Sunday, July 28, 2019

[Santa Barbara County] Civil Grand Jury Dives Into Cachuma Water Disputes, ‘Outdated’ Contract

Panel calls for a new pact in 2020 addressing future challenges and better communication among those vying for the vital water source

A civilian watchdog panel called has upon several agencies to clear up muddy communications to help end spats among members receiving and distributing water as they move toward another 25-year deal for Lake Cachuma water.
On Friday, the Santa Barbara County Civil Grand Jury released the report titled “The Cachuma Contract and Management: Whiskey Is for Drinking — But MUST We Fight Over Water?”
The report includes nine recommendations ahead of plans to renew the 1995 contract between the Santa Barbara County Water Agency and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
“The current contract needs more than revision,” the panel said. “Its terminology is often ambiguous as several different technical terms can mean the same thing and a single technical term can have several meanings. 
“Its coverage is outdated and does not address the challenges of the future, especially the expected disruptions due to climate change.”
In the future, the panel said, outdated provisions should be updated every five years.
“Local websites and other information sources leave questions for which documented answers are not readily available,” the panel added. “This report fills some of the gaps and recommends that local agencies combine to create a website which provides the essentials about the project and gives links to more complex material.”
The Cachuma Project’s primary purpose is to provide water to most of the South Coast — Gaviota to the Ventura County line. The project consists of Bradbury Dam on the Santa Ynez River creating Lake Cachuma, the Tecolote Tunnel from Cachuma through the mountains, and the South Coast Conduit.
The project's aim was a steady, reliable water supply, grand jurors said, noting that water goes to the city of Santa Barbara plus the Montecito, Goleta and Carpinteria Valley water districts.
A fifth "member unit" is the Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District, Improvement District No. 1, referred to as ID1. It serves residential and agricultural customers across 10,850 acres, including the communities of Santa Ynez, Los Olivos, Ballard and Solvang.
While Lake Cahuma was created as a water supply source, the Bureau of Reclamation often encourages or mandates the development of recreation areas at the sites of its water projects. The 9,000-acre Cachuma Lake Recreation Area annually attracts nearly a half-million visitors, putting another pressure on the limited water supply.
Cachuma supplies can affect users' demand for other sources of waters, grand jurors said.
“Thus, water management is of growing importance, directly sensitive to voter choices, and often complex," the report stated. "Clear information, readily available online, would encourage conservation and active involvement, and aid voters and potential candidates for water management offices."
In pushing for a new contract — and not another renewal — in 2020, grand jurors said the existing agreement fails to fully address future water management problems such as those linked to climate and other rapid environmental changes.
After calling aspects of earlier contracts “unclear or ambiguous,” the panel suggested defining key terms and using them in a consistent manner while also working to ensure a new contract spells out the roles and responsibilities for the direction of the member units and the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, acting as directors of the SBCWA.
The panel also called upon those involved to set up and maintain a specific website for detailed information on the Cachuma Project's history, structure, governance and operations, with links to additional historical documents and records.
While the current water year spans from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30, the panel recommended a switch to make it start around May 1, allowing for key decisions after the rainy seasons ends.
In one dispute, grand jurors said, the member units' attorney complained that an SBCWA action was “contrary to the terms of the contract,” "not supported by data" and "expressly opposed" by the members.
The members also objected to SBCWA writing an earlier letter to the federal agency about contract renewal, without telling them. The panel said county counsel responded that SBCWA had to make the renewal request at the time it did and viewed it as the "first step in a long negotiation process."
Grand jurors called for creating a meeting schedule for key technical staff to discuss Cachuma operations and to report major points of potential agreement or disagreement to their boards.
The panel asked for responses to the report from the SBCWA, the City of Santa Barbara, water districts in Carpinteria, Goleta and Montecito, ID1 and the Board of Supervisors.
June 28, 2019
Noozhawk
By Janene Scully


No comments: