Proposition 218 process for ETSGSA’s proposed SGMA Operational Assessment

Financing Groundwater Sustainability in East Turlock Subbasin GSA

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) of 2014 requires Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (“GSAs”), including the East Turlock Subbasin GSA (“ETSGSA”), to develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (“GSPs”) to avoid undesirable results and mitigate groundwater overdraft by 2042. The Turlock Subbasin GSP was developed and submitted on January 31, 2022, as a joint effort between the West Turlock Subbasin GSA (“WTSGSA”) and ETSGSA. The GSP was revised and resubmitted to the Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) in July 2024.

If a GSA fails to develop and implement a local GSP and/or the GSP is deemed inadequate by DWR, intervention by the State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”) is triggered. The SWRCB will then determine whether to consider making a probationary determination of the basins. For basins in probation, SGMA imposes certain reporting requirements and the SWRCB will impose additional fees to recover the costs of state intervention activities.

In June 2021, ETSGSA landowners and Board approved a Proposition 218 fee to fund the operation of the GSA and the development of the Turlock Subbasin GSP. ETSGSA must now implement the GSP and begin to demonstrate progress towards achieving sustainability. The current Operational Budget fees passed in 2021 are not adequate to support the increased activity required to implement the GSP. ETSGSA is immediately responsible for implementing the GSP, and adequate revenues needed for operations and implementation.

ETSGSA began working on establishing a new funding mechanism in July 2023. Over the course of six months, it was determined that the budget should be divided into an Operational Budget and a Project and Management Action Budget. The ETSGSA Board of Directors subsequently initiated Proposition 218 benefit assessment in January 2024. The SGMA Operational Assessment was proposed for all lands within the jurisdiction of ETSGSA to cover the projected costs associated with operating the GSA, implementing the GSP, and meeting SGMA compliance requirements. Irrigated parcels were proposed to be assessed at a rate of $17.75 per acre and non-irrigated parcels at $1.54 per acre. All parcels in the boundary of the GSA, as determined by Department of Water Resources, are assessed under the Engineer’s Report as benefiting from a sustainable groundwater basin.

ETSGSA mailed ballots to all landowners, 859 in total, within ESTGSA boundaries on January 30, 2024. Following the special hearing, 335 ballots were returned and counted. Of these returned ballots, 334 ballots were valid and one was considered invalid due to its missing of a “yes” or “no” marking. The SGMA Operational Assessment was adopted by the Board following a Proposition 218 compliant notice and hearing process, including tabulation of returned ballots during a Public Hearing and Special Meeting of the ETSGSA Board of Directors on April 2, 2024 at Cortez Hall. Additionally, the Board unanimously voted to adopt the ETSGSA SGMA Operational Assessment Appeal Process Policy.

For more information on the rationale supporting the SGMA Operational Assessment, please see the Engineer’s Report, FAQs, and Fact Sheet linked below.

Prop 218 Timeline

December 14, 2023 – A public workshop was held in Ballico.
January 10, 2024 – A public workshop was held in Snelling.
January 25, 2024 – ETSGSA Board accepted the Engineers Report and directed staff to mail Prop 218 notices and assessment ballots.
On or around January 30, 2024 – Notices and Ballots mailed.
April 2, 2024 – ETSGSA Board will convene to tabulate the results and consider adopting the assessment.
- Note – All ballots must be returned to ETSGSA by the end of the public input portion of the public hearing, on the morning of April 2, 2024. Mailed ballots will need to be received on April 1, 2024.
Spring 2024 - If the balloting is successful, ETSGSA may begin sending bills to property owners in spring of 2024.

Resources

Frequently Asked Questions

Benefits to be Funded by the Proposed SGMA Operational Assessment

If passed by a majority of landowners, the proposed SGMA Operational Assessment will fund ETSGSA’s operational expenses to implement the Turlock Subbasin GSP and comply with the requirements of SGMA and provide a variety of benefits to both irrigated and non-irrigated lands. A summary of these benefits is provided below. For more details, please see the draft Engineer’s Report.

Benefits to Irrigated Properties

Improved Water Supply Management

Water availability. Continued reliable access to water resources for agricultural or commercial purposes stands to greatly benefit irrigated properties.

Improved understanding of sustainable yield. Knowledge of Sustainable Yield will help the GSA establish and refine pumping reduction targets for all parcels. An improved understanding of the Subbasin’s sustainable groundwater yield provides a better understanding of water availability now and in the future.

Protection of property values. Reliable access to water now and in the future will protect existing irrigated land value and the viability of parcels to be used for various purposes, including agricultural, commercial, or residential.

Access to critical infrastructure. The use of critical infrastructure could be jeopardized by “Undesirable Results” listed in the GSP, including potential land subsidence.

Regional ecological health. The ecological health of the Turlock Subbasin, including avoidance of damage to aquatic, riparian, and wetland resources, is supported by ETSGSA’s operational efforts to implement the GSP.

SGMA Compliance and Avoidance of State Intervention

Maintaining local control of groundwater management decisions. GSP implementation is required under SGMA and is necessary to avoid State intervention. Avoiding State intervention ensures that local property owners will have the ability to make their voice heard on matters related to managing the Subbasin. The importance of locally driven management decisions and tailoring of management strategies to local needs benefits all properties.

Avoidance of mandated metering, reporting, and State-imposed fees. If the State Water Board intervened in management of the Turlock Subbasin, landowners could be required to register wells with the State, install meters, file annual reports regarding groundwater extraction, and pay State-mandated fees. During State intervention the GSA would still be required to address any alleged deficiencies in its GSP and management activities. Current State mandated extraction fees range from $40 to $55 per acre foot and base filing fees are $300 per well, with an automatic late fee of 25% per month for extractors that do not file reports by the due date. These would be imposed in addition to existing fees and/or assessments charged by the GSA needed to fund local GSP implementation efforts. Avoiding this scenario provides a benefit to irrigated landowners.

Benefits to Non-Irrigated Properties

Improved Water Supply Management

Water availability. Continued, reliable access to water resources stands to benefit non-irrigated properties by preserving access to groundwater for domestic or other uses. This is especially important for rural properties, which have more limited choices for water supply development, and for which groundwater is often an important resource that makes residential, stock, and other land uses possible. Aspects of ETSGSA’s operational efforts, including the Domestic Well Mitigation Program, will provide specific benefits to both irrigated and non-irrigated parcels. Domestic and stock wells on non-irrigated parcels will also benefit from these efforts.

Improved understanding of sustainable yield. Knowledge of Sustainable Yield will help the GSA establish and refine pumping reduction targets for all parcels and future water development potential of non-irrigated parcels. An improved understanding of the Subbasin’s sustainable groundwater yield provides a better understanding of water availability now and in the future.

Protection of property values. Water availability now and in the future affects the viability of parcels to be used for various purposes. Clarification of the Sustainable Yield and establishment of pumping reduction targets will clarify and enhance future non-irrigated land value. Non-irrigated property owners benefit from the protection of water resources underlying their properties.

Access to critical infrastructure. The use of critical infrastructure could be jeopardized by undesirable results listed in the GSP, including potential land subsidence.

SGMA Compliance and Avoidance of State Intervention

Maintaining local input. Avoiding State intervention ensures that local property owners will have the ability to make their voice heard on matters related to managing the Subbasin. Avoiding State intervention benefits non-irrigated landowners by allowing for groundwater management to be more closely aligned with local objectives and community health.