasonable” degradation of water quality in their basins.

•

•

Background on Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Quality

• Long history of groundwater testing through existing regulatory programs and special studies

• Groundwater quality is highly variable• Local areas within Subbasin of poor groundwater quality:

• Land-use related issues (e.g., active remediation sites from industrial activities, septic systems, etc.)

• Deep, ancient connate water


• Natural geologic conditions (e.g. arsenic, etc) • Existing water quality monitoring programs, such as testing of public supply

wells could help with GSP implementation


Steps for Development of Sustainable Management Criteria for Water Quality

Multiple step process to guide decision making:1. Define level of groundwater quality management and coordination2. Determine type of metric to use 3. Determine and identify beneficial users 4. Define Constituents of Concern (COC) for identified beneficial users5. Determine the limits and concentrations for each COC and category of

beneficial user6. Identify existing water quality monitoring programs that can be used for

setting SMCs7. Establish SMC

26

Strawman Proposal Considered by Advisory Committee

At its May meeting, the Advisory Committee began discussing the staff considerations and recommendations and provided initial feedback. Initial feedback from the advisory committee provided at the meeting generally centered around:

1. Ensuring alignment with existing water quality regulations and policies; and

2. Support for focusing the level of groundwater quality management and coordination on addressing groundwater quality issues related to changed groundwater conditions caused by management of the Subbasin pursuant to SGMA, such as from implementation of any potential future GSA projects and management actions.


Remaining Questions and Issues

6/11/2020 27

Remaining Issues/Questions:1. Compile inventory of existing monitoring data and monitoring programs2. Staff outreach/coordination with RWQCB 3. Develop strawman proposal for methodology to establish SMCs4. Develop range of options for establishing Undesirable Results for Board

consideration with AC inputAdditional discussion planned for July AC meeting



Discussion/Questions?

b. Grants Prop 1 and Prop 68 updates


Status of Proposition 68 Funded Activities

• Deep monitoring well installation• Geophysical Survey to Characterize Brackish Water Extent• Database Improvements (Permit Sonoma)• Rural Residential Groundwater User Outreach Program• Practitioners’ Workgroups

c. Groundwater User Registration Program


Groundwater User Registration Program (GRP) – Key Elements of Implementation

◦ Working group • Program development and implementation• Beta test design

◦ Dedicated Registration Program webpage• Interactive map, survey form, program information

◦ Customized GSA groundwater database• Accommodate updates and new data fields

◦ Interactive engagement• Staff, Advisory Committee, Board, and other Sonoma County GSA’s

◦ Enhanced outreach by GSA and members• Clear and informative notification mailer for parcel owners in the SRP• Grant funded focused outreach


Groundwater User Registration Program (GRP) – Beta TestParticipants include Advisory Committee members from all 3 GSAs, plus additional groundwater users brand new to the GSA.

Beta testers will be provided:• Secure link to the beta Groundwater User Registration Program webpage

− Describes program and provides framework and links to program tools and information• Interactive map

− Determine if a user parcel is located in/out of the basin

− Review known and/or assumed groundwater use information maintained by GSA for parcels in basin • Auto-populated information exchange form

− Allows review of parcel groundwater use info and opportunity to provide corrected and additional info

• Groundwater User Registration Program Glossary • A form to provide organized comments and feedback on each section of the program


Groundwater User Registration Program (GRP) – 2020 Development Schedule

January 13 – Advisory Committee meeting

◦ Input on registration program elements and plan

February 13 – Board meeting◦ Input on registration program progress and plan

March 9 Advisory Committee meeting◦ Input on registration program beta testing

April 9 – Board meeting◦ Delayed registration program beta testing due to

COVID-19

May 11 – Advisory Committee meeting

June 11 – Board meeting

June 22 – Added Advisory Committee meeting

July/August – Anticipated launch of beta test

July 13 – Advisory Committee meeting

August 13 – Board meeting

September 14 – Advisory Committee meeting

October 8 – Board meeting

October – Anticipated launch of Groundwater User Registration Program


Groundwater User Registration Program (GRP)Next StepsProvide feedback to staff regarding the schedule, beta test, and any aspect of the Groundwater User Registration Program.


Action Items

a. Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget Adjustment for Engineer Services

b. Contract for GSA Administrator. Consider authorization to amend the contract with West Yost Associates for administrative services for the GSA from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022


d. Contract with California State University, Sacramento, College of Continuing Education. Consider authorization to amend contract with California State University Sacramento from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022, to provide facilitation services.


a. Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Budget Adjustment for Engineer Services

After the audit of FY 18-19, the County of Sonoma, our bank, requested that the GSA revise the budget to include recommended line items per the audit.


Background ◦ The 2018-2019 audit found that the final budget did not include

enough appropriations in Engineer Services. • Sonoma Water provided grant application and management services, outreach and

communication services; and technical services for the period of April 2019 through June 2019. • Existing appropriations were sufficient to cover all except $36,200 of the $112,461.63 services. • The County has requested the GSA adjust the final budget to reconcile the difference.


Staff RecommendationStaff recommends that the Board adopt Santa Rosa Plain GSA Resolution No. 2020-001 approving the final budget adjustment and authorize the Administrator to sign the budgetary adjustment form.

The proposed budget amendment decreases the fund balance by $36,200.


b. Contract for GSA AdministratorConsider authorization to amend the contract with West Yost Associates for administrative services for the GSA from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022


Contract History◦ At the October 2018 meeting, the Board authorized an Agreement with

West Yost Associates to provide the GSA with administrative services for November 1, 2018 through June 30, 2020 (20 months) for an amount not to exceed $275,500.

◦ The scope of work included Gold Ridge RCD providing on-going financial and consulting services.


Amended Contract The GSA is requesting West Yost to continue providing administrative and program services for the Agency.

A scope of work and fee estimate for Fiscal Years 2020-21 and 2021-22 (24 months) is presented for consideration.

◦ Total estimated administrative fee is $327,219− Represents a slightly lower estimated fee per month over the proposed contract term. − Includes continuing financial support from Gold Ridge RCD.

◦ Total estimated programs fee is $142,419. − Tracked as separate tasks, including the GRP, GSP, and Rate and Fee Study update. − FY 2020-21: emphasis of hours is to support the GRP− FY 2021-22: emphasis of hours is to support the Rate and Fee study update.



Staff RecommendationProposed contract amendment would add an amount not-to-exceed $469,638 and extend West Yost’s contract through June 30, 2022. Total fee for West Yost from November 1, 2018 to June 30, 2022 would be a not-to-exceed amount of $790,138.GSA’s approved fiscal year 2020-2021 budget includes $155,000 for administrative services and $80,000 for programs, for a total of $235,000. West Yost’s proposed not-to-exceed amount for the FY 2021-22 totals $234,908.Staff Recommends the board authorize the Administrator to amend the agreement with West Yost Associates for a not-to-exceed amount of $469,638 to provide administrative and program services for the Agency from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022.




Contract History◦ In August 2017, the Board approved a contract with Kronick, Moskovitz,

Tiedemann and Girard, LLC through June 30, 2018 for general counsel legal services for a not-to-exceed amount of $60,000

◦ Contract was extended in June 2018, through October 31, 2018, for an additional not-to-exceed amount of $20,000

◦ At the October 2018 meeting, the Board approved adding $40,000 to the contract, and extending it through June 30, 2019.

◦ The total budget for KMTG during Fiscal Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 was $120,000.

◦ At the December 2019 meeting, the Board approved amending the existing contract by adding $55,000 and extend it through June 30, 2020.


Amended ContractThe proposed contract amendment would add an additional amount not-to-exceed $110,000 and extend the contract through June 30, 2022.

◦ $55K per fiscal year for 2-years and includes updated hourly rates. ◦ The total for Fiscal Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022 would be a

not-to-exceed amount of $285,000.

KMTG services include, as needed:• Attend Board meetings;• Review Board meeting agendas and specific staff reports at the request of staff or the Chair;• Prepare and/or review contracts with grantors, consultants and sub-contractors;• Support developing GSA policies and procedures, including bylaws and policies for conflicts of

interest, document retention, contracting, purchasing, and retention.

In addition to providing general counsel services, KMTG has provided legal advice to the GSA regarding financing options and has worked closely with staff and consultants on the rate and fee study, and the Groundwater User Registration Program.


Staff RecommendationStaff recommends the Board approve amending the current legal services agreement with Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann and Girard, LLC for an amount not to exceed $110,000.

Fiscal Information

The Fiscal Year 2020-21 budget includes $55,000 in funding for legal services.


d. Contract with California State University, Sacramento, College of Continuing Education.

Consider authorization to amend contract with California State University Sacramento from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022, to provide facilitation services.


Contract History◦ In November 2017, the Board approved facilitation services for Advisory

Committee meetings. The GSA engaged the Center for Collaborative Policy (CCP, operating out of California State University Sacramento).

◦ At its June 14, 2018 meeting, the Board approved a time extension to this agreement (through October 31, 2018).

◦ In October 2018, the Board approved to extend and amend the contract to June 30, 2020 for a not-to-exceed amount of $56,000.

◦ In September 2019, Sam Magill replaced Rich Wilson as lead facilitator for the Santa Rosa Plain GSA.


Amended Contract The amended agreement would extend facilitation services from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022 for an amount not-to-exceed $70,590.

The total for California State University, Sacramento’s Collaboration and Consensus Program for Fiscal Years 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-21, and 2021-22 would be a not-to-exceed amount of $136,544.84.

◦ DWR Proposition 1 grant provides reimbursement funding for facilitationservices for up to six meetings annually and for community meetings. The grantis projected to cover the majority of facilitation services costs, with the GSAproviding the remainder of the funding.


Staff RecommendationAuthorize Administrator to amend the existing contract with the Collaboration and Consensus Program (CCP) to facilitate Advisory Committee meetings, practitioner workgroups, and community meetings through June 30, 2022 for an amount not to exceed $70,590.

Fiscal Information

The Fiscal Year 2020-21 budget includes $35,000 for facilitation, of which the majority will be reimbursed through the Proposition 1 grant.


Administrator, Plan Manager and Legal Counsel Report


Adjournment


Documents

Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Sustainability Agency Board ...santarosaplaingroundwater.org › wp-content › uploads › ... · 6/11/2020 · Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater Sustainability