Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:01]

OK, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.

IT IS 2:02 FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS THE ONE TIME EVERY FEW YEARS WHERE I GET TO TO PLAY WATER CZAR. AND AS WE HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TODAY TO TO ACTUALLY FIND A NEW CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR AS WELL AS SECRETARY FOR THIS GSA.

SO, AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO CALL A MEETING TO ORDER TO, WE'LL DO A QUICK ROLL CALL.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH MR. MARCHINI.

PRESENT. MR. GALLO.

HERE. MR. PARK.

HERE. SUPERVISOR PAREIRA.

HERE. MR. SWENSON.

HERE. AND MR. UPTON.

WE'RE HERE. I THINK I'M IN THE PENALTY BOX.

ALL YOU ARE NOT IN THE PENALTY BOX.

I CAN ASSURE. THIS IS, WE ARE JUST DOING OUR PART WITH REGARD TO COVID, AS YOU WELL KNOW, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A GOOD SEGWAY.

WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS WELL AWARE THAT THIS, IN ADDITION TO OBVIOUSLY US HAVING THIS MEETING IN PERSON HERE TODAY, THE DUE TO THE ONGOING COVID-19 CRISIS AND AS AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER, THIS MEETING IS ALSO BEING BROADCAST AND THE PUBLIC IS ABLE TO PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY A PART OF THIS AGENDA.

SO, AGAIN, WE WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE THAT.

AND SHOULD YOU HAVE A QUESTION FROM THE PUBLIC, EITHER HERE OR ON THE ZOOM CALL, PLEASE, ON THE ZOOM CALL? I THINK THERE'S A FUNCTION WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY RAISE YOUR HAND.

PLEASE DO THAT. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO OUR VERY BEST TO CATCH THAT SO YOU CAN PROVIDE YOUR COMMENT PER ANY ITEM THAT COMES YOUR WAY.

SO AT THIS POINT WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND STAND, DO OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SUPERVISOR PAREIRA WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAD THIS EFFORT, SIR.

READY? AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU, SIR. SO NOW WE'RE ON TO ITEM THREE ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE ELECTION OF A CHAIR, A VICE CHAIR AND SECRETARY.

A COUPLE OF THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE BEFORE WE GET THERE.

I WANT TO CERTAINLY AND THERE IS AN ITEM HERE THAT THE OUTGOING CHAIR IS GOING TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS. I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ACKNOWLEDGE MR. KELLY FOR HIS WORK OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

SO, MR. KELLY, THANK YOU, SIR, FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND CERTAINLY WANT TO WELCOME MR. SWENSON TO THIS DAIS AS WELL AND LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU IN THE DAYS AHEAD.

SO AS IT AS THIS ITEM OBVIOUSLY ENTAILS WE NEED TO, YOU NEED TO IDENTIFY WHO IS GOING TO BE YOUR CHAIR AND YOUR VICE CHAIR AND YOUR SECRETARY.

AND WE WILL WE'RE GOING TO START WITH WITH CHAIR.

JUST BY VIRTUE OF SETTING GROUND RULES, BOARD MEMBERS ARE ABLE TO NOMINATE MEMBERS FOR THE POSITION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.

EACH NOMINATION MUST HAVE A SECOND, ONCE ALL NOMINATIONS ARE IN, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR THE QUESTION AGAIN.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TREAT THESE SEPARATELY, NOT AS A SLATE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIR AND THE FLOOR IS OPEN.

I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE LLOYD PAREIRA AS CHAIR.

OK, WE DO HAVE A NOMINATION FOR MR. GALLO, FOR SUPERVISOR PEREIRA TO SERVE AS CHAIR.

IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? I'LL SECOND.

OK, THANK YOU, MR. UPTON, SO WE DO HAVE A NOMINATION FOR SUPERVISOR PAREIRA AS CHAIR.

WE DO HAVE A SECOND. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? OK, SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS AND I'LL CALL FOR THE QUESTIONS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE NOMINATION OF SUPERVISOR PAREIRA AS CHAIR SIGNIFY BY STATING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? SUPERVISOR PAREIRA, THANK YOU, SIR.

YOU ARE OUR NEW CHAIR. WE CAN GO AHEAD AND SWAP SOME SEATS HERE REAL QUICK AND YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND KEEP ON.

I'LL KEEP ON ROLLING HERE MOMENTARILY.

WELL, WHILE YOU WHILE YOU GET MOVED.

WE WILL GO AHEAD. WHILE THAT'S TAKING PLACE THE SAME EXERCISE AS IT RELATES FOR VICE CHAIR. DO WE HAVE ANY NOMINATIONS FROM THE DAIS FOR THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF THIS GSA? I NOMINATE NIC MARCHINI FOR VICE CHAIR.

YES, WE HAVE A NOMINATION FOR MR. PARK, FOR MR. MARCHINI.

SECOND THAT MOTION. AND WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. GALLO FOR MR. MARCHINI.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIRMAN, SEEING NONE I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS? SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION ESSENTIALLY AND A SECOND FOR MR. MARCHINI TO CONTINUE HIS SERVICE AS VICE CHAIRMAN.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? MR. MARCHINI CONGRATULATIONS, SIR.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR SERVICE.

LAST ONE. AND THEN I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO CHAIRMAN PAREIRA, IS ANY NOMINATION AND

[00:05:06]

VOTES FOR SECRETARY? I HAVE PLAYED THIS ROLE FOR A FEW YEARS.

I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO CONTINUE, BUT THIS IS ENTIRELY AT YOUR DISCRETION.

SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR EXCUSE ME, A NOMINATION FOR SOMEONE TO SERVE AS SECRETARY. I NOMINATE MARK HENDRICKSON TO CONTINUE AS SECRETARY.

MR. PARK SECOND THAT. WE'VE GOT A WE HAVE A NOMINATION FOR MARK HENDRICKSON TO SERVE AS SECRETARY FROM MR. PARK A SECOND.

MR. GALLO, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FROM THE DIAS? GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? CONGRATULATIONS, MARK HENDRICKSON.

SINCE WE ARE IN, WE DO HAVE A GOOD NEW SLATE OF OFFICERS.

AGAIN, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN PAREIRA.

THANK YOU, MR. MARCHINI, FOR YOUR SERVICE.

MR. CHAIRMAN, IS YOUR AGENDA.

WE ARE UP TO REMARKS FROM THE OUTGOING CHAIR.

WELL, IT'D BE MY PLEASURE, MR. KELLY, IF YOU'D COME UP AND AND GIVE US YOUR OUTGOING REMARKS WHILE HE'S WALKING UP.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT HE'S YOU KNOW, FOR ERIC, YOU'RE NEW TO THE BOARD, BUT MR. KELLY IS REALLY DRIVEN THIS WELL.

AND I HOPE TO FOLLOW IN HIS FOOTSTEPS.

MR. KELLY. YEAH.

THANK YOU. I WANT TO BE CONCISE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE.

BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN A COMPLICATED, COMPLEX PROCESS THAT WE STARTED FIVE YEARS AGO, FOUR YEARS AGO.

AND A LOT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE HAD TO DO WITH JUST KIND OF GETTING OUR HANDS AROUND SUBJECT MATTERS AND STARTING INTO IT.

A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING IS IN FRONT OF US.

AND WHEN I SAT DOWN TO TRY AND WRITE MY IDEAS, IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT.

NO. ONE, BECAUSE THERE'S THERE'S SO MUCH INVOLVED.

AND EVERY TIME I ATTEMPTED TO WRITE SOMETHING, IT WAS ALWAYS TOO MUCH INFORMATION THAT WOULD LEAD THE AVERAGE PERSON ALL CONFUSED.

SO THEN I TRIED TO PARE IT DOWN.

AND THEN I FELT IT WAS KIND OF WRONG BECAUSE I WAS LEAVING OUT A LOT OF IMPORTANT INFORMATION. SO THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST DIFFICULT THING BECAUSE WE START WITH NOTHING AND WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT IS THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A LOT OF STRUCTURE, A LOT OF OF FORMAL, FORMALITY AND ABILITY TO FORM DECISIONS AND MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS AND THEN HAVE THOSE IMPLEMENTED.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT BEING SAID, I'M GOING TO TRY AND JUST JUST HIT SOME SOME MAIN POINTS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD VERY GOOD STAFF MOVING US FORWARD AND THEY'VE GOT THEIR HANDS ON THINGS. WELL, SO I'M NOT TO TRY JUST HIT THINGS THAT I THINK ARE, WOULD BE HELPFUL TO THE TO THE BOARD MEMBERS GOING FORWARD.

AND REALLY IN TWO AREAS.

FIRST IS THE BASIN SUSTAINABILITY GOVERNANCE AS A WHOLE AND THE SECONDARY IS OUR GSA SUSTAINABILITY GOVERNANCE, AND FIRST, THE BASIN SUSTAINABILITY GOVERNANCE IS GOING TO REQUIRE A SOME KIND OF A DOCUMENT, WHETHER IT'S A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE.

THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE A ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT WILL DEFINE HOW THE GSA HAS MOVED FORWARD IN THE DECISIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE ALLOCATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED WITH THE GSP, THE BASIN ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE GSP.

SO I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE DETAILS BECAUSE IT'S HARD.

I WANT TO HIT, THOUGH, THE TOPIC OF DEVELOP SUPPLY.

AND THIS IS A LEGALLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE THAT A FOREIGN WATER OR WILL SAY SURFACE WATER THAT PERCOLATES INTO THE BASIN, SOME PORTION OF IT IS AVAILABLE FOR EXTRACTION, IS NOT CONSIDERED PART OF THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD NATIVE GROUNDWATER.

[00:10:04]

THAT CONCEPT IS HAS BEEN ACCEPTED THAT THE DIFFICULTIES ARE YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS TO BE DONE IS FIRST WE HAVE TO DEFINE IT.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE GOT INTO TROUBLE WHEN WE FIRST DID THE MOU.

A LOT OF THOSE CONCEPTS WERE THROWN INTO THAT FIRST MOU.

WITHOUT DEFINITION ON BOTH SIDES ON WHAT EXACTLY DEVELOPED SUPPLY IS.

I ACTUALLY CREATED ANOTHER FILE DOCUMENT THAT I THINK THAT STAFF WILL PASS AROUND ON MY THOUGHTS WITH REGARD TO DEVELOP SUPPLY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS BASIN IS IN SEVERELY OVERDRAFT CONDITIONS, THAT IT IS A COMMUNITY BASIN IN THAT WITH RESPECT TO SOME PORTION OF PERCOLATED SURFACE WATER.

IT IS A COMMUNITY.

AND SOME OF IT HAS TO BE FOR THE HEALTH OF THE BASIN.

SOME OF IT HAS TO BE IDENTIFIED WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WAS PARTICULARLY A SURFACE WATER.

AND THEN THE BALANCE IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LEFT WITH TO ALLOCATE IN THE WAY IN WAY OF SUSTAINABLE YIELD.

THE THAT BEING SAID, IT IS AN EQUITY ISSUE, IN MY OPINION, FOR THE GSA NEED TO NEGOTIATE WHAT THE ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK IS GOING TO BE.

NOW, THERE ARE GOOD ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES AS TO WHAT THE DEVELOPERS SUPPLY IS.

IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT THE SURFACE WATER SUPPLIER MID IN THIS CASE COULD TIGHTEN UP ITS CONVEYANCE. SO ALL THERE'S LITTLE PERCOLATION AND MAKE A CASE THAT IT'S WHOLLY RECAPTURE.

WELL, WHAT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER, AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE BEGINNING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOP SUPPLY, IS THAT THERE'S STRONG REQUIREMENTS ON DOCUMENTATION OF PERCOLATION DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED BY THE CONSENT OF THE GSAS.

IT WOULD BE UP TO THE ACCREDITING PARTY TO COMPLETE THE REQUIRED STEPS TO ESTABLISH, ACCEPTED, DEVELOP SUPPLY.

AND IT WOULD BE THE SAME NO MATTER WHAT TYPE IT WOULD BE.

THERE IS ALSO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE LOOKING BACK.

I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOING FORWARD.

THAT ACCREDITING PARTY, WHOEVER IT IS, HAS TO ESTABLISH OWNERSHIP AND INTENT TO RECAPTURE. AND THAT WAY THERE'S IT'S CLEARLY THOUGHT OF AS THIS IS WATER SURFACE WATER THAT'S PERCOLATED THAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO RECAPTURE, WHETHER IT BE CURRENT SURFACE WATER PROVIDED BY IRRIGATION DISTRICT OR PERCOLATED RECHARGE WATER OR OVER APPLIED SURFACE WATER.

THERE HAS TO BE A IMPORTANT CLEAR STEPS THAT EACH ONE OF THOSE PROCESSES GO THROUGH AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A THIRD PARTY CONCURRENCE, SOMEHOW THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE A AN AGREEMENT AS TO A THIRD PARTY AS TO DEFINING THIS.

AND IT WILL BE ONGOING.

IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, REGULARLY.

I DON'T KNOW, THE INTERVAL MAYBE MORE OFTEN THAN FIVE YEARS, BUT AT LEAST FIVE YEARS, THE ESTABLISHMENT OF JUST EXACTLY WHAT IS DEVELOPED SUPPLY IS GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE BECAUSE OVER TIME, THERE'S INCREASED EFFICIENCIES, THERE'S LESS WATER PERCOLATING INTO INTO THE GROUNDWATER.

AND THE IMPORTANT CONCEPT IS, IF IT IS INDEED A PERCOLATED SURFACE WATER AND IT MEETS THEIR CORE REQUIREMENTS OF DOCUMENTATION, THEN IT'S FINE. IT'S NOT WHAT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A SUSTAINABLE YIELD, NATIVE GROUNDWATER ALLOCATION. HOWEVER, IF IT'S OVERESTIMATED OR IT'S NOT REAL IN THAT CONCEPT, THEN IT BECOMES QUITE PROBLEMATIC TO BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY BECAUSE YOU'RE

[00:15:05]

YOU'RE ALLOWING WATER, PERCOLATING GROUNDWATER, TO TO LEAVE TO RECAPTURE THAT WAS NOT THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE CASE.

SO I WANT TO SAY THAT YOU CAN YOU CAN GET WRAPPED UP IN THE DETAILS, BUT IF IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED AND IT AND IT IS, QUOTE UNQUOTE REAL, IT SHOULDN'T YOU SHOULDN'T GET TOO CONCERNED BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY IS A PERCOLATING SURFACE WATER.

SO I KIND OF I WANTED TO TO MAKE THAT POINT WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOP SUPPLY.

AS I SAID, I HAVE THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL FILE THAT I THAT I WROTE ON WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOP SUPPLY AND THE IMPLEMENTATION DISCUSSION ITEMS, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN WORKING ON.

AND AND SO I HOPE THAT STAFF SHARES THAT WITH YOU BECAUSE IT JUST FURTHER DESCRIBES WHAT I JUST WENT TO. I WANTED TO SAY ALSO THAT THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE WITH RESPECT TO THE LARGER BASIN, A GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE.

I CALL IT THE BASIN SUSTAINABILITY GOVERNANCE BOARD.

IT WOULD BE IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR IMPLEMENTATION AND IMPLEMENTATION ARM FOR THE BASIN ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK TO ESTABLISH AND DOCUMENT ONGOING CONSUMPTIVE USE MEASUREMENT, WHICH WILL CHANGE SUSTAINABLE YIELD, NATIVE GROUNDWATER, DEVELOP SUPPLY AND PROGRESS ON GROUNDWATER DEMAND REDUCTION.

I DON'T KNOW.

I'M NOT GOING TO SAY WHO HOW MANY IN THERE SHOULD BE, I BELIEVE A TECHNICAL COMPONENT.

AND I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD IT'S GOING TO BE ANSWERABLE TO THE GSA BOARDS.

BUT THERE IS GOING TO NEED TO BE DOWN THE ROAD, NOT TOO FAR A STRUCTURE BECAUSE YOU ALL THERE HAVE YOUR OWN JOBS AND YOU ALSO SIT AS MEMBERS OF THE GSA.

BUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE BASIN ALLOCATIONS, THAT'LL BE AN ONGOING PROCESS.

AND SO IT IN MY OPINION, THERE NEEDS TO BE A FORMAL STRUCTURE, OK.

THAT BEING SAID, THE NEXT ITEM WHAT DOES THIS GSA NEED TO FOCUS ON.

AND A LOT OF IT IS BEING IMPLEMENTED AS WE SPEAK.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF AND CONSULTANTS ON REMOTE SATELLITE SENSING.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH RESPECT TO DATA GAPS THAT'S ALL ONGOING SUSTAINABILITY ZONES, DEFINED HYDROLOGICAL AREAS THAT MAY REQUIRE PROCEDURES AND ALLOCATIONS OF SUSTAINABLE YIELD GROUNDWATER, YOU KNOW.

THAT'S, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT IN ORDER TO GET TO THE IMPORTANT THING, GROUNDWATER DEMAND REDUCTION THAT REQUIRES A TIERED ALLOCATION OF AVAILABLE NATIVE THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD NATIVE GROUNDWATER.

AND I SAY TIERED.

I'M TALKING ABOUT ONCE A SUSTAINABLE YIELD, NATIVE GROUNDWATER NUMBER DOES FINALLY COME OUT WHEN WE GET THROUGH THE ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK THAT WILL BE DIVIDED ACCORDING TO WHAT THE GSA SEES FIT.

BUT THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD BE IN 2040.

THAT AMOUNT OF WATER WOULD BE LIKE AN ALLOCATED ON A ON A PER ACRE BASIS.

THE NEXT TIER WOULD BE TRANSITION WATER.

THIS IS OVER-DRAFTED WATER THAT CURRENTLY IS BEING PULLED OUT.

IT WOULD BE NO LONGER AVAILABLE AFTER 2040.

THE IDEA THERE IS THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WOULD ALLOW A TRANSITION TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY, NOT ALL AT ONCE.

THESE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF TIERED WATER ARE GOING TO HAVE PRICES ON THEM.

[00:20:01]

AND WE KNOW THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR MAIN WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO BUSINESS. SUSTAINABLE YIELD WILL BE LESS EXPENSIVE.

TRANSITION WATER WILL BE QUITE A BIT MORE EXPENSIVE.

AND THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE NEED TO BE PENALTY WATER, WHICH IS IF YOU EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT IS YOUR TRANSITION AND YOU'RE SUSTAINABLE, THAT IS GOING TO BE QUITE EXPENSIVE. THE ONLY TYPE OF WATER, IN MY OPINION, THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE TRADED WOULD BE SUSTAINABLE YIELD WATER, NOT THE TRANSITION WATER, NOT, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER TYPE OF TIERED WATER. THAT'S MY OPINION ON THAT ONE THERE IS TO PDF DOCUMENTS THAT THEN I'M THE STAFF KNOWS ABOUT THAT, THAT OUR NEIGHBORING GSAS HAVE DONE THAT DESCRIBED PRETTY MUCH WHAT I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

THERE'S THE COUNTY GSAS WORK ON ALLOCATION.

SO THOSE ARE THOSE WOULD BE GOOD THINGS TO LOOK AT BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING NEAR US.

NEXT ITEM IS A BASIN WIDE TRADING AND CREDITING PROGRAM.

I DON'T NEED TO GET INTO THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT WILL HAPPEN.

THEY'LL BE INDIVIDUAL FARMING UNITS THAT WILL BE REGISTERED AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE THEIR WATER AROUND WITHIN THEIR FARMING UNIT OR EVEN TRADE IT.

BUT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT THAT'S DEFINITELY A SOMETHING THAT WE'LL SEE DEVELOP IN TIME.

MY NEXT THING IS SIMPLY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MERCER COUNTY, OUR STAFF, A GSA, HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB IN THIS IN THIS PROCESS.

BUT UNDERSTANDING THAT CURRENT STAFF IN MERCER COUNTY HAVE FOUR SUB BASINS THAT THEY ARE INVOLVED IN. SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET INTO THE WEEDS VERY MUCH ON THIS DEAL. SO THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE IN SHORT ORDER.

AND I THINK IN SHORT ORDER THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

WE NEED TO NEED TO TALK TO TALK ABOUT SOMEONE THAT IS KNOWLEDGEABLE, THAT IS GOING TO TAKE THIS PROCESS FORWARD ON A MUCH MORE RAPID PROCESS, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME REAL PROGRESS IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

WE HAVE A FIVE YEAR REPORT AND WE'VE GOT TO SHOW SOME PROGRESS AND DEMAND REDUCTION.

SO THAT'S GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT REQUIREMENT.

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IS GOING TO NEED ALSO TO TO HAVE SOME KIND OF, IN MY OPINION, SOME KIND OF A BOARD THAT CAN ASSIST IN MAKING THE DECISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE ALLOCATIONS WITHIN THE GSA. AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE'S THERE'S SOME FORMAL STRUCTURE THERE REQUIRED.

SO FINALLY, WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS, IS, YOU KNOW, I'VE APPRECIATED THE TIME HERE.

I'VE LEARNED A LOT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT IS.

PROBABLY THE MOST COMPLEX THING THAT THEY HAD TO DO, BECAUSE THERE WAS NO NOTHING.

THERE WERE NO RULES.

WE HAD TO FIGURE IT ALL OUT OURSELVES.

AND THAT WAS HARD AND CONTINUES TO BE HARD.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD IS GOING TO BE COMPLEX.

IT'S GOING TO BE FRAUGHT WITH MISSTEPS.

YOU KNOW, THE GOALPOSTS OF SUSTAINABILITY ARE GOING TO BE CONSTANTLY MOVING, BUT MISSTEPS CAN BE CORRECTED. AND IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE PROGRESS THAN BE HESITANT ABOUT MAKING A MISTAKE. AND FINALLY, WHICH IS IS A CONCEPT WHICH I APPRECIATED AND I THOUGHT ABOUT IT. AND THAT IS THE PRINCIPLE THAT PERFECTION CAN BE THE ENEMY OF THE GREATER GOOD.

AND WHAT THAT IS SAYING IS ALWAYS ATTEMPT TO SEE THE BIG PICTURE.

DON'T GET LOST IN THE CURRENT ISSUE BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN JUST ABOUT ANY PUBLIC PROCESS.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT.

THAT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND IF YOU CAN SEE THE BIG PICTURE, IF YOU CAN IF YOU CAN REALIZE WHAT WE GOT TO GET

[00:25:04]

THERE, LET'S NOT WORRY ABOUT WE GOT TO HAVE THIS AND WE GOT TO HAVE THAT.

I THINK THAT I THINK THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GET THERE FINE.

AND IF IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S WAY TOO COMPLICATED, JUST TAKE IT ONE STEP AT A TIME, ONE STEP AT A TIME, DO THE BEST YOU CAN AND THEN GO TO THE NEXT ONE ANYWAY.

THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU.

AND DO ANY OF THE MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR.

I'D JUST LIKE TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR JUST ALL THE WORK ALL THE TIME SPENT BY THE OUTGOING PRESIDENT, KELLY, FOR JUST FOR HIS EFFORTS AND CARING TO TRY TO MAKE THIS WORK RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? OK, WELL, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE ALL YOU'VE DONE AND AND BEING WILLING TO DRIVE.

I DON'T THINK WE'VE PROBABLY MOVED AS FAST AS YOU WOULD HAVE LIKED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. BUT I BELIEVE WE'VE ALL HEARD YOU AND WE WILL HOPEFULLY AS A BOARD TO HEED YOUR WORDS AND MOVE A LOT FASTER.

SO THOSE DIDN'T GO WASTED ON ME.

SO THANK YOU FOR THOSE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

WE'LL GO TO ITEM FIVE ON PUBLIC COMMENT.

MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS THE OBVIOUS POINT IN THE MEETING THAT SHOULD THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY ANY COMMENTS ON ANY MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST WITHIN THIS BOARD'S JURISDICTION, INCLUDING ITEMS ON THE BOARD'S AGENDA, TESTIMONY IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

JUST ONE QUICK REMINDER FOR THOSE ON THE ZOOM CALL.

SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST IN ACTUALLY MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE USE THE RAISED HAND FEATURE.

NOBODY COMING TO THE PODIUM HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND IS ANYBODY ONLINE LOOKING TO MAKE A COMMENT? THERE ARE NO RAISED HANDS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME.

MR. CHAIRMAN, WE HAVE NOBODY THAT WANTS TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. SECRETARY. WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM SIX, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDITIONS TO THE MINUTES.

ANY OBJECTION TO APPROVING THE MINUTES? IS THERE A MOTION? MR. CHAIR, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 14TH.

THANK YOU. MOVED BY MARCHINI, SECONDED BY GALLO.

WE'VE ALREADY HAD PUBLIC COMMENT.

COULD YOU DO THE, CALL THE ROLL PLEASE TO VOTE? SURE, WE CAN DO THAT.

I JUST I THINK UNDER THE BROWN ACT AND COVID, WE SHOULD DO IT RIGHT.

THAT'S OK. SO WE'LL START WITH VICE CHAIRMAN MARCHINI.

YES. MR. GALLO. AYE. MR. PARK. AYE. MR. UPTON. YES. MR. SWENSON. AYE.

AND MR. CHAIRMAN.

YES. YOU DO HAVE A YOU JUST PASSED YOUR MINUTES.

OK, AND NOW WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM SEVEN GSP IMPLEMENTATION WORKSHOP WILL TURN THAT OVER TO STAFF. THANK YOU.

THIS IS A WORKSHOP FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS, IT'S A GSP WORKSHOP FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS TO GIVE A REFRESHER ON BOTH THE GOALS OF THE GSP AND THE STRATEGY IS THAT THE BOARD HAS ALREADY TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

AND IF I CAN JUST DOUBLE CHECK THAT WE ARE SEEING THE SLIDES ON THE ZOOM CALL.

THE BOTTOM MIDDLE IS TO COME UP ON THERE.

YES. SO EXCUSE ME FOR JUST A SECOND.

FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE THE COMPUTER IN FRONT OF YOU ON YOUR YOUR CALL BUTTON IN THE MIDDLE, ON THE BOTTOM, YOU CAN PULL THE SLIDE UP ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF THAT WOULD BE EASIER FOR YOU.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO, BUT YOU CAN.

AND SLIDES ARE VISIBLE ON THE ZOOM CALL AS I SEE THEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SO I'M LACEY MCBRIDE WITH TEAMING ALONG WITH GREG YOUNG WITH TULLY AND YOUNG.

AND SINCE THIS IS A WORKSHOP, WE'RE HOPING THAT THIS CAN BE A DIALOGUE FOR THE BOARD TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF TO HAVE CONVERSATION AMONG YOURSELF.

SO AS WE GO ALONG, PLEASE DON'T HOLD BACK ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS AND CHIME IN WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO COVER THROUGH THIS WORKSHOP, A REVIEW OF THE GSP AND THE SUSTAINABILITY GOALS. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN THAT THIS BOARD HAS SEEN BEFORE AND HAS WORKED ON BEFORE.

[00:30:04]

WE WILL LOOK AT THE CURRENT DEMAND CONDITIONS AND RELATION TO GROUNDWATER USE AND LEVELS.

GREG YOUNG WILL WALK THROUGH SOME SLIDES LOOKING AT THAT DATA THAT THE BOARD APPROVED AT THE LAST MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL ACTIONS TO REDUCE GROUNDWATER USE IN THE MERCED SUB BASIN GSA AND TALK ABOUT EXPANDING THE FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS FOR DEMAND REDUCTION AND THEN TALK ABOUT SOME NEXT STEPS.

SO FIRST, THE SUSTAINABILITY GOAL THAT THE MERCED GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN IDENTIFIES IS TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ON A LONG TERM AVERAGE BASIS BY INCREASING RECHARGE AND OR REDUCING GROUNDWATER PUMPING WHILE AVOIDING THE UNDESIRABLE RESULTS. SO THE PLAN IDENTIFIES TWO REAL TARGETS.

ONE IS REDUCING GROUNDWATER PUMPING AND THE OTHER IS INCREASING RECHARGE UNDER REDUCING PUMPING THE PLAN AND THE GSA HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT REDUCTION IN GROUNDWATER USE IS NECESSARY IN THE BASIN.

THE GSP HAS IDENTIFIED THAT THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD AT THE YEAR 2040 IS APPROXIMATELY FIVE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET A YEAR.

NOW THIS NUMBER INCLUDES IRRIGATION PUMPING, URBAN PUMPING AND WATER PUMPS THAT WAS SEEPED FROM CANALS.

SO THIS SUSTAINABLE YIELD NUMBER IS NOT NECESSARILY THE NATIVE YIELD OF THE BASIN.

DETERMINING WHAT THAT NATIVE YIELD IS PART OF THE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

AND THE AD HOC COMMITTEE BETWEEN THE GSAS.

THERE ARE TWO MANAGEMENT ACTIONS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE GSP.

ONE IS THE INITIAL GROUNDWATER ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK.

THIS IS WHERE THE GSAS WILL ALLOCATE THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD OF NATIVE GROUNDWATER TO EACH OF THE GSAS.

AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS CURRENTLY WORKING IN A SMALLER GROUP SETTING TO COME UP WITH WHAT THOSE BUCKETS OF GROUNDWATER ARE THAT EACH OF THE GSA IS WOULD HAVE TO PUMP THAT WOULD CONTINUE THE BASIN ON A SUSTAINABLE PATH IN 2040.

THE SECOND IS THE MERCED BASIN GSA DEMAND REDUCTION MANAGEMENT ACTION.

AND THIS IS A DEMAND REDUCTION PROGRAM TO GRADUALLY REDUCE PUMPING AT A CONSISTENT ANNUAL RATE. AND THE GSA HAS RECOGNIZED THAT THEY WILL FORMALIZE METHODS TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED GSA WIDE REDUCTION.

AND THOSE METHODS MAY BE IN PLACE BY 2025.

SO WHERE ARE THE GSA IS TODAY? AND THE CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU'RE HAVING TODAY ARE REALLY IN LINE WITH THE TIMELINE THAT YOU PUT IN THE GSP AND IN THIS MANAGEMENT ACTION A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MANAGEMENT ACTIONS.

SO THIS MANAGEMENT ACTION DESCRIBES IDENTIFYING THE I'M SORRY, THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS MANAGEMENT ACTION IDENTIFIES THAT DURING THE FIRST FEW YEARS OF GSP IMPLEMENTATION, THIS GSA WILL EVALUATE OPTIONS AND ADOPT NECESSARY APPROACHES.

AND SO THAT'S REALLY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE TODAY IN EVALUATING OPTIONS TO CONSIDER FOR ADOPTION. AND I DO WANT TO JUST MAKE A NOTE ALSO, AND BOB KELLEY REFERRED TO IT, THAT THESE SMALL STEPS THAT WE CAN BE TAKING ALLOW US TO SEE WHAT WORKS AND WHAT MAY NOT BE THE BEST PATH. AND IT MAY BE EASY TO BACK OFF FROM SOME OF THOSE SMALLER STEPS AND REDIRECT. AND THAT'S ALL A PART OF THE PATH THAT WE'RE ON HERE.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF DEMAND REDUCTION IS.

CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION OR SHOULD I WAIT TIL AT THE END? NO, DON'T WAIT.

OK? ON YOUR GOAL THERE IS AN INCREASE IN RECHARGE AND REDUCING GROUNDWATER PUMPING.

I AGREE WITH THAT. BUT HOW ABOUT GETTING WATER BROUGHT IN FROM OTHER BASINS WHICH TRANSFERS AND EVERYTHING WHEN THERE ARE CERTAIN.

THINGS ON THE TABLE NOW WHERE WE CAN BRING WATER INTO THE MERCED BASIN THAT HERETOFORE HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT IN? YEAH, I THINK THAT IS RIGHT IN LINE WITH PART OF THE SUSTAINABILITY GOAL THAT TALKS ABOUT INCREASING RECHARGE AND INCREASING SURFACE WATER SUPPLY.

SO THE GSP IDENTIFIES INCREASING SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES AND USING SURFACE WATER AS ANOTHER OPTION. SO THERE ARE TWO SIDES OF IT.

WE'RE NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE DEMAND REDUCTION, WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE SURFACE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING TO HAVE.

THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE GSP.

ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY IS THAT LE GRAND-ATHLONE WATER DISTRICTS TYPE PROJECT, WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSITION SIXTY EIGHT GRANT APPLICATION THAT WE JUST SUBMITTED IN

[00:35:03]

JANUARY. BUT THAT'S ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE'LL BRING IN HOPEFULLY IDEALLY SURFACE WATER. YEAH, I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE LANGUAGE SAYS IT BY INCREASING RECHARGE AND OR REDUCING GROUNDWATER.

DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT BRINGING IN OTHER WATER FOR ACTUAL USE.

SO MAYBE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF SEMANTICS.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE, THAT'S STILL ON THE TABLE.

ABSOLUTELY. AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BE SURE THAT WE INCLUDE WHEN WE DISCUSS THESE IN THESE IN THE FUTURE TOO, THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN WATER FROM OUTSIDE OF THE GSA AS WELL. THE WATER RIGHTS APPLICATION THAT THE BASIN IS WORKING ON WILL BRING IN SOME OF THE FLOOD, IDENTIFY OR CAPTURE SOME OF THE FLOODWATER THAT'S MOVING THROUGH THE BASIN RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT THE MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT STARTED AND THIS GSA AND OTHER AGENCIES IN THE BASIN ARE PARTNERING WITH THEM ON IN ORDER TO BRING MORE SURFACE WATER SUPPLY INTO THE BASIN THROUGH THE CAPTURE OF FLOOD WATERS.

AND THEN I DID MENTION THE PROJECTS IN THE GSP, NOT ONLY THE INNER TYPE, BUT THERE ARE OTHER PROJECTS AS WELL.

SO AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN ANY OF THE DEMAND REDUCTION ACTIONS OR SURFACE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS IS GOING TO BE FINANCING AND CURRENTLY THE GSA DOES NOT HAVE A REVENUE STREAM IN PLACE FOR FUNDING PROJECTS.

THE CURRENT BUDGET IS DRIVEN BY THE FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IN A MINUTE.

AND IT INCLUDES SOME STUDIES AND PROGRAMS THAT ARE RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION, BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE FUNDING FOR LARGE PROJECTS LIKE RECHARGE BASINS OR PROGRAMS LIKE INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR LAND FALLOWING OR RESTING.

THE BUDGET IS CURRENTLY FUNDED BY THE SIGMA COMPLIANCE LANDOWNER FEE, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THIS BOARD THROUGH A PROPOSITION 218 PROCEEDING BACK IN 2019.

AND SO THAT LANDOWNER FEE, THE WAY THAT IT WAS APPROVED, IT CAN ONLY FUND GSA ADMINISTRATION AND SOME IMPLEMENTATION, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO FUND PROJECTS.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT LATER ABOUT THE NEXT STEPS IN FINANCING AND COMING UP WITH A WAY TO PAY FOR SOME OF THESE DEMAND REDUCTION STRATEGIES.

SO THIS SLIDE IS JUST A PORTION OF THE FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN THAT THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED BEFORE, IT'S JUST THE FIRST FEW YEARS, I BELIEVE THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE THE FULL FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND WILL POST IT ONLINE SO THE PUBLIC CAN ALSO SEE IT AS WELL. IT'S BEEN AVAILABLE BEFORE THIS BOARD AND THE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES DISCUSSED THIS PLAN BEFORE THE GSA WAS ADOPTED.

AND WHILE WE HAVEN'T GONE IN PERFECT CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER IN WORKING THROUGH THESE ITEMS, WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL SUCCESSES.

SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED HERE, WE'VE TACKLED AS A GSA, SUCH AS WORKING ON IDENTIFYING THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES AND STARTING TO IDENTIFY EXTRACTION PER PARCEL THROUGH ET TRENDS, WHICH GREG YOUNG WILL BE TALKING ABOUT NEXT.

OTHER ITEMS WE'VE WE ARE WORKING ON IN COORDINATION WITH OTHER GSAS OR THROUGH OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT EFFORTS.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE MERCED INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY RECEIVED A I.R.W.M. DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT GRANT TO CONDUCT A DOMESTIC WELL INVENTORY.

AND SO THROUGH THAT GRANT, WHICH IS FROM D.W.R, THEY ARE DOING AN INVENTORY OF DOMESTIC WELLS IN THE BASIN AND THAT'S GOING TO GIVE THE BASIN A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THOSE DOMESTIC WELLS ARE AND MORE INFORMATION ON THOSE WELLS, WHICH IS THAT WAS A STUDY THAT WE IDENTIFIED DOING BACK IN THE FIRST COLUMN, 2019 THROUGH EARLY 2020.

THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.

THAT GRANT WAS AWARDED LAST YEAR.

AS A BASIN, THE GSAS ARE ALSO WORKING ON A DATA GAPS PLAN.

THIS IS FUNDED THROUGH THE PROPOSITION SIXTY EIGHT GRANT.

IT WILL NOT ONLY IDENTIFY GAPS IN THE MONITORING, BUT IT WILL ALSO INSTALL A LIMITED NUMBER OF MONITORING WELLS.

THE BASIN IS ALSO SUBMITTING A TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES APPLICATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES AND WILL BE ABLE TO USE THAT TECHNICAL TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES TO INSTALL MONITORING WELLS AS WELL.

[00:40:01]

D.W.R HASN'T YET STARTED INSTALLING THOSE WELLS, BUT INSTALLATION IS ONE OF THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES THAT THEY OFFER AND WE ARE TURNING IN THE APPLICATION TO BE ABLE TO START IDENTIFYING, WELL, LOCATIONS.

AGAIN, I MENTIONED THE WATER RIGHTS APPLICATION BEFORE.

THIS WAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFORT LAST YEAR.

THE APPLICATION ITSELF WAS INITIALLY SUBMITTED BY MID.

HOWEVER, THE GSA AND OTHER INDIVIDUAL AGENCIES HAVE SINCE WORKED WITH MID TO PROVIDE PROJECT INFORMATION, INFORMATION ON DIVERSION POINTS THAT CAN BE INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION. AND WE PUT TOGETHER TWO ADDITIONAL AGREEMENTS THAT ALLOWS THIS GSA TO PARTICIPATE IN THE APPLICATION AS AN APPLICANT WITH THE WATER BOARD AND TO SHARE IN THE COST OF THE APPLICATION.

SO SOME OF THE CURRENT ACTIVITIES THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT THIS AD HOC COMMITTEE, THIS IS WE CALL IT THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, IS ACTUALLY A COMMITTEE OF AN AD HOC COMMITTEE OF THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

LACEY. YES. BEFORE YOU LEAVE THE IMPLEMENTATION SLIDE, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SO THIS YEAR MAY BE A FAIRLY DRY YEAR.

WATER TABLES MIGHT BE DROPPING SIGNIFICANTLY.

WHAT DOES OTHER PROGRAMS INITIATE DOMESTIC WELL, MITIGATION PROGRAM MEAN? IF I WERE SOMEONE WITH A WELL GOING DRY, I WOULD THINK THAT MEANS THAT SOMEONE'S GOING TO HELP ME PAY FOR A REPLACEMENT WELL, SO WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN IN THE YEAR 2021? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

SO WE HAVE NOT STARTED DISCUSSING A DOMESTIC WORLD MITIGATION PROGRAM.

HOWEVER, IT IS ON THIS LIST BECAUSE WE HEAR FROM SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE WORKING WITH DOMESTIC WELL OWNERS AND DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES THAT A DOMESTIC A WELL MITIGATION PROGRAM IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM.

AND WE ALSO RECEIVED MANY COMMENTS ON THE GSP THAT IDENTIFIED, WELL, MITIGATION PROGRAM BEING IMPORTANT. THE INVENTORY OF DOMESTIC WELLS IS REALLY THE FIRST STEP.

BEFORE WE START TALKING ABOUT A WELL MITIGATION PROGRAM, WE WANT TO KNOW WHERE THOSE WELLS ARE AND HOW DEEP THEY ARE.

BUT THE DECISION TO ACTUALLY PUT A WELL MITIGATION PROGRAM IN PLACE AND WHAT THAT WELL MITIGATION PROGRAM WOULD LOOK LIKE IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD WILL DISCUSS.

AND LATER ON, I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

I WOULD ENVISION THAT PUTTING TOGETHER A PROGRAM THAT ADDRESSES DOMESTIC WELLS WOULD FIRST START THROUGH DISCUSSIONS ON A TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE LEVEL AND THEN WORK UP TO THIS BOARD.

I THINK THERE PROBABLY IS AN ASSUMPTION IF YOU THINK DOMESTIC WELL, MITIGATION, THERE IS AN ASSUMPTION THAT SAYS THE GSA IS GOING TO PAY FOR MY NEW WELL.

BUT BECAUSE THIS PROGRAM HASN'T BEEN DECIDED ON, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT IT MEANS.

SO WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE? IT IS NOT SCHEDULED.

MY SECOND QUESTION RELATES TO THE PROGRAMS WHERE IT SAYS INITIATE A PARCEL BASED WATER USE ACCOUNTING.

AND MY QUESTION THERE IS IT'S SHOWN IS ONGOING IN FUTURE YEARS.

SO THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS WHAT YEAR DO WE ANTICIPATE BEING AT THE POINT WITHOUT ACCOUNTING THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MUCH WATER AN INDIVIDUAL FARM IS USING FOR IRRIGATION? SO THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA THAT WE THAT THIS BOARD APPROVED IN JANUARY AND THAT WE PURCHASED IN JANUARY IS GOING TO START GIVING THE BOARD A BIGGER PICTURE. LOOK AT WHAT CONSUMPTIVE USE IS ON.

WE'RE LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW THROUGH SUSTAINABILITY ZONES.

BUT IT IS ON A I WOULD SAY IT'S ALMOST A PER PARCEL BASIS.

GREG, IF IF I'M, IT'S ALMOST A PER PARCEL BASIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

BUT WE ARE AGGREGATING THAT DATA UP FOR YOU TODAY.

AND RIGHT NOW, THESE FIRST STEPS ARE GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO START NARROWING DOWN AND LOOKING AT WHAT THE USES PER PARCEL, I THINK, PER PARCEL USE IS GOING TO FEED INTO ALLOCATION IF YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO ALLOCATE, KNOWING HOW MUCH EACH PARCEL IS USING, I THINK, PER PARCEL USE, BUT ALSO FEED INTO ANY EXTRACTION FEES THAT A PARCEL WAS USING.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT MY QUESTION REALLY IS, WHAT IS YOUR VISION FOR WHEN WE WOULD HAVE IT ON A PARCEL BASIS AVAILABLE?

[00:45:04]

I UNDERSTAND IT'S BEING AGGREGATED NOW, BUT I'M SAYING BASED ON THE FIVE YEAR PLAN, WHAT YEAR, IN THIS FIVE YEAR PLAN WOULD YOU SAY OUR TARGET IS TO HAVE THE PARCEL LEVEL DATA AVAILABLE? WELL, I THINK WE COULD.

IT DEPENDS PARTIALLY ON ON THIS BOARD AND WHAT THEY ARE GOING AND WHAT THE BOARD'S DIRECTION IS GOING TO BE ON KIND OF WHAT PATH WE MOVE FORWARD.

AND IF THE BOARD WANTS TO SEE A PER PARCEL INFORMATION, WE CAN START DRILLING DOWN TO THAT. AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO COLLECT ON A FASTER TRACK IF YOU WISH.

I THINK THERE'S ALSO TASKS THAT HAVE TO BE HAPPENING ON A PARALLEL BASIS.

AND BY THAT I MEAN I THINK OUTREACH NEEDS TO HAPPEN, I THINK THERE COULD BE A DANGER IN COMING UP WITH PER PARCEL USE AND THEN JUST GOING TO LANDOWNERS AND TELLING THEM THIS IS WHAT YOUR PER PARCEL USES WITHOUT WORKING WITH THEM THROUGH THE PROCESS ON HOW WE GOT TO THAT PER PARCEL USE WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY WAS THAT USED THAT.

SO THERE'S TRUST ALSO WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN THE INFORMATION THAT THEY'RE HEARING COMING OUT OF THE GSA AND THAT THAT INFORMATION IS ALSO MATCHING WHAT THEY'RE SEEING, MAYBE IF THEY HAVE A METERED WELL.

AND SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S INFORMATION THAT IF THE BOARD DIRECTS US TO COME UP WITH THAT INFORMATION ON A QUICKER PATH, WE COULD DO THAT.

BUT I THINK THERE ARE ALSO TASKS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN AS WELL.

THIS OUTREACH HAS TO HAPPEN AS WE DO IT IN ORDER TO BRING THE STAKEHOLDERS AND THE LANDOWNERS ALONG WITH US AS WE DO THIS.

OK, THANK YOU, LACEY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE FIRST FIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN? OK, SO THE AS I WAS SAYING, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS A IT'S A COMMITTEE OF THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

THEY ARE A SHORT TERM COMMITTEE.

THERE'S PROBABLY JUST A COUPLE OF MORE MEETINGS LEFT.

THEY'RE WORKING ON DEMAND REDUCTION TARGETS BETWEEN THE THREE GSAS.

SO THIS IS LOOKING AT A 2025 FIVE-YEAR TARGET, WHICH WILL GIVE THE MERCED GSA THE ABILITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME OF THESE ACTIVITIES WITH A TARGET IN MIND THAT WE WANT TO HIT.

THEY'RE ALSO WORKING ON CREATING A BASELINE OF GROUNDWATER USE AND THEN IN PARALLEL TO THOSE TWO THINGS, WHICH ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER IF THEY'RE WORKING ON THE DEFINITION OF DEVELOPED SUPPLY AND WHAT THAT MEANS WHEN WE LOOK AT SUSTAINABLE YIELD AND THE NATIVE YIELD OF THE BASIN.

SO THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.

I THINK YOU'LL SEE THOSE COME UP TO THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, WHICH IS THE NEXT.

THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE IS ALSO WORKING ON A BASIN WIDE MONITORING.

WE JUST HAD A COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING ON MONDAY AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO MEET THIS YEAR. THEY'RE SCHEDULED TO MEET QUARTERLY.

BUT I THINK YOU MIGHT ALSO SEE AS ITEMS COME UP THAT THEY'LL MEET A LITTLE BIT MORE OFTEN THAN QUARTERLY. BUT TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES WILL CONTINUE TO MEET.

AND AGAIN, I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT LATER ABOUT SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT STAFF HAS FOR RESTRUCTURING THOSE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES TO MAKE THEM WORK FOR THIS BOARD A LITTLE BIT AND A LITTLE DIFFERENT WAY.

AND THEN FINALLY, WE'RE DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING DEMAND REDUCTION METHODS, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY.

AND SO NOW I'M GOING TO PASS IT OVER TO GREG YOUNG, WHO'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME DEMAND CONDITIONS. AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE EARLY RESULTS FROM THE ET DATA.

LET ME ASK FIRST IF THERE WERE ANY QUESTIONS ON SOME OF THE CURRENT ACTIVITIES OR ANYTHING ELSE. IF NOT, I'M GOING TO CHANGE SLIDES, SLIDE CHANGE THAT TO THE ZOOM CALL AS WELL.

LACEY, THERE'S NO QUESTIONS OR NO RAISED HANDS AT THE MOMENT.

THANK YOU. YOU GIVE ME INFORMATION ON THAT AD? CAN YOU TALK INTO THE MICROPHONE SO THAT THE ZOOM CALL CAN HEAR YOU? HI, LACEY, THIS IS BRAD SAMUELSON.

I WAS HOPING YOU COULD GIVE INFORMATION ON THE COMMIT, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE.

I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT COMMITTEE AS IT KNEW AND WHO'S ON IT.

SO IT'S THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS A IT'S AN AD HOC COMMITTEE OF THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

[00:50:06]

SO IT'S NOT NEW.

IT WAS IDENTIFIED RIGHT AT THE END OF 2019 IS WHEN THEY FIRST MET, BUT THEY ONLY MET A COUPLE OF TIMES IN 2020.

AND AS A SMALLER GROUP OF THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE A QUORUM OF COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM THE GSA.

IT INCLUDED BOB KELLY, NICK MARCHINI, AND MIKE GALLO FROM MIA KEN ELWIN, I BELIEVE, FROM THE CITY, ATTENDED SOME MEETINGS AND LARRY HARRIS FROM TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT GSA.

AND THEY WERE TASKED EARLY ON WITH WORKING THROUGH THE ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK.

YEAH, CREATING AN M.O.U, TO WE STARTED WITH A FIVE YEAR M.O.U TO GET US SOME DEMAND REDUCTION TARGETS WHILE WE WORK ON THOSE TRICKIER ISSUES OF DEVELOP SUPPLY AND ALLOCATING PER GSA WITHIN THE BASIN.

THANK YOU, BOB, FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE.

APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO BE PART OF THAT LAST FEW YEARS.

SO AT YOUR LAST MEETING, YOU APPROVED A CONTRACT WITH FORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL FOR I THINK IT WAS SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WOULD PROVIDE US HISTORIC 2010 THROUGH 2018 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA FOR A BUNCH OF GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES.

SO WE ARE GOING TO LOOK THROUGH SOME OF THAT INFORMATION AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MIGHT BE, HOW IT IS GOING TO BE INFORMATIVE.

WE JUST RECEIVED THIS ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF AGO AND WE WERE PLOWING THROUGH SOME OF IT.

WE WERE RAISING SOME QUESTIONS, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS.

I THINK WE MADE SENSE OF WHAT IT IS SO IT CAN BE COMPARABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE IN RELATION TO THE GSP BUDGETS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH.

SO WE WANT TO WALK THROUGH THAT A LITTLE BIT AND USE THAT AS PART OF OUR FRAMEWORK FOR DISCUSSING KIND OF THE NEAR-TERM ACTIONS WHERE WE WANT TO POTENTIALLY START TO MOVE ON DEMAND REDUCTION WHILE THE GSA CONTINUES FORWARD WITH A VARIETY OF SURFACE AUGMENTATION.

AND, MR. UPTON, TO YOUR POINT, I THINK YOU'RE CORRECT.

THE RECHARGE CAN SOMETIMES JUST MEAN PEOPLE THINK IT JUST MEANS SOME PERCOLATING GROUNDWATER. BUT THE RECHARGE COULD BE IN LIEU, WHERE WE'RE BRINGING IN SURFACE WATER AND GETTING IN THE CREDIT BACK INTO THE GROUND.

SO I THINK WHEN THE GROUP WAS DRAFTING, IT WAS INTENDED TO BE ALL ENCOMPASSING.

IT DEFINITELY WOULD LOOK TO ANY WATER SUPPLIES TO EITHER DIRECTLY USE IN PLACE OF GROUNDWATER OR TO RECHARGE DIRECTLY INTO THE BASIN.

AND EITHER WAY, THAT CREATING SOME SORT OF CREDIT THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HELP IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE CONSUMPTIVE USES THAT ARE NECESSARY.

SO LACEY IS GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE SLIDE DECK HERE THAT WE HAVE AND WE WANT THIS TO BE OPEN SOME CONVERSATION LIKE LACEY HAD LAID OUT AT THE BEGINNING.

THIS IS A WORKSHOP DISCUSSION.

WE, THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A LECTURE WITHIN SOME QUESTIONS AT THE END.

SO FEEL FREE TO SAY HOLD ON A SECOND.

AND IF IT'S SOMETHING I KNOW I'M GOING TO GET TO LATER, I'LL PAUSE YOUR QUESTION AND WE'LL WE'LL KEEP GOING.

SO GO AHEAD AND START WITH THE FIRST SLIDE.

AND LACEY, FOR YOUR BENEFIT, THERE'S SEVERAL ANIMATION ASPECTS THAT ARE SIMPLY JUST HITTING A BUTTON TO GET ANOTHER PICTURE ON A PAGE.

SO I'LL JUST SAY NEXT AND THEN THAT'LL BRING US THROUGH THERE.

SO I'M GOING TO FOLLOW ALONG ON MY SCREEN HERE JUST SO I BECAUSE I CAN'T NECESSARILY SEE ALL THOSE SCREENS UP THERE VERY WELL.

I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THIS IS ACTUAL DATA THAT WE PURCHASED? THIS IS MADE UP DATA THAT.

NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. YES.

THIS IS SO IT'S A APPRECIATE THAT POINT BECAUSE IT DOES REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT.

I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT.

SO THANK YOU, MR. MARCHINI, FOR RAISING THAT QUESTION.

WHAT THIS DATA IS, IS ET ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE ON A WHAT'S CONSIDERED A PIXEL LEVEL AND AT THE SATELLITE IMAGES THAT WERE USED TO DO THIS ANALYSIS, TAKE A PIXEL AS A THIRTY METER BY THIRTY METER.

THERE'S SOME OTHER SATELLITES THAT READ EVEN NARROWER DOWN TO THE TEN METER BASIS.

THIS WAS USING THIRTY METER DATA.

THE COMPANY FORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL, WHO WE BOUGHT THIS DATA FROM, HAD COMPLETED AN ANALYSIS FOR THE ENTIRE STATE AS PART OF A CONTRACT WITH W.R.

AND SO WHAT THESE PROCESSES ARE IS GOING AND ACQUIRING THAT DATA FOR OUR AVAILABLE

[00:55:01]

SOURCES IN USE.

SO THE DATA IS ACTUALLY THE RAW DATA THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE IS DOWN AT THE PARCEL LEVEL BY MONTH BY PARCEL.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY RELATED TO A PARCEL.

I BELIEVE IT IS. I MEAN, IT'S THERE'S SOME PRETTY BIG FILES.

AND I HAD SOME OF MY STAFF DEALING WITH THE GIS INTERFACING AND PEOPLE THAT KNOW HOW TO DO THAT BETTER THAN I DO.

SO TO YOUR POINT, THIS IS ACTUAL DATA COMING FROM FIELDS OVER SEVERAL YEARS, FROM 2010 THROUGH 2018 BASED ON SATELLITE READS THAT ARE PASSING OVERHEAD.

I BELIEVE YOU. THERE ARE EIGHT TO TEN DAYS AND THEN THE PROCESS THAT FORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL USES, THEY USE ONE OF THE ALGORITHM PROCESSES.

I'M NOT GOING TO FORGET WHICH ONE THEY USE.

THERE'S SOME COMPETING PROCESSES OUT THERE AND THEY ALL KIND OF DO A PRETTY GOOD ESTIMATE AND THEN ONE MIGHT DO BETTER THAN OTHERS IN SOME INSTANCES.

BUT THESE ARE ALL SHOULD ALL BE RELATIVE.

SO THIS IS ACTUAL DATA.

AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE IMAGES AND YOU CAN SEE PARCELS THAT ACTUALLY CHANGE THEIR SIGNATURE OVER TIME.

AND THAT GIVES YOU A SENSE OF KIND OF LIKE, OK, YEAH, THAT'S BEEN GOING ON HERE.

MAYBE IT IT ACTUALLY WAS A LAND THAT WAS BEING ACTIVELY FARMED AND THAT WENT FALLOW.

MAYBE IT WAS. BEING REPLANTED FOR TREES OR SOMETHING, SO THERE'S A YEAR WHERE THERE'S BASICALLY ZERO TRANSPIRATION BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T EVEN WEEDS IN THE FIELD, NATURAL GRASSES OR ANYTHING GROWING, AND THEN YOU MIGHT SEE IT COMING BACK UP AGAIN.

SO THERE'S THAT KIND OF INFORMATION WE WEREN'T ABLE TO PROCESS ALL THE WE HAVE BAR CHARTS FOR ALL THE YEARS, BUT I WASN'T ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER THE RASTER IMAGES THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT. AND SOMETIMES THAT CAN REALLY BE TELLING WHEN YOU START TO LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON YEAR TO YEAR, YOU CAN START SEEING THINGS.

AND WE'RE ALSO WANTING TO MAKE SURE THE REASON WHY THIS IS AGGREGATED RIGHT NOW, WHILE YOU COULD WE CAN ALL LOOK DOWN THERE AND GO, HEY, THAT'S MISS JONES FARM OVER THERE, OR MR. SMITH'S FARM.

THE INTENT IS NOT TO BE CALLING ANYBODY OUT FOR ANYTHING WITH THIS.

THIS IS ALL HISTORIC DATA, BUT THIS IS THE TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD BE USING GOING FORWARD INTO MR. SWENSONS QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT PARCEL BASED DATA.

THIS IS THAT PARCEL BASED DATA, BUT IT'S ALREADY BEEN PROCESSED.

SO TO GO GET THE NEW STUFF IS ABOUT THE ESTIMATES.

I'VE BEEN TOLD PROBABLY FIVE TO SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS TO PROCESS A YEAR'S WORTH OF IMAGES FOR THESE AREAS.

NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF WE START ASKING FOR IT DOWN AT THE VERY I MEAN, IT'S PROCESSED ON THE PIXEL LEVEL. BUT IF WE START ASKING FOR IT, THAT DISCRETE LEVEL AND ABILITY TO VIEW IT AND OTHER THINGS INTERACT WITH IT, THERE MIGHT BE ADDED COSTS.

THERE'S A VARIETY OF CONVERSATIONS TO HAVE ON THAT POINT ALONE.

SO THIS IS A SAMPLING OF THE TYPES OF THINGS WE WOULD SEE IF WE'RE GOING TO USE REMOTE SENSING DATA GOING FORWARD.

BUT THIS IS A GOOD PICTURE TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHERE THE TRENDS ARE.

WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN OUR IN OUR BASIN ALTOGETHER AND ESPECIALLY KIND OF IN SOME DIFFERENT ZONES THAT WE HAVE THAT WE'RE JUST USING FOR CONTEMPLATION.

THOSE AREN'T DEFINED ZONES OR SIMPLY ILLUSTRATIVE ZONES FOR OUR OUR CONSIDERATIONS AT THIS POINT. SO THAT WAS A LONG WINDED ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, MR. MARCHINI. BUT HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWER IT.

THAT WAS A GREAT WAS A GREAT ANSWER.

IT'S ACTUALLY EXCITING TO SEE OUR DATA.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS TECHNOLOGY FOR YEARS AND IT'S ALWAYS JUST BEEN A PICTURE OF SOMEWHERE AT SOME POINT IN TIME.

SO, YEAH, I THINK SO.

NEXT. AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF PLACES YOU CAN SEE THAT MSGA THE A KIND OF IS SLIPPED OFF A LITTLE BIT. AND WE FOUND WHEN I FIRST MADE THIS WHOLE THING FROM THE ACTUAL IMAGES THAT WERE BURIED IN HERE, IT WAS ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY MEG POWERPOINT FILE.

IT GOT A LITTLE BIG AND A LITTLE CUMBERSOME.

SO YOU CREATE PICTURES OUT OF A LOT OF THESE THINGS.

AND SOMETIMES WHEN YOU CREATE PICTURES, YOU GET THOSE WEIRD LITTLE SHIFTS ON THAT STUFF.

I ALSO JUST FOR THE RECORD, IN THE HANDOUT AND THE PRINTOUT, I NOTICE THE LAST SLIDE WE HAVE IN THE PRINTOUT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN.

IT DID SOME WEIRD SHIFTING.

SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, SO HERE IS THE KIND OF THE IMAGERY FOR THE MERCED SUB-BASIN GSA BOUNDARY. WHAT YOU SEE IS COLORATIONS AND THE COLORATIONS ARE PUT ON THERE AS RELATED TO DIFFERENT SCALES OF OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION THAT ARE HAPPENING.

THIS IS THE ANNUAL PICTURE.

THIS HAPPENS TO BE 2018 TOTAL IMAGE.

AND WHAT YOU SEE IS THE DARKEST RED IS THE LEAST AMOUNT OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION THAT OCCURRED FOR THE YEAR. THE GREEN IS THE MOST AMOUNT.

NOW, THIS EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA WE SEE HERE HAS BEEN MET BY ONE OF THREE SOURCES, RAIN, PUMPS GROUNDWATER, OR APPLIED SURFACE WATER.

SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO ACCOUNT FOR WHAT'S GONE ON THERE.

I KNOW WHEN WE'VE DONE SOME SIMILAR WORK IN SOME OTHER BASINS I'VE WORKED IN, WE STARTED TO ESTIMATE OUT THE EFFECT OF

[01:00:02]

BECAUSE A REALLY WET YEAR, DEPENDING ON THE TIMING OF THE RAIN AND THOSE ALL THOSE THINGS HAS AN EFFECT ON THE CONSUMPTION OF APPLIED WATER, WHICH IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE STARTING TO WANT TO GET TO, IS WE'RE TRYING TO REDUCE THE CONSUMPTIVE USE OF APPLIED WATER TO HELP OUR BASIN REACH SUSTAINABILITY.

SO THE THE IMAGES YOU'RE SEEING HERE IN THE COLORATIONS ARE TRYING TO DEPICT DIFFERENT DEGREES OF THAT TOTAL ET THAT'S HAPPENING FOR THE YEAR.

SO NEXT. IT'S FUNNY, I'M LOOKING AT MY COMPUTER, I'M LIKE, IT DIDN'T CHANGE, BUT WOW, YEAH IT'S AFTERNOON.

ASK ONE QUESTION. SURE.

SO THE COLORS, IS THERE A SCALE WHERE DARK RED MEANS TWO INCHES AND DARK GREEN OR BLUE MEANS A LOT? THERE IS, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TRY AND PRESS ON THAT RIGHT NOW.

IT IS THE COLORING HERE IS OUR LAYERING OF A SCALE BASICALLY.

AND SINCE THESE ULTIMATELY ARE TOTAL INCHES FOR THE YEAR, I DON'T WANT TO TRY AND DESIGNATE WHERE THOSE DIFFERENT POINTS ARE.

ONE, I'D PROBABLY BE OFF A LITTLE BIT ANYWAY, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER INFORMATION. BUT ESSENTIALLY, I THINK THE MOST EVAPOTRANSPIRATION YOU'RE SEEING HERE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS IS NORTH OF 40 INCHES AND THE LOWEST IS GOING TO BE DOWN, YOU KNOW, EIGHT INCHES OR SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE.

SO YOU'RE KIND OF SCALING ACROSS THAT RANGE.

SO THIS NEXT ONE IMAGE THAT CAME UP HERE IS THE MSGSA AREA, BECAUSE WE SINCE WE PURCHASING THIS DATA, WE DID PURCHASE IT FOR THE WHOLE BASIN AND WE GAVE THEM GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES AND WE SAID, GIVE US THE SO WE CAN CUT FOR MSGSA FROM MERCED BASIN AND FOR TURNER ISLAND. AND THEN WITHIN THE MERCED SUB BASIN, WE SEPARATED INTO THOSE SIX SUSTAINABILITY ZONES ALSO.

SO THIS JUST IS AGAIN THE 2018 IMAGE.

WE HAVE THIS DATA FOR 2010 THROUGH 2018 BY MONTH.

GO AHEAD NEXT. AND THERE'S TURNER ISLAND.

SO THIS IS THE KIND OF IMAGERY NOW LET'S START TALKING ABOUT WHAT ALL THIS MEANS, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS I STARTED TO SEE.

GO AHEAD. AND NEXT SLIDE IS THE RESULTS ARE THESE BAR CHARTS.

AND I LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS AND I'M ALWAYS ONE THAT FOLLOWS THE RULE OF QUESTION, DON'T ASSUME. SO I LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS AND I'M LIKE, SOME THINGS SEEM A LITTLE OFF.

HOW DO THEY ALL ADD UP HERE? HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO THE BUDGETS THAT WERE IN THE GSPS? AND YOU CAN SEE THE UPPER LEFT IS THE MERCED SUB-BASIN, AND IT'S SHOWING THE ORDER OF FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND ACRE FEET OF ET AND YOU HAVE ABOUT THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET AND MSGSA AND ABOUT TWENTY SEVEN THOUSAND IN TURNER.

YOU ADD ALL THAT TOGETHER.

AND WE WERE NORTH OF EIGHT HUNDRED, WHAT ARE WE, EIGHT-FIFTY, EIGHT SEVENTY-FIVE SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

AND WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE BUDGET IN THE GSP, THE TOTAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION WAS AROUND THAT SAME NUMBER. EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE, THAT KIND OF NUMBER.

AND THE AG PORTION WAS IN THE SIX HUNDREDS IT RANGED DEPENDING ON WHETHER THEY'RE LOOKING AT WHAT YEAR, DRY YEAR AND STUFF.

SO IT HIT ME.

I'M LIKE SOMETHING DOESN'T SEEM ABSOLUTELY RIGHT HERE.

SO WE WANTED TO LOOK AT SOME OTHER THINGS.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD. AND NEXT SLIDE, WE WANT TO COMPARE SOME TO THE GSP.

AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS WE HAD RECEIVED SOME DATA FROM WOODARD-CURRAN, MISSPELLED HER NAME WOODARD.

THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH.

SORRY, FOUR OF THEM ARE SAID SUB-BASIN, GSA.

WE HAD GOTTEN THIS, I THINK I WANT TO SAY BACK IN OCTOBER, 2019, I BELIEVE.

AND I THINK SOME OF US HAD A SMALL WORKGROUP, BUT WE WERE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT TOTAL ET THAT WAS HAPPENING AND WHERE OUR NUMBERS MIGHT BE AND HOW MUCH GOAL WE KIND OF HAD.

AND WE WERE STARTING TO LOOK AT NIC.

I REMEMBER YOU WERE IN THAT MEETING.

WE WERE OVER IN ONE OF THESE CONFERENCE ROOMS TALKING ABOUT SOME THINGS.

SO THEY HAD ABOUT THREE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND TOTAL ACRES IN THEM ARE SAID SUB BASIN GSA, ABOUT ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THREE THOUSAND OF THAT WAS IRRIGATED, ACCORDING TO THE 2015 DATA SET THAT THEY HAD.

AND THEY HAD TEN CROP SPECIFIC MONTHLY ET VALUES AND AN ESTIMATE TOTAL OF ABOUT THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET WAS WHAT THE GSP WAS TALKING ABOUT.

AND THAT'S THE DATA THAT THEN ROLLED INTO ALL OF THEIR BUDGETS AND ALL THE STUFF THAT ULTIMATELY GOES INTO THIS BALANCE OF THE GSP.

THE INITIAL COMPARISON WITH THE DATA WE JUST GOT RAISE THESE QUESTIONS.

WE SEE THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY VERSUS FOUR HUNDRED AND SEVENTY IN 2015 AND THREE SIXTY FIVE VERSUS FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE IN 2013 BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THAT LITTLE BIT OF DIP THERE IN THIRTEEN, FOURTEEN, FIFTEEN IN THIS, IN THE BAR CHART ON THE RIGHT.

SO IT BEGS THE QUESTION IN MY MIND WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT EXACTLY WAS GOING ON. SO LET'S GO TO NEXT SLIDE.

GREG, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT ONE MORE TIME WHERE EXACTLY ALL THAT MEANT AGAIN? SURE. SO IN OUR GSP, WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT'S BEEN USED TO TRY AND ESTABLISH HOW MUCH OF

[01:05:05]

THE ALL THE INS AND OUTS OF THE BASIN RIGHT NOW WAS USED TO DO ALL THE MODELING.

AND THEN THAT WAS USED TO DO THE PREDICTIVE MODELING INTO THE FUTURE TO SAY IF WE DO THESE ACTIONS, WE'RE GOING TO WE SHOULD ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY WITH THIS KIND OF DEGREE OF DEMAND REDUCTION IN THIS KIND OF ADDED WATER SUPPLIES BROUGHT IN AND ALL THAT WAS BASED ON A BIG MODEL.

AND MODELS ARE NEVER RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE VERY USEFUL.

SO IT WAS USEFUL IN HELPING GUIDE US, BUT.

IT'S ITS NUMBERS SOMEWHAT BECOME SIMPLIFIED BECAUSE THEY USE CERTAIN LAND USE BASES, THE CERTAIN ET VALUES.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT HERE IN A LITTLE BIT THAT SKEW A LITTLE BIT OF IT FROM THE ACTUAL REAL YEAR TO YEAR DATA. A LITTLE.

AND SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE, FIRST OF ALL, THAT WE ARE RECOGNIZING HOW THIS DATA COMPARED, BECAUSE IF YOU RECALL, THE GSP USED DATA FROM METRIC.

THAT'S ANOTHER SIMILAR THING TO WHAT FORMATION DOES.

IT'S OPERATED OUT OF CAL POLY ITRC RUNS THE METRIC PROGRAM.

AND SO THEY THERE WAS DATA FROM LIKE, LET'S SAY, THE LATE 80S, SEVERAL YEARS IN THE 90S, A FEW YEARS IN EARLY 2010, 11 AND 13, I THINK WERE THE YEARS THAT GOT USED FOR METRIC TO DO SOME MODEL CALIBRATION.

SO THERE'S IN THIS FIELD OF REMOTE SENSING, EVERYBODY'S ALWAYS ARGUING ABOUT, WELL, HOW GOOD IS IT, HOW REAL IS IT? HOW ACCURATE IS IT? I DON'T TRUST THAT ONE.

I DON'T TRUST THAT ONE. SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE SAME THINGS COME TO ME.

I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO SIT THERE AND JUST SAY, YES, THIS IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE TO SOME OTHER THINGS.

AND SO THIS COMPARISON HERE MADE ME QUESTION.

I'M LIKE, WELL, WHY ARE WE OFF THIS MUCH? WHY ARE WE WHY DO WE HAVE THAT KIND OF MAGNITUDE? AT LEAST IT'S ALWAYS IN THE SAME DIRECTION.

IT'S NOT. WELL, ONE YEAR WERE LOWER.

ANOTHER YEAR WERE HIGHER. THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM.

BUT IT'S STILL TOO HIGH.

IT'S TOO TOO DIFFERENTIAL.

SO I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHY THAT MIGHT BE.

SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

SO WE ARE SUSPICIOUS THAT RANGELAND WAS INFLUENCING THE VALUE AND THE FORMATION DATA SET AND PARTICULAR THIS AREA.

GO AHEAD AND CLICK NEXT.

SPECIFICALLY THAT AREA THAT'S ALL HIGHLIGHTED IN THERE.

THAT'S ALL RANGELAND GRASSLAND.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY, RAINFALL AS GRASS GROWS, IT'S GREEN, IT TRANSMITS, IT HAS EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. SO THERE'S A VALUE THERE.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T SOMEHOW INCORPORATING THAT INTO IT.

NEXT SLIDE. BUT THE ACTUAL PARCEL OF DATA THAT WAS ANALYZED IN THE FORMATION BASIS IS USING THE DATA D.W.R 2016 LAND USE DATA SET.

THAT IS THESE PIXELS YOU SEE OVER ON THE IN THE SECOND IMAGE ON THE LOWER RIGHT.

AND WHAT'S NOTICEABLE IS YOU DON'T SEE ANY COLORATION IN THAT OVAL AREA.

RIGHT. SO THAT COLORATION, THE OVERALL AREA WAS SOMEWHAT OF AN ARTIFACT OF OUR MAPPING THAT WE WERE DOING. SO WE SAID, OK, WELL FIRST OFF, THE ONLY THING THAT'S REALLY ADDING UP INTO THOSE NUMBERS WE WERE COMPARING.

SO FOUR HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET IS COMING FROM THE PARCELS YOU SEE IN THIS MAP. THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE DESIGNATED AS AGRICULTURE IN 2016 D.W.R LAND USE COVER. SO NOW LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

SO WE WERE RECOGNIZING THEN THAT MANAGED WETLANDS, WHICH IS A CATEGORY IN THAT D.W.R COVER, WAS CREATING A POTENTIAL PROBLEM.

SO NEXT CLICK.

THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. AND THIS OVAL IS AT ABOUT 36000 TOTAL ACRES IN THE DATA PROVIDED BY FORMATION. THERE'S A THIRTY SIX THOUSAND ACRES.

MOST OF IT IS IN OUR ZONE FIVE THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT LATER.

SOME OF IT IS IN ZONE FOUR.

THAT ALL HAD A GO AHEAD AND HIT THE NEXT SLIDE.

SORRY, I BEGAN LOOKING AT MY SCREEN GOING, COME ON, SO THIRTY SIX THOUSAND ACRES OF MANAGED WETLANDS NEXT CLICK AND IRRIGATED AG WAS ABOUT ONE HUNDRED FORTY TWO THOUSAND.

SO NET THEY HAD ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY EIGHT THOUSAND ACRES.

ALL TOLD, IN THEIR NEXT CLICK, THE FORMATION ANALYSIS HAD THIS MANAGED WETLAND AT THIRTY TWO AND A HALF INCHES PER YEAR.

SO THAT'S ABOUT NINETY SEVEN THOUSAND ACRE FEET OF DEMAND.

NOW THAT'S THAT'S NOT A THAT'S NOT LIKE, THAT'S A LIE.

THAT WATER IS ACTUALLY OCCURRING.

THAT'S A LOT OF THAT'S RAINFALL.

BUT A LOT OF IT'S ALSO APPLIED WATER.

IT'S WATER GOING ON OVER SAID NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

IT'S WATER GOING ON A LOT OF THOSE THOSE AREAS THAT ARE OUT THERE.

AND SO IT'S REAL WATER THAT'S PART OF THE PICTURE.

BUT IT'S NOT AND THAT WAS WHERE WE STARTED GOING.

OK, AHA. SOMETHING IS OFF HERE.

SO GO AHEAD. GO NEXT SLIDE.

SO NOW HERE AGAIN IS THIS MERCED SUB-BASIN AND GSA WITH WET MANAGED WETLANDS IN IT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND ACRE FEET.

THE NEXT SLIDE YOU CAN SEE NOW WHEN WE REMOVED IT FROM ALL THOSE DIFFERENT YEAR TYPES, NOT

[01:10:03]

ONLY DID IT FLATTEN OUT A LITTLE BIT, IT ALSO LOWERED DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO NOW ONE MORE CLICK THAT IT TRENDS FROM THE FORMATION DATA SHOW THIS ET ANALYSIS OVER TIME, FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTEEN THOUSAND DROPPING DOWN INTO THREE NINETY COMING BACK UP CURRENTLY. WELL, I SHOULD SAY CURRENTLY IN 2018, IT'S FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND.

SO IT'S UP FROM WHERE IT'S BEEN AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT 19 AND 20 ARE, BUT THEY MAY BE ALSO HIGHER. AND THEN NEXT FOR COMPARISON, THE 13 AND 15 DATA, THOSE ARE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS FROM THE WATER THAT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE, RIGHT? TWENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET OVER THAT KIND OF QUANTITY.

WE'RE NOW KIND OF IN THAT SAME.

ALL RIGHT. THIS IS MORE REASONABLE.

BUT STILL, WHY MIGHT THERE BE A LITTLE DIFFERENCE? WHY SHOULD WE HAVE CONFIDENCE IN BOTH FOR THEIR PURPOSES? SO NEXT CLICK, LIKE THE ET COMPARISON FACTORS IS IMPORTANT HERE IN THE FORMATION DATA SET, THERE IS 30 DIFFERENT CROP TYPES WITH DIFFERENT FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH MONTHLY ET DATA. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SEE ALMONDS WITH FORTY-TWO INCHES A YEAR AS THE AVERAGE OVER THAT 2010 TO 2018 PERIOD.

FORTY-TWO INCHES WAS AVERAGE.

SOME YEARS IS A LITTLE BIT LOWER, SOME YEARS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.

AND THAT A LOT OF THAT DEPENDS ON THE ACTUAL HEAT DAYS, THE AMOUNT OF RAIN THAT MIGHT BE HAPPENING IN THE SOIL BECAUSE IT'S ALSO MEASURING SOIL EVAPORATION.

SO IF YOU HAVE SOME REALLY WET SOILS THAT MAYBE NEVER WERE IRRIGATED, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO EVAPORATE MORE DURING THE YEAR.

SO COMPARED TO WOULD OCCUR AND JUST HAD ALL ORCHARDS AT THIRTY SEVEN.

SO WE START TO SEE SOME VARIANCES THERE.

GRAPES, THE FORMATION HAD THIRTY-TWO.

THE WATER TURN, HAD TWENTY SIX AND A HALF, ALFALFA ABOUT THE SAME THIRTY-EIGHT VERSUS THIRTY-SEVEN. AGAIN THOSE WERE AVERAGES.

THE REASON WHY SOME OF THAT IS IMPORTANT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE ALMONDS.

FORTY TWO VERSUS THIRTY SEVEN.

THAT'S FIVE INCHES.

RIGHT. THAT'S ALMOST A HALF A FOOT.

AND WE HAVE TWENTY THOUSAND IRRIGATED ACRES OF ALMONDS IN OUR DATA SET AND IN THIS KIND OF TIME FRAME. SO THAT'S TEN THOUSAND ACRE FEET RIGHT THERE.

AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENTIAL OF TEN THOUSAND.

TWENTY THOUSAND. SO I MEAN FIFTY PERCENT OF IT CAN BE JUST IN THAT NUMBER THERE.

SO WHAT THAT TELLS ME IS, OK, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS DATA IS ACTUALLY USEFUL.

IT'S STILL MIGHT BE HIGH.

IT MIGHT BE LOW. THE WATER CURRENT USE OF THE METRIC MIGHT BE HIGH, MIGHT BE LOW, BUT IT'S ALL RELATIVELY THE SAME AND IT'S SHOWING PATTERNS THAT ARE THE SAME.

SO IT'S USEFUL NOW FOR US TO THINK ABOUT HOW IT LOOKS ACROSS OUR BASIN, HOW THE TRENDS MAY BE LOOKING. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR US NOW STARTING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DIFFERENT DEMAND REDUCTION CONCEPTS? IT ALSO, I THINK, ADDS FAITH THAT THE DATA THAT'S IN THOSE MODELS IN THE GSP AND EVERYTHING ARE FINE.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO REASON TO QUESTION THAT.

AGAIN, IT'S A GUIDANCE MODELING.

MAYBE DOWN THE ROAD WE CAN LOOK AT SOME FURTHER REFINEMENTS.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S THOSE ARE ALL QUESTIONS THAT ARE FINE.

BUT THIS DOESN'T IMPEACH THE GSP'S BUDGET.

AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT FACTOR TO RECOGNIZE HERE.

THIS IS USEFUL FOR US TO START TO LOOK AT FOR PLANNING, BUT IT ALSO DOESN'T IMPEACH THE DATA WE HAVE GOING FORWARD.

THAT MAKES SENSE. ANY QUESTIONS YET? SO, GREG, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.

ONE AT A TIME. I WILL DO THAT, SIR.

SO THIS DOESN'T AFFECT THE GSP ESTIMATE OF SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER YIELD.

CORRECT. SO THIS IS LOOKING LIKE JUST AN INCREASED DEMAND FROM AGRICULTURE, NOT AN INCREASE IN AVAILABLE SUSTAINABLE YIELD, BECAUSE IT'S ONLY LOOKING AT WHAT THE ET IS.

RIGHT.

RIGHT. SO THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD NUMBER OF FIVE SEVENTY THAT WAS IN THE GSP AND THEN IT HAD THESE WE'RE GOING TO SUBTRACT THINGS AND THERE'S STILL THAT'S WHERE ALL THE DISCUSSION IS, IS HOW MUCH. WE ACTUALLY SUBTRACT THAT FIVE 570 MIGHT BE A LITTLE HIGHER OR MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT LOWER IF YOU USE THE DIFFERENT DATA SET, BUT THEN EVERYTHING ELSE WOULD BE RELATIVELY THE SAME.

ALSO, THEIR TOTAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION THAT DROVE THAT NUMBER WOULD BE VARIANCE.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE ONE NUMBER CHANGES, BUT THEN THE OTHER NUMBERS DON'T CHANGE.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE WATCHING WATER LEVELS, AS YOU WELL KNOW.

THAT'S OUR INDICATOR.

THE REST OF THIS IS REALLY GUIDANCE.

THIS ET STUFF IS GUIDANCE.

I THINK WHAT IT TELLS US IS WE CAN START TO TRUST SATELLITE REMOTE SENSING, WHETHER IT'S WHOEVER WE MAY USE IN THE FUTURE GOING FORWARD TO DO ANY KIND OF PARCEL BASED ANALYSIS IF WE'RE DOING THAT, TO TIE TO ANY TO CREATE ANY KIND OF ASSISTANCE TO THE LANDOWNERS TO SAY THIS IS WHAT I'M ACTUALLY USING COMPARED TO MAYBE IF WE GET TO A BUDGETS OR NOT.

I DON'T, ALL THAT STILL HAS TO BE DISCUSSED.

BUT THE WE SHOULD HAVE TRUST THAT THIS THESE ARE FUNCTIONAL TOOLS.

BUT I DON'T THINK IT CHANGES ANY OF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THE NUMBERS ON THAT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, ERIC, WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT. SOMEWHAT SO 2015 WAS KIND OF THE BASELINE YEAR, I BELIEVE, IN THE GSP FOR A LOT OF

[01:15:05]

THE DATA. THE ACCORDING TO THIS DATA, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S 54,000 ACRE FEET OF ADDITIONAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN 2018.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, ABOUT ABOUT THAT.

NOW AGAIN, RECOGNIZE THAT 2015.

WAS THEY ACTUALLY ALL THE BUDGETS HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME SO THEY, I PULLED 2015 BECAUSE THEY GAVE US 2015 ACREAGE DATA AND THEN THEY HAD AN ET NUMBER THAT I DON'T THINK THAT ANY NUMBER VARIED BY YEAR.

SO THAT OBVIOUSLY CHANGES SOME OF THE CALCULUS AND THOSE WATER BUDGETS AND OTHER THINGS.

BUT WHAT YOU'RE INDICATING IS THAT AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU MAY SEE, BECAUSE I CAN ALSO HELP ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THERE'S A TREND THAT'S LOOKING LIKE IT'S UPWARD FOR OUR BASIN AS A WHOLE.

THAT'S THE KEY.

AND THAT KIND OF TIES INTO THIS QUESTION OF, WELL, WHAT IS THE RIGHT WHEN WE'RE THINKING ABOUT A FIVE YEAR TARGET FOR DEMAND REDUCTION? AND THIS IS WHERE THE AD HOC GROUP WAS STARTING TO HAVE THE CONVERSATIONS FOR THAT FIVE YEAR MOU IS WHAT MIGHT BE A REASONABLE AND A TARGET TO PUT OUT THERE TO HELP THIS BOARD MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT STARTING TO MOVE FORWARD OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.

WE WEREN'T SURE WHAT THAT WHERE THAT NUMBER KIND OF SHOULD FALL.

AND IT ALSO MATTERED WHETHER HOW MUCH DIFFERENT WE MIGHT BE THAN WHAT WAS BEING USED FOR THE MODELING. SO IN THAT CONTEXT, IT LOOKS LIKE THE TREND IS GOING IN A DIRECTION WE PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO SEE UNLESS THERE WAS A LOT MORE SURFACE WATER THAT WAS ALSO HELPING US, WHICH IS POSSIBLE.

SO WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IS, ONE, WE'RE NOT REMOVING 2017 WAS A VERY WET YEAR, SO THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF EFFECTIVE 2017, 2018 WAS A MORE NORMAL-ISH IF THERE IS SUCH A THING YEAR.

SO WE MIGHT HAVE SEEN THE APPLIED WATER ABOUT THE SAME IN 17 AND 18 AND IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THAT MUCH HIGHER THAN FIFTEEN WHEN THERE WASN'T THAT MUCH RAIN TO CONTRIBUTE AND THERE WAS MORE APPLIED WATER.

SO THE OVERALL ET MIGHT BE TRENDING UP, BUT THE APPLIED WATER PART, THE I DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY WALK AWAY AND SAY, OH MY GOD, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEE-SAW PLANTING EVERYWHERE AND EVERYTHING MUST CHANGE BECAUSE THIS REPRESENTS ALL WATER CONTRIBUTING TO ANNUAL GROWTH.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GETTING YOUR QUESTION.

I'M JUST PUTTING MORE CONTEXT AROUND THINGS.

I'LL GO TO QUESTION TWO.

IT'S IN SOME WAYS MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD.

AT THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE THIS LAST MONDAY, A STATEMENT WAS MADE THAT THE SATELLITE DATA CAN'T BE ACCURATELY CALIBRATED NOW BECAUSE MERCED COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE A STATION THAT MEETS ALL THE AND THERE'S A NEED FOR A NEW DATA. AND I THINK THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CROPPING CURRENTLY AROUND WHERE THE CURRENT SO WITH THAT REFERENCE LOOKING AT? I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S ULTIMATELY A QUESTION FOR THE ENTITIES THAT ARE DOING THE ALGORITHMS THAT USE BOTH LAND BASED WEATHER DATA AND THE SATELLITE ANALYSIS.

I KNOW THAT THE THE VENDOR THAT MADERA COUNTY HAS HIRED AND IS STARTING A MULTI-YEAR PROGRAM WITH USES A MULTITUDE OF DIFFERENT WEATHER STATIONS, GROUND STATIONS, NOT JUST THERE ALSO HAS BEEN SOLICITING AND RECEIVING INPUT FROM FARMERS WHO HAVE THEIR OWN WEATHER STATIONS THAT ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK, INPUT THAT IS GETTING ALSO INCORPORATED. SO THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS TO TRY AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

DOES THAT YOU KNOW, FIRST OFF, I WOULD NEVER TAKE ANY ONE OF THESE NUMBERS AS YET SAYS OUT TO THE ONE ACRE FOOT LEVEL OR A HALF OR A QUARTER OF AN INCH OR SOMETHING.

I MEAN, THESE ARE ALL THEY ARE GUESSES RIGHT THERE, BUT THEY'RE EDUCATED GUESSES AND THEY ARE DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT.

EXCUSE THE CHANGES WE'RE SEEING ARE RELATIVE TO THE PRIOR YEARS AND THE PRIOR CONDITIONS IN THOSE OTHER TOOLS OR EVEN IN THE FORMATION TOOL.

AND WHEN OTHER PEOPLE ARE OFFERING LAND IQ METRIC OTHERS, THEY ALSO WILL OFTEN OFFERED A COUPLE ALL OF THE ROOT ZONE MODELS WITH IT SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY TRY AND MANAGE WHAT'S EFFECTIVELY THE FLIP SIDE, THERE'S SOME ENTITIES DOWN THE VALLEY THAT ARE SETTING A ALLOCATION THAT JUST SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO GET POINT SEVEN ACRE FEET OF RAIN CONTRIBUTED EVERY YEAR AND

[01:20:02]

MAYBE EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE WE'LL CHANGE IT.

I DON'T CARE IF IT'S A WET YOU'RE A DRY YEAR.

YOU GET THAT MUCH. SO THAT JUST COMES OUT OF AND THEY ONLY LOOK TOTAL ET.

SO THEY LOOK AT THE TOTAL ET FOR THE PARCEL.

THEY GIVE YOU A POINT SEVEN ACRE FEET FOR THAT, FOR RAIN, AND THEN THEY GIVE YOU SOME CREDIT FOR A SUSTAINABLE YIELD AND SOME OTHERS.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS TO KIND OF LOOK AT THIS.

AGAIN, IT ALL TIES BACK TO WHAT ARE OUR GROUNDWATER LEVEL IS DOING.

ARE THEY GOING TO START TRENDING IN THE DIRECTIONS WE WANT THEM TO TREND? WE WERE LACEY AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING TO TRY AND CORRELATE SOME OF THIS DATA TO WHERE THE GROUNDWATER TRENDS ARE GOING IN THE GROUNDWATER MONITORING.

THERE'S SOME CHALLENGES IN THAT.

BUT I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING TO CONTINUE FORWARD.

THERE'S A LOT OF DATA THAT WAS IN THE GSP AND IN THE MODEL THAT WAS USED FOR THE GSP.

THAT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF DATA POINTS THAT ARE IN THIS TIME FRAME.

A LOT OF THEM MAYBE ENDED EARLY, YOU KNOW, 2010, 2013.

A FEW OF THEM HAVE LATER DATES.

SO THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO START LOOKING AT THIS A LITTLE MORE MATCHED AND SEE IS THERE A CORRELATION WITH GROWLERS LEVELS AND GOING THE OTHER WAY.

THAT MIGHT TELL US SOME THINGS, BUT MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE CORRELATION DOESN'T EXIST ALSO.

WE DON'T KNOW YET. THANK YOU SO MUCH, GREG.

EXCUSE ME, GREG, YOU MADE A COMMENT EARLIER.

I JUST WANT TO YOU MADE THE YOU USE THE TERM GUESS WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE WATER, BUT DID YOU MEAN A IT'S AN ACCURATE NUMBER.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW ACCURATE OR DID I.

THAT'S A FAIR POINT. I DID.

I HEARD MYSELF SAY GUESS.

AND I'M LIKE AND I IMMEDIATELY HEARD PEOPLE GO LIKE, WELL, SO WHAT'S THE POINT? BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE WATCHING, JUST.

SO, APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP.

IT IS THESE ARE BASED ON SCIENTIFICALLY VETTED ALGORITHMS. THERE'S VARIANCES IN THOSE ALGORITHMS, BUT THEY STILL HAVE SOME SUBJECTIVITY TO THEM.

SO THE FACT THAT WE SEE IN 2018 FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED IN TWENTY EIGHT, CAN YOU GO BACK A SLIDE, THE 2018 NUMBER THERE ARE FOUR AND FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT.

OR MORE IMPORTANTLY, LET'S LOOK AT THE FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND FORTY IN 2015 COMPARED TO WHAT IT IT'S DEPENDENT ON, ON SEVERAL LITTLE THINGS LIKE THOSE DEMAND FACTORS BY THE CROP TYPE.

HOW WILL WE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON ON THOSE GROUNDS.

RECOGNIZE THAT THE 2016 LAND USE WE SEE IN THE SATELLITE.

GO AHEAD AND GO FORWARD AGAIN. THAT LAND USE IMAGE THAT WE SEE THAT HAPPENS TO BE PARCEL ET FOR 2010, BUT IT IS ONLY LOOKING AT ALL THE PARCELS THAT WERE INDICATED IN THE 2016 D.W.R LAND USE ANALYSIS.

THAT SAID, THERE'S AG GOING ON THERE, THERE'S PRODUCTION AG OR THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, MIGHT BE IDLE LAND, BUT IT'S IT'S CONSIDERED AGRICULTURAL LANDS.

THERE MAY BE OTHER LANDS THAT HAVE GONE IN SINCE SIXTEEN OR THAT WERE THERE ARE SHOWING UP THERE THAT WEREN'T PLANTED IN 2010.

AND SO THE SIGNATURE MIGHT LOOK DIFFERENT BETWEEN 2010 AND 2018 BECAUSE IT'S ONLY SEEN IT'S APPLY WHATEVER WAS ON THE GROUND IN 2016, BUT USING THE ACTUAL ET ANALYSIS.

SORRY I KEEP WALKING AWAY FROM THE MICROPHONE.

THE ACTUAL ET DATA FROM 2010, ALL THE READS, ALL THE WEATHER DATA, BUT APPLIES TO ONLY THE PARCEL THAT THEY THOUGHT HAD SOMETHING ON IT.

BUT THEY MIGHT HAVE SAID, LOOK, IT'S GOT ALMONDS BUT IN 2010 IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN BEANS AND IF IT WAS BEANS IT'S GOING TO LOOK A LOT DIFFERENT SIGNATURE WISE, BUT IT STILL HAS ET.

I'VE SEEN SOME PLOTS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY YOU COULD DEFINITELY TELL MATURITY, GROWTH OF A TREE VERSUS WHEN IT WAS GROWING.

SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WHEN THEY JUST USE LAND USE WAS X IN THIS YEAR.

AND THEN THEY DID A, YOU KNOW, TEN, FIFTEEN YEAR SCALE.

YOU CAN SEE WHEN IT WAS JUST A PLANTED TREE GROWING UP VERSUS ANOTHER CROP TYPE WAS IN THERE BEFORE, SO THE DATA IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD, WE JUST CAN'T, I CAN'T TELL YOU IF IT'S 454 OR 379.

SORRY. IN THESE COMPARISONS TO FOUR HUNDRED OR THREE SEVENTY NINE FOR TWENTY FIFTEEN OR MAYBE IT WAS FOR NINETY TWO, IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THAT IT'S THE MAGNITUDES, IT'S THE GOING UP, GOING DOWN THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING.

DOES THAT HELP? THANK YOU FOR MAKING SURE I CLARIFIED THAT.

SO HERE WE SEE PARCEL ET FOR 2010 AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE ARROW POINTING TO THE 2010 BAR AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE IS JUMPING OUT TO 2018.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO CREATE THE IMAGES FOR ALL THE IN BETWEENS.

IT SOMETIMES IS INTERESTING, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ZOOM IN AND WE'LL LOOK AT A COUPLE OF ZOOM IN HERE IN A MOMENT. WHEN YOU ZOOM IN AND YOU GO YEAR BY YEAR, YOU CAN SEE SOME INTERESTING THINGS, ESPECIALLY WHERE MAYBE IT WAS A REAL CROP GOING ON AND IT'S BEEN PULLED OUT AND PLANTED.

AND SUDDENLY THE ET DROPS DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE YOU BASICALLY HAVE STICKS GROWING FOR A YEAR AND THEN IT STARTS RAMPING BACK UP UNTIL IT'S NOW AT SOME PRODUCTION LEVEL.

AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE THINGS.

AND IT'S VERY INTERESTING TO SEE WHEN YOU LOOK AT A SATELLITE IMAGE AT THE SAME TIME AS

[01:25:02]

LOOKING AT THE RASTER COLOR, AS LOOKING AT THE BAR GRAPH.

SO WE JUST DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO DO THAT YET BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THOSE OTHER ANOMALIES AND MAKE SURE WE FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THE DATA NEXT SLIDE.

SO LET'S LOOK AT THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES.

WE HAD ALSO ASKED FOR THE DATA WHERE WE COULD BREAK IT DOWN INTO THESE ZONES EASILY.

SO THEY CLASSIFIED ALL THESE THINGS.

SO IT'S EASY FOR US TO GO PULL IT OUT AND BE ABLE TO DO THIS.

IF YOU RECALL, WE HAD HAD PRESENTED ON THESE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES, THERE'S SIX OF THEM.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SAY THESE ARE THE ONES AND THEY'RE GOING TO HOLD IN PLACE FOR.

WE TALKED ABOUT FOUR. WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT NUMBERS.

BUT INTERESTINGLY, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF DOING THESE KIND OF EXERCISES, WE'RE LOOKING AT ET, MAYBE LOOKING AT OTHER ELEMENTS.

THIS KIND OF A LITTLE BIT MORE SMALLER GEOGRAPHIC SCALE IS HELPFUL FOR US RATHER THAN THE ENTIRE SUB BASIN GSA BECAUSE IT'S SO GEOGRAPHICALLY DIFFERENT.

SO NEXT SLIDE, GO AHEAD.

SO THESE ARE GOING TO BE SMALL, BUT THEY'RE ALL ON THE SAME SCALE.

SO THEY'RE ALL AT A SCALE OF ZERO TO ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET.

SO HERE IN ZONE ONE, WE'RE AT ABOUT 80.

BETWEEN 60 AND 80,000 IS WHAT THAT NUMBER IS COMING.

GO AHEAD AND CLICK.

ZONE TWO. WE'RE WAY DOWN AT ABOUT 20,000 AND IT'S PRETTY FLAT NOW.

RECALL ZONE ONE AND ZONE TWO.

ARE THESE THE ZONE ONES, THAT NORTHERN PART? A LOT OF THE RANGELAND AREAS.

SO WE'RE ONLY THIS IS ONLY THE ET THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE PARCELS THAT WE'RE UP IN THAT AREA. SO IT'S NOT ALL THE RANGELAND, IT'S ONLY THE GROWTH AREAS.

ZONE TWO IS IS STARTING TO DROP DOWN INTO THE SOUTHERN END OF THAT EASTERN EDGE.

GO AHEAD NEXT.

ZONE THREE WERE UP AT OVER ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND NEARING HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET. ZONE FOUR NEXT IS ABOUT ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND.

ZONE FIVE IS IN THE EIGHTY THOUSAND TO NINETY THOUSAND RANGE.

AND THEN ZONE SIX, IS PRETTY FLAT THERE.

THAT DASH LINE, YOU SEE, IT'S JUST A IT'S EXCELS LINEAR TREND LINE.

I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE MATH IS THEY USE FOR THAT.

SO YOU TAKE IT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.

BUT IT IS INTERESTING WHAT IT TRIES TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR LITTLE.

THAT IS THE END OF OUR PRESENTATION.

OH, NO, SORRY. I TAKE THAT BACK THERE A COUPLE OF MORE.

I WANT TO JUST ZOOM IN ON A SPOT HERE SO YOU COULD SEE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE VARIANCES THAT OCCUR. THIS IS A 2011 IMAGE AND THIS IS KIND OF DOWN IN ZONE FOUR.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO PICK ON ANYBODY.

THERE'S JUST SOME INTERESTING THINGS THAT YOU CAN NOTE HERE.

YOU SEE THE CIRCLES, OBVIOUSLY, THOSE ARE CENTER PIVOT AREAS THAT ARE OUT THERE.

SO THEY SHOW UP PRETTY PREDOMINANTLY.

NEXT SLIDE, YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE THE BYPASS CUTTING THROUGH THERE FROM THE LOWER RIGHT, CUTTING DIAGONALLY AND THEN EXITING RIGHT UP NEAR THE UPPER LEFT HAND CORNER.

THIS IS A 2013.

YOU SEE A LOT OF THE SAME SORT OF COLORATION, BUT THERE'S A FEW VARIANCES.

YOU START TO SEE A FEW THINGS HAPPENING IN SOME PLACES.

NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE 2015 .

I THINK WHAT'S INTERESTING HERE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT 2011 ABOVE IT ALONG THE BYPASS.

RIGHT, SO THAT'S THE EAST SIDE BYPASS AREA IS A LOT GREENER BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT MORE WATER IN 2011 AND 2015.

SO YOU HAD A LOT, THAT'S ALL THE, THAT'S A LOT OF THE REPAIRING AND VEGETATION AND THINGS THAT ARE GROWING ALONG THAT ARE SHOWING UP AS CONSUMING A LOT MORE WATER BECAUSE THERE WAS MORE WATER THERE, BOTH FROM RAIN AND JUST FLOWING THROUGH THE BYPASS.

NEXT SLIDE, YOU ALSO SEE THAT IN 2017 COMPARED TO 2015, YOU CAN SEE THE REALLY DRY AREA VERSUS VERY HIGHER ET IN THAT AREA ALONG THE CHANNEL, ALMOST TO THE POINT OF BEING BLUE, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE HIGHEST USE THROUGHOUT BECAUSE IT WAS WET FOR SUCH A LONG PERIOD.

IT HAD HIGH FLOWS, ET CETERA, BECAUSE IT WAS RAINING BYPASS WATER.

RIGHT. IT WAS RUNNING FLOODWATER OUT THROUGH THAT FOR A LONG PERIODS.

SO ANYWAY, THERE ARE SOME INTERESTING OTHER THINGS THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT, SOME OF THE VARIANCES DOWN IN THE JUST ABOVE THE CIRCLES.

THERE'S THAT KIND OF RECTANGLE AREA THAT'S A LITTLE MORE YELLOW IN 2017.

AND COMPARED TO THE OTHER YEARS, IT'S MUCH MORE OF AN ORANGE OR RED THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT PROBABLY SOMETHING IS STARTING TO MATURE THROUGH THOSE AREAS.

MAYBE OR THEY MAYBE THE LANDS WERE FOLLOWED FOR A LITTLE BIT AND THEY ARE COMING BACK INTO SOME ACTIVITY. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT SATELLITE DATA FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE YEARS.

BUT THIS IS THE KIND OF STUFF GETTING TO THE POINT ABOUT PARCEL DATA.

THIS IS THERE AT THE PARCEL LEVEL.

WE CAN ACTUALLY GO.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE PARCEL ID STUFF.

I'M NOT ABSOLUTELY SURE.

THE THING IS, IS WE DON'T WANT TO START GOING DOWN THAT PATH AT THIS POINT.

[01:30:03]

WE'RE NOT SITTING HERE LOOKING TO TRY AND PULL OUT EVERYBODY'S HISTORIC USE.

THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THE BOARD WANTS TO START TO DO, IS HELP PEOPLE GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THINGS ARE.

BUT I WOULD SAY WE'D WANT TO GET 19 AND 20 DATA TO GET A MORE UP TO SPEED INFORMATION BEFORE WE DO THAT. SO NOW THAT IS THE END OF THE SLIDE SHOW.

GREG, IN THE HANDOUT, THE MAPS, THAT IS THE ONE MAP THAT FOR SOME REASON IT SHIFTED.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHY WHEN IT PRINTED, BUT THAT MAP IS THE ONE THAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING.

THAT'S THE MAP WE SEE ON THE SCREEN.

AND I BELIEVE WE CAN TRY AND REPOST OR REPRINT FROM THIS FROM THE POWERPOINT, BECAUSE THAT WAS A PDF. AND IT AND I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY I PRINTED THAT PDF BEFORE I WENT AND TRIED TO REDUCE THAT FILE SIZE.

SO ANYWAY, WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN SHOULD BE WHAT'S ON THE PAPER, BUT PAPER IS WRONG.

JUST SO PEOPLE WATCHING AT HOME.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT. WE HAVE EIGHT PEOPLE WATCHING.

IF ANYBODY WAS WONDERING.

A PARTY OUT THERE.

WE'LL MAKE THESE SLIDES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND PUT THEM ONLINE.

OK, THANK YOU.

WELL, THAT WAS A THOROUGH PRESENTATION.

DID YOU EXPECT ANYTHING DIFFERENT? NO, ACTUALLY, I DID.

LACEY.

WE ARE GOING TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT TO OUR TO OUR OTHER SLIDE OF WHERE IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS INFORMATION.

ANY QUESTIONS ? NOPE.

SO NOW, BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE STARTING TO GATHER, WE WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT POTENTIAL ACTIONS TO REDUCE GROUNDWATER USE IN AT THE JANUARY BOARD MEETING.

WE DID GET OUR REQUEST TO STAFF FROM BOARD MEMBER TO START REACHING OUT TO SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORING BASINS JUST TO GET SOME IDEAS ON WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OTHER GSA OR SOME OTHER GSA ACTIVITIES.

SO I DID REACH OUT TO SOME COUNTY LEVEL COUNTERPARTS IN OTHER VALLEY COUNTIES REGARDING DEMAND REDUCTION ACTIVITIES THAT GSA IS IN CRITICALLY OVERDRAFT BASINS ARE UNDERTAKING.

AND THERE ARE VARIOUS LEVELS OF ACTIVITIES IN FRESNO COUNTY SIMILAR TO THE GSA IS HERE, THE GSA IS THERE.

THEY HAVE NOT YET ADOPTED ANY DEMAND REDUCTION POLICIES.

THEY'RE TAKING TIME TO GATHER THE NECESSARY DATA TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THEIR SITUATION.

AND THEY'RE STARTING TO DEVELOP SOME OF THOSE POLICIES, BUT THEY HAVEN'T PUT ANYTHING IN PLACE YET IN POLICIES OR ORDINANCES.

FURTHER SOUTH IN TULARE COUNTY, SOME OF THOSE GSAS HAVE STARTED ADOPTING SOME KIND OF TRANSITIONAL PUMPING ALLOCATIONS.

THEY CALCULATE THE DEMAND USING THE SIMILAR SATELLITE IMAGERY AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION, AND THEY'RE USING THAT AS AN INITIAL ALLOCATION.

AND THEN ALLOCATIONS OF SUSTAINABLE YIELD WERE MADE ON A PER ACRE BASIS FOR ALL PARCELS WITHIN THE GSA.

SO THEY GAVE AN EVEN ALLOCATION TO ALL PARCELS IN TULARE COUNTY.

THOSE GSAS ARE WORKING ON EXTRACTION FEES.

THEY DON'T HAVE THEM IN PLACE YET.

MOST OF THE GSA ARE PROPOSING A TIERED PRICING STRUCTURE FOR WHEN GROWERS EXCEED THE SUSTAINABLE ALLOCATION.

SO THOSE TEARS ARE BASICALLY A SUSTAINABLE ALLOCATION, A TRANSITIONAL PUMPING AMOUNT, WHICH IS THE AMOUNT ABOVE THE SUSTAINABLE ALLOCATION, BUT STILL WITHIN THE HISTORIC USE AND THEN AN AMOUNT ABOVE THE TRANSITIONAL PUMPING AND THE FARTHER AWAY FROM SUSTAINABLE YIELD THAT THEY GOT, THE MORE EXPENSIVE THAT WATER GOT TO THE WEST OF US IN THE DELTA MENDOTA BASIN. THEY'RE NOT IMPLEMENTING DEMAND REDUCTION POLICIES AT THIS TIME, BUT ONE OF THE GSAS OVER THERE HAS ADOPTED A WELL REGISTRATION POLICY.

AND SO THEY ARE REQUIRING THE REGISTRATION OF EVERY WELL IN THEIR GSA AND THAT MAY, IN THE FUTURE, SUPPORT AN EXTRACTION FEE THAT WOULD BE BASED OFF METERED WELLS.

SO THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT USING THE ET DATA.

THEY'RE METERING, LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY METERING WELLS.

[01:35:02]

OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH IN STANISLAUS COUNTY ARE NOT IN THE CRITICAL CONDITION OF OVERDRAFTS. SO THOSE GSAS ARE WORKING ON DEVELOPING GSPS, BUT THEY'RE REALLY IN THE PLACE THAT THIS BASIN WAS TWO YEARS AGO.

AND THEN, AS GREG HAD MENTIONED, MADERA COUNTY DID PUT IN PLACE AN ALLOCATION AS WELL.

OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH, THAT WAS THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUTTING AN ALLOCATION INTO PLACE FOR ALL OF THE WHITE AREA AND THE GSA THAT COVERED ALL OF THE WHITE AREA, WHICH IS THE COUNTY BY ITSELF.

GREG. ARE THERE ANY OTHER EXAMPLES YOU WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT? YEAH, I'M GOING TO ELABORATE ON A COUPLE OF THOSE AND THEN MAYBE TOUCH ON A FEW OTHERS.

ONE, WE'LL START WITH THE MADERA SITUATION.

THE BOARD DID ADOPT AN ALLOCATION APPROACH.

WE ARE GETTING CLOSE TO SETTING THAT SUSTAINABLE YIELD ALLOCATION VALUE.

BUT THEY ALSO CREATED KIND OF AN OPT IN OPT OUT CONCEPT BECAUSE THEY HAD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF GRAZING LANDS THAT MAY NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE.

SO WE CAN'T YOU KNOW, THERE'S A BUCKET OF YIELD AVAILABLE TO THE COUNTY, GSAS, AND THEY WANT TO SUBDIVIDE THAT OVER THOSE WHO WANT TO PARTICIPATE.

SO WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THAT ACREAGE.

SO THAT PLAYS INTO IT.

BUT THEY ARE ESTABLISHING THAT.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO KNOW, TOO, IS ALL THE FEE STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED OUT THERE ALL HAVE TO TIE SOMEHOW TO PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS OF SOME SORT, SOME BASIS.

YOU CAN'T JUST SAY I'M GOING TO DO A BEHAVIORAL BASE YOU OVERUSE, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE. THAT'S A VIOLATION OF 218.

SO THINGS HAVE TO TIE TO SOME SORT OF FUNDING BASIS.

AND A LOT OF TIMES I CAN TIE TO BUILDING PROJECTS, PAYING FOR RECHARGE FACILITIES, PAYING FOR WATER RIGHTS APPLICATIONS, PAYING FOR ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLIES, LIKE MAYBE, OK, I GOT TO GO BUY WATER ON THE MARKET TO REPLACE.

SO HERE'S WHERE MAYBE THE MARKET PRICE COMES IN.

SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO TRY AND CREATE THAT INTERSECTION, TOO, ON ANY OF THOSE FEES. SO IT'S NOT AN EASY TASK.

IT'S NOT ARBITRARY. MOST OF THE ONES THAT HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS ARE ALREADY IRRIGATION DISTRICTS WHERE THE GSA IS CONTIGUOUS WITH THE IRRIGATION DISTRICTS.

SO THERE'S A HISTORY OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE GROWERS.

AND SOME SORT OF FEE STRUCTURES AND INTERACTIONS AND THE GSA NOW LAYERING SOMETHING ON TOP OF THAT. SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE IN A SITUATION HERE IN THIS GSA OF, TO SOME DEGREE, CREATING A WATER DISTRICT.

YES, WE HAVE SOME DISTRICTS, SOME SOME AGENCIES THAT ARE TRULY FORMED WITHIN THE JPA.

THAT'S THIS GSA. BUT THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, THIS KIND OF LIKE CREATING A NEW DISTRICT.

SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF OF TIME NECESSARY JUST TO KIND OF GET THAT BALL ROLLING.

SEMI TROPIC IS ANOTHER ONE THAT HAS AN ALLOCATION APPROACH OUT THERE.

THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE STARTED IN 2017 WITH A BUDGET.

THEY TOLD ALL THEIR GROWERS, HERE'S WHAT YOUR BUDGET WAS.

HERE'S WHAT YOU ACTUALLY USED.

COME TALK TO US TO LET US KNOW IF THIS SEEMS OFF.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO CHARGES AT ALL HERE.

AND I BELIEVE THAT ROLLED INTO 2018 AND THEN NOW THEY'RE STARTING.

I THINK LAST YEAR THEY ACTUALLY STARTED INTO IF YOU WENT OVER YOUR BUDGET, YOU'RE GOING TO BE PAYING INTO FEES AND THEY HAVE A RAMPING DOWN PROCESS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

THE TO THE THAT WAS REALLY, I THINK THE ADS, THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT'S GOING ON WHERE, DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'RE BEHIND THE BALL WE'RE DEFINITELY NOT.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE SEEMED LIKE THEY'VE ADVANCED OR IN PLACES THAT THEY ALREADY WERE IN A GOOD PLACE.

AND A LOT OF WHAT THEY'RE ALLOCATING TIES TO THEIR SURFACE WATER RIGHTS AND CONTRACTS THAT THEY HAVE THAT ARE DISTRIBUTED THROUGH THE GROUND, THAT'S THERE'S SEVERAL PLACES THAT ARE DOING THAT.

ONE OTHER TRY COUNTIES HAS AN INTERESTING THEY ARE NOT USING REMOTE SENSING.

THEY'RE REQUIRING EVERYBODY TO REGISTER WELLS AND YOUR WELL.

REGISTRATION BY REGISTERING YOUR WELL, YOU ARE BASICALLY THEN COMMITTING YOUR PARCEL, BUT THEY ARE ALSO ALLOTTED A FAIR NUMBER OF LARGE GROWERS AND THAT THERE'S NOT THAT MANY NUMBER OF GROWERS, I THINK IN THAT TRI COUNTIES.

THAT'S A LOT OF THE LARRY LAKE BED AREA, BOSWELL AREA.

SO THEY'RE TAKING A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT APPROACH.

THEY'RE NOT USING REMOTE SENSING, BUT I THINK THEY ALSO YOU CAN COUNT ON ON A COUPLE OF HANDS THE TOTAL GROWERS, FOR THE MOST PART, I COULD BE WRONG THERE.

I SHOULDN'T SPEAK.

I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS.

SO IF YOU WANTED MORE INFORMATION ON SOME OF WHAT SOME OTHER BASINS ARE DOING, WE CAN INVITE SOMEBODY TO INVITE SOME OF THOSE TO COME AND TALK TO THE GSA AS WE MOVE FORWARD, IF THERE'S AN INTEREST THERE.

BUT WE DID REACH OUT AND TRY TO GET SOME EXAMPLES ON OTHER ALLOCATION APPROACHES, I

[01:40:05]

GUESS, MOVING INTO ALLOCATION APPROACH HERE.

WE WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT DIFFERENT OPTIONS, TO LOOK AT GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS AND MAYBE STARTING TO TAKE A LOOK AT AREAS OF THIS BASIN WHICH MIGHT THERE MIGHT BE LOWER HANGING FRUIT WHERE THERE ARE SOME EASY OPTIONS AND EASY THINGS THAT WE COULD DO TO ACHIEVE SOME OF THAT EARLY DEMAND REDUCTION WHILE THESE LONGER TERM PROGRAMS ARE BEING PUT INTO PLACE. GREG, DO YOU WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FOCUSING ON ON DIFFERENT AREAS? YEAH, AND LET ME JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT.

I THINK, TO THAT IT'S IT SEEMS LIKE THE EASY ANSWER TO JUST SAY LET'S GO CREATE AN ALLOCATION IN EVERY ACRE HAS SOMETHING.

BUT THERE'S A LOT TO THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE THERE'S ALL SORTS OF QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW IT RELATES TO WHO'S IN WHO'S NOT IN DO.

IS IT ONLY PER ACRE? IS IT SHARED OVER A LARGER AREA? IS THERE SOME HAVE A FIVE YEAR BLOCK THAT BASICALLY SAYS YOU'VE GOT A 12 ACRE FEET PER ACRE WITH NO MORE THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT PER YEAR, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF CROSS THOSE ACROSS TIME. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU BLOCKS OF WATER OVER FIVE YEAR PERIODS OR SOMETHING. SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF WAYS SOME PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO APPROACH THAT.

SO I THINK THAT THE ENTIRE CONCEPT OF ALLOCATIONS CAN ALSO BE DONE AT A DIFFERENT SCALE.

FOR INSTANCE, INSTEAD OF SAYING EACH ACRE IS GOING TO GET A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WATER THAT ROLLS UP WITH A PARCEL OR ROLLS UP INTO A FARM UNIT BASIS OR SOMETHING, YOU COULD WE COULD GET TO A PLACE THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR SUSTAINABLE NATIVE SUSTAINABLE YIELD. HOWEVER, THAT ULTIMATELY GETS DECIDED AS AN END GOAL FOR 2040, HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING WITH THERE.

AND WE COULD SAY, LET'S SUBDIVIDE THAT ACROSS OUR ZONES AND WE KNOW THIS ZONE GETS THIS MUCH, THAT ZONE GETS THAT MUCH AND THAT ZONE GETS THAT MUCH.

AND IT MIGHT RELATE TO HISTORIC USE.

IT MIGHT RELATE TO PROSPECTIVE USE.

I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS TO CONTEMPLATE THERE.

WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT GEOGRAPHIC ACTIONS.

OH, SORRY, GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS AT ALL, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY JUST HAVE TO BE ON A PER ACRE BASIS WITHIN PER PARCEL, WE COULD GO LARGER.

WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO NECESSARILY GO THERE IF WE'RE FINDING THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO OTHER ACTIVITIES, AS WHEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT PRELIMINARY ACTIONS, JUST COMPLETE THE REAL PROJECTS AND REAL OPTIONS.

BUT JUST HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, LET'S SAY WE DID LAND REPURPOSING, A FANCIER NAME FOR FALLOWING, ALTHOUGH IT COULD BE GOING TO DIFFERENT THINGS, GROWING DIFFERENT CROPS, HABITAT RELATIONS, EASEMENTS, WHATEVER.

IF YOU DID ENOUGH OF THAT, JUST AS IT WAS ONE WILD EXAMPLE, YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE TO ALLOCATE ANYTHING IF WE DID ENOUGH OF THAT TO TO HAVE THE RESULTANT EFFECT ON OUR GROUNDWATER LEVELS THAT WE ANTICIPATE IN THE GSP, THEN WHY WOULD YOU EVER HAVE TO GO TO ALLOCATIONS? YOU'VE SOLVED IT IN A DIFFERENT MANNER.

SO I JUST WANT EVERYBODY'S MIND TO KIND OF MAKE SURE WE'RE THINKING BROADLY.

THE ONLY ANSWER IS NOT JUST I'M GOING TO GIVE EACH ACRE A QUANTITY OF WATER I NEED TO WORK AND HOW WE MANAGE THIS BASIN SO THAT WE GET THE RESULTANT CHANGE STABILIZATION AND HOPEFULLY INCREASE THE RAISING OF GROUNDWATER LEVELS TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WE ARE WORKING SUSTAINABLY IN THIS BASIN AND NOT HAVING A LONG TERM OVERDRAFT.

SO, YOU KNOW, COUPLED WITH THAT ON THE ON THE KIND OF PRELIMINARY ACTIONS RELATES TO THE IMPORTATION OF WATER, MR. UPTON LEFT FOR A MOMENT.

THE YOU KNOW, THAT IS AN OFFSET, RIGHT.

SO THAT IS ALMOST EQUIVALENT TO A DEMAND REDUCTION IN SOME PLACES.

MAYBE THOSE KIND OF THINGS CAN BE EARLY IMPLEMENTORS THAT HELP US GET OFF OF GROUNDWATER.

SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT I THINK WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT MAYBE GEOGRAPHICALLY FOCUSED INTO OUR SUSTAINABILITY ZONES.

AND THAT DON'T NECESSARILY MEAN WE'RE GOING TO A PER ACRE ALLOCATION RIGHT OFF THE BAT, GOING TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TAKING SMALL STEPS, AS MR. KELLY WAS TALKING ABOUT AND REITERATED BY LACEY, WE CAN MAKE MOVEMENT FORWARD WITHOUT TRYING TO SOLVE IT ALL TODAY.

WE CAN'T YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY, OH, OK, HERE'S THE ANSWER.

EVERYBODY GETS THIS MUCH WATER.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT JUST YET.

SO LET'S TAKE SOME ACTIONS THAT START TO DEMONSTRATE TO OUR PARTNERS AND WE'LL DEMONSTRATE TO THE STATE WE ARE ACTUALLY HAVING SUCCESS TOWARDS OUR GOAL, WHICH IS STABILIZING GROUNDWATER LEVELS.

OUR GOAL IS NOT REDUCE DEMAND.

THAT'S LIKELY WHAT WE HAVE TO DO AS PART OF THIS, GETTING TO THAT GOAL OF STABILIZING GROUNDWATER LEVELS AND RAISING THEM.

SO LET'S BE THINKING ABOUT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE ON THESE ALLOCATION APPROACH CONCEPTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. GEOGRAPHICALLY, THERE MAY BE VALUE IN FOCUSING IN SOME AREAS OVER OTHERS. THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO TO DO SOME OF THESE NEAR-TERM ACTION PROJECTS

[01:45:06]

WHERE MAYBE TEMPORARY LAND REPURPOSING OR EVEN LONGER TERM REPURPOSING GET US THAT DEMAND REDUCTION WINDS, SO TO SPEAK, RIGHT OFF THE BAT OR IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS.

SO THAT'S ALL I ANYBODY HAVE THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS? AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS AND THOUGHTS AND DISCUSSION.

WELL, GREG, THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR YOU OR LACEY, BUT HOW QUICKLY DO YOU THINK FLOOD MARK IS GOING TO PLAY A ROLE IN PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES IN THAT PERMIT, I BELIEVE, COMES FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD.

AND THERE ARE SOME INTERIM APPROVALS THEY CAN MAKE.

AND I THINK THE FULL PROCESS TAKES LIKE SEVEN YEARS.

SO WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME, DO YOU THINK, THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY START TO SEE SOME ALLOCATIONS OF THOSE MANAGED FLOODWATERS BEING MADE FOR PEOPLE TO UTILIZE THOSE WATERS? I'M HAPPY I CAN TALK A LONG TIME ON THIS, BUT IF YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING FIRST, LACEY, I'LL DEFER. I'M GOING TO LET YOU TALK A LONG TIME ON THIS.

BUT I DO WANT TO JUST MENTION THAT WE DO HAVE THIS BASIN WIDE WATER RIGHTS APPLICATION, BUT THAT DOESN'T STOP AGENCIES FROM PUTTING IN APPLICATIONS FOR SOME OF THOSE TEMPORARY WATER RIGHTS AND THOSE STREAMLINED WATER RIGHTS, WHICH ARE THE PROCESSES THAT THE WATER BOARD LIKES AND IS REALLY PUSHING.

AND I THINK THOSE CAN GET THROUGH A LITTLE BIT FASTER THAN THIS BIG APPLICATION THAT WE SUBMITTED AS A BASIN.

SO IS THAT LIKE TWO TO THREE YEARS, GREG, ON WHICH PART OF TEMPORARY IS, YOU KNOW, ANYWHERE FROM A YEAR TO TWO YEARS OR YOU CAN HAVE IT IN PLACE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, LONGER TERMS OR, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TWELVE.

THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS.

THEY DID. BUT THE STREAMLINING OF THE PROCESS AND THE TEMPORARIES BASICALLY SAID IF YOU'RE WILLING TO TAKE WATER BETWEEN POINT IN DECEMBER AND THE 1ST OF MARCH, I THINK IS THE ONLY PERIOD OF TIME YOU'RE ALLOWED TO POTENTIALLY PETITION FOR THAT WATER.

AND YOU HAD TO DEMONSTRATE THINGS AND YOU HAD TO.

THEY ALSO SAID IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THAT STREAMLINE AND I'M KIND OF TRYING TO RECALL I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE DETAILS IN A LITTLE WHILE, BUT IT WAS ESSENTIALLY YOU COULD TAKE UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT IF YOU WERE AT A CERTAIN PLACE.

SO IF YOU'RE AT 90 PERCENT EXCEEDING ON THE FLOW FOR A PARTICULAR FOR LIKE THE PRIOR DAY WAS 90 PERCENT EXCEEDING, YOU COULD TAKE 10 PERCENT OF THE FLOW.

OK, THAT'S ENOUGH OF AN ANSWER.

BUT THANK YOU. SO IT WAS IT WAS STREAMLINED, BUT THERE WAS NOT A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY TO CHASE THERE. THE OTHER THING I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, I THINK WE SHOULD WELL, FLOOD-MAR HAS IS A TERM OF ART.

MORE IS THE IMPORTANT PART.

MANAGED AQUIFER RECHARGE.

THAT'S WHAT MAR STANDS FOR.

THE SOURCE OF WATER IS WHAT IS ALWAYS IN QUESTION.

WE'RE PURSUING. WE'RE PARTICIPATING WITH MID ON THIS WATER RIGHTS APPLICATION.

THERE ARE THESE POTENTIAL TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PETITIONS THAT YOU COULD PROCESS AND YOU COULD GO DOWN. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE COULD DO, WATER TRANSFERS AND GO BY WATER.

I KNOW SEVERAL OF THE LANDOWNERS IN OUR GSA OR THE DISTRICTS OR SOMETHING ARE WORKING WITH MID TO BUY WATER SUPPLIES.

THAT'S NOT FLOOD-MAR. THAT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT IS STRAIGHT UP.

I'M BRINGING NEW WATER IN INSTEAD OF GROUNDWATER.

OK, GREAT. THAT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN BUYING WATER FROM SAC VALLEY AND DOING SOME WEIRD EXCHANGE OR SOMETHING AND GETTING IT HERE.

SO THERE ARE THOSE KIND OF OPPORTUNITIES THAT CAN EITHER HAVE MANAGED AQUIFER RECHARGE, WHICH DIRECTLY RECHARGED OR IT'S IN LIEU CREDIT INTO THE GROUNDWATER WHICH WILL HELP OUR BASIN. SO THOSE THINGS ARE DOABLE.

NOW, IT ALL RELATES TO THE SOURCE OF THE WATER, NOT THE MAR PART.

WE HAVE A QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE.

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION, WHAT SPECIFIC.

IS THAT OKAY LACEY? YES, SEVERAL OF THE DISTRICTS IN THE ON THE JPA ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SUBMITTING TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATIONS, WHICH THEY'VE HIRED WAGNER IN BOSNIA, THE WATER RIGHTS ENGINEERS OUT OF SACRAMENTO.

SO THROUGH WORKING THROUGH ALL THEIR NEW STREAMLINED PROCESSES, THE ONE THEY'RE REALLY PUSHING PEOPLE NOW IS A FIVE YEAR TEMPORARY PERMIT.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.

IT SEEMS THE ONLY NEGATIVE WELL NOT THE ONLY NEGATIVE.

ONE OF THE NEGATIVES IS WE HAVE TO DO FEEDBACK INVOLVES FISH AND GAME.

SO THE STREAMLINED IS NOT ALWAYS NECESSARILY FAST, BUT THEY ARE PUSHING YOU THERE WITH THEIR FEE STRUCTURE ALONE.

[01:50:02]

SO THERE WILL BE.

IT'S NOT DECIDED WHICH AGENCIES ARE GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE TEMPORARY, BUT I THINK IT WILL BE IN PLACE BY NEXT WATER SEASON, BY NEXT DECEMBER.

YEAH. AND THE IDEA IS YOU GET A FIVE YEAR THAT WOULD TAKE YOU UP UNTIL THE TIME WE GOT THE PERMANENT RIGHT. OK, WELL, THANKS FOR THE UPDATE.

WELL, BOARD, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR.

I MEAN, THAT'S A PROBLEM WHEN YOU COVER STUFF SO THOROUGHLY, IT DOESN'T REALLY LEAVE A LOT OF CHANCE FOR QUESTIONS.

THE A COUPLE THAT I HAVE IS WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE THOUGHT OF ASKING THE GROWERS TO COME UP WITH A WATER USE PLAN TO GET THEM THINKING OF, HEY, I'M USING THIS WATER AND AT SOME POINT IN TIME, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUMP LESS.

UH-OH, I NEED TO START MAKING SOME SOME PLANS IN THE INTERIM.

IS THERE A WAY TO KIND OF USE THAT METHODOLOGY OR PROCESS TO BRING OUR GROWERS ON BOARD, ESPECIALLY IN THE WHITE AREA? YOU KNOW, IN THE DISTRICTS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE KIND OF DO THAT ALREADY, I GUESS.

BUT ANYWAY, IT'S JUST KIND OF WANTED TO KNOW WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS MIGHT BE OR GREG, SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY INPUT. NO, I HAVE A COMMENT, MR. CHAIR. SURE, SOMETIMES ROUNDING UP GROWERS TO FILL OUT SURVEYS AND DO PLANS IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S DIFFICULT. YOU CAN ASK THE WATER COMMISSION ABOUT THAT.

THEY'VE HAD THEY'VE BEEN AROUND FOR 15 YEARS AND STILL CAN'T GET EVERYONE TO SIGN IT, SIGN UP AND BUY IN. SO IT'S A NOBLE THOUGHT.

YOU KNOW, WE COULD CERTAINLY TRY.

AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO START PUTTING OUT TOO MUCH INFORMATION TO GROWERS, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE USEFUL TO IF WE TRUST THE DATA ENOUGH, IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T HURT TO I HAVE PUMPING DATA OF MY OWN AND BUT, YOU KNOW, IN MY OPINION, THE SOONER WE START FEEDING DATA TO GROWERS, IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE MORE BENEFICIAL.

BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

AND I THINK IF WE SUNSHINE THE DATE OF, YOU KNOW, JANUARY OF 2025 IS WHEN WE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY FORCED INTO REDUCTIONS TO SOME DEGREE, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. IT'S IT'S VOLUNTARY.

I MEAN, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING ON IT, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE REALLY ARE AND, YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY US, BUT THE GROWERS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE SUNSHINE THAT DATE OF ON THIS DATE, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN OR, YOU KNOW, OR MAYBE THERE'S A WAY TO TO TO SHARE THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN, THEN AT LEAST PUTS THAT DATE IN PEOPLE'S MINDS AND THEY KNOW I NEED TO START WORKING TOWARDS IT.

I DON'T KNOW. I JUST YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I JUST I HATE MR. KELLY'S WORDS, RIGHT.

THAT WE NEED TO WE NEED THIS PROCESS TO MOVE FASTER.

AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK AND BRAINSTORM OF IDEAS TO TO POTENTIALLY HAVE THAT HAPPEN. I MEAN, BUT THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT, BECAUSE I'VE HAD THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ASK ME, WHEN'S IT GOING TO START? WHEN ARE WE GOING TO START REDUCING? AND SO MAYBE MAYBE IT'S AS SIMPLE AS PUTTING A 2025 THING.

AND WE START WITH SOMETHING LIKE YOU SAID, AND THEN IT MAY EVOLVE NEXT YEAR AND THE YEAR AFTER. BUT AT SOME POINT THERE HAS TO BE A DATE IN SOMEONE'S MIND THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE UNTIL THIS TIME AND THEN.

RIGHT. RUBBER STARTS MEETING THE ROAD.

RIGHT. AND WELL, I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S RISK AND POTENTIALLY IN THAT WHETHER WE SHOULD BE SAYING SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED ALREADY.

YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN STARTED ALREADY.

WE'RE ALREADY BEHIND THE BALL.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE THAT'S WHY SIGMA GOT PASSED.

WE HAVE AN OVERDRAFT SITUATION AND WE HAVE TO START TO MANAGE IT.

I THINK THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST FIVE PLAN, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT DEMAND REDUCTION, OUTREACH AND EDUCATION, I THINK FRAMING THAT IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT.

ONE OF THE THINGS COULD BE, LOOK, WE HAVE TO HAVE A REDUCTION OF THAT IS, SOME NUMBER TEN THOUSAND FIFTEEN THOUSAND ACRE FEET BY FIVE YEARS FROM NOW IN IN THOSE ET NUMBERS, WHATEVER ET NUMBERS WERE WANTING TO TRUST AND USE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE HAVE TO BE THERE.

AND IF WE'RE NOT, WE'RE POTENTIALLY GETTING VISITS FROM THE STATE AND WE MAY GET VISITS FROM THE STATE BEFORE THAT.

THAT'S THE WAY WE HAVE TO FRAME IT, BECAUSE THE CHALLENGE WITH THE STATE AND WE PROBABLY HAVE TO REEMPHASIZE THIS AGAIN, IS PART OF THE THE INFORMATION YOU HATE TO JUST YOU HATE TO SAY YOU DO SOMETHING NOW BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO KEEP THAT BAD GUY OUT.

BUT THE REALITY IS THE STATE CAN COME IN AND IMMEDIATELY IMPOSE A PER WELL CHARGE AND A PER ACRE FOOT PUMPING CHARGE.

THAT'S PRETTY EXPENSIVE. AND EVERYBODY PAYS IT, REGARDLESS.

AND YOU HAVE NO CHOICE, NO ABILITY TO SAY NO, WE HAVE CONTROL OF OUR DESTINY BY MANAGING

[01:55:01]

THINGS EARLY. AND MY WORRY ABOUT TRYING TO JUST SAY, LOOK, LET'S JUST PUT A THING OUT THERE WITH, YOU KNOW, RUBBER HITS THE ROAD OF 2025, THAT IF WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY BEEN MAKING PROGRESS AND THE PROGRESS DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO HAVE THE EVERYBODY GOING TO HAVE AN ALLOCATION. EVERYBODY HAS TO REDUCE.

THESE ARE THE CHALLENGES WE RAN WE'VE RUN INTO AND OTHER PLACES OF LIKE EVERYBODY THINKS, OH, I HAVE TO DO 10 PERCENT.

EVERY FARM HAS TO DO 10 PERCENT.

WELL, NOT NECESSARILY. MAYBE GET OUT OF THIS GUY, DO ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

AND THIS GUY, SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE NOT DO ANY, THAT WORKS TOO.

BUT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO PROBABLY PAY TO GET THE ONE TO DO ONE HUNDRED PERCENT IN ORDER FOR THE OTHERS TO STAY.

THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE HAVE TO START SAYING.

WE GOT TO START MOVING DOWN AND THERE'S WAYS TO DO IT.

AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK THE OUTREACH WE REALLY NEED TO START PRESSING ON SOME SORT OF OUTREACH MATERIALS THROUGH FARM BUREAU MEETINGS, THROUGH YOU GUYS, ALL HIS ADVOCATES AND AMBASSADORS OUT TO THE DIFFERENT AREAS.

THERE'S HAS TO BE MORE OF THAT.

IT IS HARD. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THERE ANY GROWER OUT THERE, THEIR FULL TIME JOB IS GROWING.

IT'S NOT COMING AND LISTENING TO MEETINGS AND FILLING OUT FORMS, IT'S PRODUCTION.

RIGHT. THAT'S THIS.

THE FACT THAT YOU GUYS THAT OUR GROWERS ALSO SPEND TIME HERE IS PRETTY IMPRESSIVE.

THIS IS IT'S EASY FOR ME BECAUSE THIS IS MY JOB.

RIGHT? SO IT'S HARD.

AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET OUT THERE IN SOME WAYS AND BE CREATIVE ON THOSE THINGS.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK TO YOU ON THE BOARD THAT HAVE THOSE INSIGHTS, HOW THOSE BEST THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN. LET'S HAVE A.

YOU KNOW, LET'S HAVE A LITTLE BARBECUE DINNER OR SOMETHING OUT IN YOUR AREA AND HAVE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THERE AND JUST KIND OF TALK AND GET PEOPLE THINKING AND RECOGNIZE, YOU KNOW, SHOOT STUFF IS COMING.

I BETTER START DOING THIS.

OH, HEY, HERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY.

WE'RE GOING TO START LOOKING FOR VOLUNTEERS TO FALLOW SOME LAND AND FIGURE OUT AN INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THAT.

I MEAN, THERE'S THAT'S THE PLACE WHERE WE STARTED DOING SOME OF THAT MESSAGING.

I THINK THAT'S MY OPINION.

YEAH. BUT, YOU KNOW, THE MINDSET ON FALLOWING THE LAND IS THAT LAND IS GOING TO HAVE A WATER VALUE AND SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BUY IT.

THAT'S HOW YOU'RE GOING TO FALLOW LAND.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT'S LIKE LIKE MR. KELLY MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THE CREDITS AND THE TRADING, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE NEED TO YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE NEED AN AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT JUST WORKS ON HOW THAT SYSTEM IS GOING TO WORK.

RIGHT. I JUST THINK THAT.

BUT YOU'D HAVE TO BE ABLE TO YOU NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING IN ORDER TO KNOW YOU COULD TRADE SOMETHING. RIGHT. SO IF YOU IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO SAY MY FOLLOWING THIS LAND, IF YOU IF I CAME TO YOU RIGHT NOW AND I SAID, LOOK, I'M YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE CALCULUS IS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MATH IS, BUT THERE'S SOME VALUE THERE AND SAYS, I'LL GIVE YOU THE AN ANNUAL EQUIVALENT HERE TO PUT TO REST THIS LAND FOR FIVE YEARS OR WE WORK ON SOME OTHER PROGRAMS. SO YOU'RE ABOUT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE AT YEAR 20 OR YOU'RE 18, SOME ALMONDS OR SOMETHING, AND YOU'RE LIKE, FINE, I'LL PULL IT OUT AND THE REST THAT LAND AND YOU'RE GOING TO PAY ME SOME VALUE THAT I WOULD BE EARNING OR SOME OTHER THING WHILE WE TRY AND FIGURE THIS OUT. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

YEAH, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUY THE WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

RIGHT. GROWERS ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

RIGHT. BUT WE NEED TO START THE BUDGETARY ITEM NEEDS UP HERE, I THINK IS WHERE STAFF NEEDS TO START SAYING, OK, WELL, HOW MUCH MIGHT WE NEED? BECAUSE THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A 218 TO ASSESS PEOPLE, TO COLLECT THE MONEY, TO BE ABLE TO GO DO PAY FOR THAT.

OR WE LET THE GROWER THAT WANTS TO USE THE WATER.

WELL, I GUESS THAT THAT'S REALLY NOT GOING TO CUT WATER IF YOU IF YOU DO IT THAT WAY.

WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EXTRACTION FEES TOO, YOU KNOW.

YEAH. I MEAN, YOU START HITTING PEOPLE IN THE POCKETBOOK, THEY START THINKING, DO I WANT TO IRRIGATE THAT PASTURE OR NOT? RIGHT. YEAH, OK.

AND THAT I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO TO HAVE A COMMITTEE WORK ON SOME IDEAS ALONG WITH STAFF TO BRING IT TO THE FULL BOARD.

SOME OPTIONS, SOME IDEAS, OK.

GEORGE, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? YEAH, IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY ASKED BY GROWERS, WE'RE CONSTANTLY ASKED BY BANKERS, BY REALTORS, BY APPRAISERS, HOW MUCH DO YOU HAVE THAT CERTAIN? HOW MUCH DO YOU NOT HAVE? AND THIS UNCERTAINTY JUST KEEPS HANGING OUT THERE.

AND THEN THEY SAY, WELL, THE OTHER JUST OR OTHER COUNTIES, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER IS X..

WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER? WE DON'T HAVE A NUMBER.

AND IT'S WORSE THE LONGER WE GO UNTIL WE HAVE SOME ANSWER THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GIVE UP ON THAT. AND I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT THAT IT GETS FRUSTRATING WITH THE LONGER WE GO WITHOUT HAVING SOMETHING TO POINT TO.

[02:00:02]

YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HAVE A NUMBER WE JUST HAVEN'T VOTED TO MAKE IT THE NO.

I MEAN, HONESTLY, WE KIND OF BEAT AROUND THE BUSH, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THE NATIVE YIELD AND THEN FROM THERE, IT'S THESE OTHER FLOOD-MAR PROJECTS.

IT'S THE RECHARGE BASIN AND THAT'S THE YOU KNOW.

IT CHANGE THAT NUMBER.

BUT THAT'S ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS OR A GROUP BASIS, NOT THE BASIS BASIN.

DID YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT, GREG? YEAH, I THINK GETTING TO THAT THAT POINT IN THE ANALYTICS THAT WE'RE IN THE GROUP, OR AT LEAST INFERRED AND THE GSP HAD A NUMBER FOR SUSTAINABLE YIELD AND SUBTRACTION FOR SEEPAGE AND A RECOGNITION FOR THE URBAN APPROPRIATORS.

AND THERE WERE SOME SLIDES EVEN DISCUSSED WITHIN THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE THAT BASICALLY BROUGHT THAT NUMBER DOWN TO ABOUT 400,000 ACRE FEET, A LITTLE OVER SOMEWHERE IN THAT BALLPARK. JUST LET'S JUST ROUTE IT TO FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND.

AND THEN WE WERE SAYING THAT SHOULD BE THAT BUCKET OF WATER SHOULD BE SPLIT.

IT IS A RESULT OF EVERY ACRE OF LAND AND ITS GROSS ACRE IN THE IN EACH OF THE GSAS.

THAT'S HOW THAT WATER COMES TO BE.

SO THEREFORE, DIVIDE IT.

AND I THINK WE WERE 60 PERCENT AND MID OR MSGSA WAS LIKE THIRTY-EIGHT PERCENT OF THE GROSS AREA AND TURNER WAS A COUPLE PERCENT.

IF YOU JUST KIND OF RUN THAT MATH, ROUGHLY THAT 2040 NUMBER OUT THERE IS ABOUT TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THOUSAND ACRE FEET OF WATER GROUNDWATER THAT WE SHOULD HAVE AVAILABLE THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO USE ON A LONG TERM BASIS.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS SAYING WE'RE IN ABOUT FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF CONSUMPTION OR WE'RE AT 400,000 OR SOMEWHERE IN THAT REALM, THAT'S STARTING TO GIVE YOU A NUMBER, ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND, MAYBE IT'S KIND OF THAT 20 YEAR REDUCTION TARGET.

SO IF 10 PERCENT IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, THAT'S 10 TO 15 THOUSAND ACRE FEET OF TRYING TO REDUCE CONSUMPTIVE USE OF GROUNDWATER BY 10 TO 15 THOUSAND ACRE FEET IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THOSE ARE BALLPARKS THAT CAN BE HELPFUL TO GET THAT WORD OUT TO THE GROWER WITHOUT SAYING YOU GET AN ACRE FOOT.

AND AND HERE'S MY BASIS, BECAUSE NOW SOMEBODY'S GOING TO SAY, WELL, WHY DON'T I GET AN ACRE AND A HALF OR WHAT AM I GOING TO BUY FROM MID TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE I NEED TO GO PLANT I'M ABOUT TO MAKE A 20-YEAR INVESTMENT IN A NEW ORCHARD OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. I GET THAT PART OF THE CERTAINTY.

BUT I THINK THE PROBLEM IS IF WE PUT A NUMBER OUT THERE AND IT'S HAPPENED ELSEWHERE, YOU PUT A NUMBER OUT THERE THAT PEOPLE WANT TO JUST DO THAT STRAIGHT MATH AND SAY, OK, WE HAVE TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND AND WE HAVE, WHAT DO WE SAY, ABOUT 140,000 IRRIGATED ACRES? SHOOT.

THAT MEANS IN SOME NUMBER, RIGHT.

WELL, WHAT ABOUT THAT LAND THAT'S NOT IRRIGATING RIGHT NOW THAT HAS A RIGHT TO THAT WATER? ALSO, WE RESERVING SOME FOR THEM OR NOT, OR HOW ARE WE DOING WITH THAT? THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE NEED TO WRESTLE, BECAUSE IF WE SAY SHOOT, YOU HAVE LIKE A FOOT AND A HALF OF SUSTAINABLE YIELD.

GO FIND WHAT YOU NEED ON TOP OF THAT.

BUT THEN WE COME BACK AND WE SAY, NO, WE GOOFED.

WE ONLY MEANT A FOOT. THAT'S A DIFFERENCE.

RIGHT? SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I THINK IT'S A LITTLE WHILE.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT THAT.

MR. PARK. I TOTALLY AGREE.

PEOPLE ARE LIKE, HOW MUCH DO I GET? HOW MUCH DO I GET? THAT GOES BACK TO THE BABY STEPS.

WE NEED TO START SOMEWHERE. WE NEED TO START TARGETING THAT 10 TO 15 THOUSAND REDUCTION AS WE TRY AND HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS.

AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IN A YEAR'S TIME WE CAN'T GET TO AN ALLOCATION CONVERSATION.

BUT WHILE THAT CONVERSATION IS GOING ON, WE SHOULD BE DOING THINGS THAT ARE STARTING TO GET DEMAND REDUCTION OCCURRING.

BUT IF YOU USE THE SAME TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THOUSAND ACRE FOOT NUMBER AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, SO MANY ACRES, I MEAN, IT KIND OF TELLS YOU YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE UP PER ACRE NUMBER, BUT YOU CAN GIVE A PICTURE, A PERSON A PICTURE OF KIND OF WHAT'S AVAILABLE, HOW MUCH LAND IS GOING TO USE IT AND LET THEM GO DO THEIR OWN MATH, WHAT YOU KNOW, TO GIVE THEM SOME DIRECTION WITHOUT US PICKING THE NUMBER BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IT YET. RIGHT. YOU COULD WE COULD SIT BACK AND REASONABLY SURMISE, ALL RIGHT, THERE'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE THAT MUCH NEW LAND THAT COMES INTO PRODUCTION BECAUSE THAT'S IT'S GOT ITS OWN CHALLENGES.

YOU HAVE THE COUNTY WELL ORDINANCE AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IN PLAY.

HEY, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF ACRES.

SO MAYBE IT'S MAYBE THIS IS KIND OF A BALLPARK I CAN PLAY WITH.

AND IF I'M GOING TO GET SOME TRANSITION WATER, MAYBE I HAVE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF IN THIS BALLPARK HERE OF TIME OVER THE NEXT FIVE OR 10 YEARS, THIS IS KIND OF WHERE MY QUANTITY MIGHT BE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR MY INVESTMENTS? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR MY CROPPING DECISIONS, FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME, MY INVESTMENT DECISIONS ON LAND PURCHASES, ON IMPROVEMENTS TO LANDS, ON WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING? I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT.

BUT THEN WE DON'T I THINK WOULD BE SHORT SIGHTED IF WE ONLY FOCUS THERE AND JUST TALK ABOUT THAT. AND WE DIDN'T SAY, LOOK, WE ALSO COULD BRING IN, THERE ARE LANDS OUT BY THOSE

[02:05:05]

REFUGE AREAS WE KNOW THAT ARE FARMED THAT MAYBE YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN EASEMENTS? WE PUT PERMANENT EASEMENTS.

WE'VE JUST REDUCED SOME DEMAND AND WE HELPED OUT.

AND SOME OF THOSE INTERESTS, THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS CAN BRING OUTSIDE MONEY.

THEY'RE DOING IT DOWN IN PIXLEY AND LOWER TULLEY.

THEY HAVE A PROGRAM RIGHT NOW WHERE THEY'RE FALLOWING LAND WITH OUTSIDE DOLLARS.

ACTUALLY, THE GROWERS ARE HELPING FUND THIS, BUT IT IS BEING A LOT OF THE INVESTIGATIONS AND A LOT OF THE OTHER PIECES ARE COMING FROM OUTSIDE DOLLARS, TIED IN WITH AUDUBON AND THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. AND THEY'RE DOING A FUNCTIONING PROGRAM AND THEY CREATED A NEW LAND TRUST DOWN THERE IN PIXLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT.

THOSE THINGS CAN BE REAL.

WE COULD BE DOING MULTIPLE THINGS AT THE SAME TIME WHILE GIVING THAT KIND OF QUASI.

HERE'S ROUGHLY YOU'RE GOING TO GET SOMETHING LESS THAN YOU HAD, YOU KNOW, START THINKING ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS LONG TERM.

OR ANYTHING ELSE, GEORGE? YEAH, I AGREE, YOU NEED TO HAVE A LOT OF TOOLS IN HIS TOOLBOX.

AND ONE THING THAT I'VE LOOKED AT FROM THE LONG TERM AGO WAS IN THE OLD OFFICE, THE IDEA WAS TO KEEP THE PRICES HIGH.

SO IF YOU PLANTED CORN, YOU ONLY PLANTED EIGHTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE ACREAGE.

YOU SET ASIDE 15 PERCENT FOR THAT YEAR AND YOU GET A PAYMENT.

AND WE COULD DO THE SAME THING HERE WHERE EVERYBODY INNOVATION HAD TO SET ASIDE FIVE PERCENT OR WHATEVER, AND THEN YOU USE THESE INCENTIVE PROGRAMS TO BUILD ON THAT AS YOU GO. SO I THINK YOU NEED A COMBINATION OF THINGS, BUT I THINK HAVING EVERYBODY IN THE BASIN PARTICIPATE AT SOME LEVEL, YOU KNOW, GIVES YOU GIVES YOU MORE CREDIBILITY THAN JUST WAITING FOR PEOPLE TO JOIN IN OR PENALIZING THEM.

SO, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, TELLING THE BANK, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THEY'RE ANXIOUS, BUT TO GIVE THEM THE WRONG NUMBER, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK.

I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING TO YOU'RE GOING TO BE TOO HIGH OR YOU'RE GOING TO BE TOO LOW EITHER WAY. YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK ON YOU.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S BETTER TO WAIT AND SEE, YOU KNOW, LET'S SEE HOW IT ALL COMES OUT.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH THIS FIVE YEAR PLAN.

AND ONCE THAT'S REALLY IN PLAY AND WE SEE WHAT HOW MUCH WATER IS REALLY AVAILABLE TO US, YOU KNOW, THEN WE'LL HAVE A BETTER IDEA.

BUT WE STILL MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWER.

I MEAN, IT'S YOU KNOW, THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS TELL MY BANK THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M ONLY GOING TO HAVE TWO ACRE FEET OF WATER WHEN I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE WATER.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY.

AND IF I TELL THEM I GOT FOUR ACRE FEET AND END UP WITH TWO.

AT SOME POINT, IT'S GOING TO CATCH UP TO YOU, SO I THINK WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW THAN WE HAVE ANSWERS.

PERSONALLY. OK, ONE FINAL JUST KIND OF ADD ON THAT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO CONSIDER A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE THINK ABOUT IT, WHILE EVERYBODY GOT TO DO THEIR PERCENTAGE, SOME OF THE GROWERS, ESPECIALLY THE CONFINED ANIMAL FACILITIES, DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION. IT'S KIND OF LIKE IT'S BUILT A CERTAIN WAY.

IT'S TIED TO A NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT, LIKE THE DAIRIES TIGHTER NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ON FIELDS. AND IT'S NOT LIKE THEY CAN JUST SHAVE 10 PERCENT OF THE COWS OFF.

IT'S THAT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

SO WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THESE THINGS AND HOW THIS IS GOING TO PLAY INTO DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE OPERATIONS AROUND THE THE BASIN AND ADDRESS THOSE THINGS AND JUST BE HAVE LOTS OF TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX. ONE SIZE WILL NOT FIT ALL.

ONE OTHER ONE OTHER POINT.

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE SLIDE OR.

WELL, IT'S IN THE OTHER PACK, THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES THAT'S IN THE OTHER PACK.

DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. IT'S FINE.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT THOSE ZONES IS THAT THE LAND THAT WE CHOSE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NEXT TO EACH OTHER, NOT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE SAME.

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE THAT I WOULD RATHER SEE US DO THOSE ZONES.

YOU COULD HAVE SOME ZONE THREE HERE, HERE AND HERE IF THEY'RE IF THEY HAVE THE SAME ISSUES. RIGHT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US TAKE A LOOK AT THAT BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR DOWN THE ROAD WITH THE ZONES.

PUTTING, YOU KNOW, PUTTING RANGE GROUND AND, YOU KNOW, FARM GROUND TOGETHER.

JUST, YOU KNOW, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT AS A WAY TO SUSTAINABLY EVALUATE AND DEAL WITH THE ZONE. SO I JUST BUT I WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE AND LET YOU GUYS PUT YOUR INPUT BACK TO, YOU KNOW, SEE WHAT YOU THINK.

[02:10:01]

MR. SWENSON. LLOYD, I THINK AT THE PREVIOUS BOARD MEETING, THE BOARD DECIDED WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO WAS TURN THOSE ZONES BACK TO THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO MAKE SOME ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THOSE EXACT THINGS YOU WERE SAYING.

SO I THINK WE'RE WAITING FOR THAT TO HAPPEN AND IT TO COME BACK.

ALL RIGHT. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL VALID COMMENTS.

I THINK THAT'S IN THE WORKS.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I WAS ASKING LACEY ABOUT WHEN THAT MEETING WAS SCHEDULED, BECAUSE I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO ESTABLISH THOSE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS BECAUSE THAT WILL HELP OTHER THINGS THAT ARE DONE THAT MAY BE TIED TO THOSE.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO TRY TO DEVELOP SOME TIMELINES TO TRY TO MOVE THINGS ALONG EXPEDITIOUSLY SO THAT CAN THEN BE ONE OF THE SETTLED THINGS, SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH OTHER ITEMS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, THOUGH, IF I CAN JUST WRAP UP, I THINK THAT HELPS US KIND OF GET TO OUR LAST SLIDE HERE AND JUST WRAPPING UP WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS ARE. SO WHAT I HEARD FROM THE BOARD HERE WAS THERE'S AN INTEREST AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THERE'S AN INTEREST IN MAYBE PUTTING TOGETHER A SMALLER COMMITTEE OF BOARD MEMBERS WHO MIGHT HELP WORK OUT SOME OF THOSE THAT MIXED TOOLBOX OF NEAR AND LONG TERM DEMAND REDUCTION ACTIVITIES.

WE CAN GO AHEAD AND DO THAT AND PULL A SMALL GROUP TOGETHER THAT CAN START WORKING SOME OF THOSE OUT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FUNDING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS, ESPECIALLY SOME OF THOSE INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE FUNDED SOMEHOW. ALSO, WE'RE TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES. SO RIGHT NOW, THE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES ARE WE CREATED THEM AS A BOARD. YOU CREATED THEM AS TWO SEPARATE COMMITTEES, ONE INITIALLY FORMED TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL FEEDBACK ON GSP DEVELOPMENT AND ANOTHER TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON OUTREACH ACTIVITIES. HOWEVER, FOR VARIOUS REASONS, ESPECIALLY THESE COMMITTEES BEING ACTUALLY SO SMALL, THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN MEETING JOINTLY.

AND SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADD A FUTURE MEETING, TO BRING THAT TO THE BOARD AND ACTION FOR YOU TO RESTRUCTURE THESE COMMITTEES INTO A SINGLE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. RIGHT NOW, THE MEMBERSHIP, AS I MENTIONED, IS ACTUALLY FAIRLY SMALL.

I THINK THE BOARD WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING A TECHNICAL COMMITTEE, A TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT HAD REPRESENTATION FROM EVERY MEMBER IN THE GSA AND THE WHITE AREAS.

AND SO I WOULD PROPOSE BRINGING BACK AN ACTIVITY OR AN ACTION TO THE BOARD TO NOT ONLY RESTRUCTURE THE COMMITTEES INTO A SINGLE COMMITTEE, BUT ALSO TO WORK WITH THE MEMBER AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY ONE OR TWO PEOPLE REPRESENTING THOSE AGENCIES WHO COULD PARTICIPATE ON THIS COMMITTEE.

THEN WE WOULD HAVE REPRESENTATION THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE GSA AND IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE BROAD AND EVEN REPRESENTATION.

AND THEN WE COULD USE THAT TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TO FLESH OUT, AGAIN, SOME OF THESE IDEAS MAYBE THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THE SMALL GROUP OF BOARD MEMBERS.

AND WE COULD RUN THAT THROUGH THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE.

SO IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN THAT, I CAN BRING THAT BACK AS AN ACTION AT A FUTURE MEETING. ANY OBJECTION TO THAT IDEA? GREAT, SO THE NEXT BOARD MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 8TH.

SO YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE SEE THIS AGAIN ON APRIL 8TH.

OKAY.

SO THAT THAT COMPLETES THE WORKSHOP, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.

ANY RAISED HANDS ONLINE? SORRY ABOUT THAT. NOPE, NO COMMENTS OR HANDS RAISED.

OK, WELL, THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT.

ITEM EIGHT. THIS IS A CONTRACT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR AUDIT SERVICES.

SO AS A JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, THE SETS ARE BASED IN GSA.

JPA IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO PERFORM ANNUAL FINANCIAL AUDITS.

IN 2018, THE GSA WORKED WITH THE MERCED COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO GET APPROVAL FOR A REQUEST TO ADOPT A FIVE YEAR AUDIT FOR THE GSA.

SO THE GSA HAS NOT HAD TO DO ANY AUDITS UP TILL NOW BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN UNDER THIS FIVE YEAR AUDIT. HOWEVER, IN 2019, AFTER ADOPTING THE SIGMA LANDOWNER FEE, THE GSA REVENUE

[02:15:02]

INCREASED TO EXCEED THE THRESHOLD THAT THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE HAS FOR A FIVE YEAR AUDIT. AND SO NOW THE GSA HAS TO PERFORM ANNUAL AUDITS AND THE FIRST AUDIT HAS TO INCLUDE EVERY YEAR THAT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY AUDITED.

SO THE FIRST AUDIT WILL INCLUDE YEARS FROM THE FISCAL YEAR THAT ENDED IN 2017 THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR THAT ENDED IN 2020.

SO EARLIER THIS YEAR, I REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL FINANCIAL FIRMS TO RECEIVE SOME COST ESTIMATES FOR THE FIRST AND CONTINUING ANNUAL AUDITS FOR THE GSA.

AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE GSA CONTRACT WITH THE FINANCIAL FIRM OF BROWN ARMSTRONG ACCOUNTANCY CORP.

TO COMPLETE NOT ONLY THE INITIAL AUDIT, WHICH WILL COVER SEVERAL YEARS, BUT ALSO ANNUAL AUDITS FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS FOR A COST FOR A CONTRACT COST THAT DOES NOT EXCEED THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

NOT ONLY IS BROWN ARMSTRONG, THEY WERE THE LOWEST COST ESTIMATE WITHIN WITH LOOKING AT A FIVE YEAR RANGE. BUT ALSO THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE COUNTY OF MERCEDEZ FINANCIAL SYSTEM AS THEY ARE THE COUNTY'S AUDITOR AND THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES. SO ALSO TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS OUTSIDE OF A COMPETITIVE PROCESS, THE ACTUAL TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRACT AMOUNT IS BELOW THE LIMIT THAT'S REQUIRED TO HAVE A COMPETITIVE PROCESS. AND SO, AS SUCH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE GSA CONTRACT WITH BROWN ARMSTRONG FOR THE FINANCIAL AUDITS AND TO COMPLETE THAT FIRST REQUIRED AUDIT BEFORE THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, WHICH WOULD BE JUNE 30TH, 2021.

AND THEN THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE FOUR ADDITIONAL YEARS OR NOT? OR YOU JUST WANT TO DO? NO, NO, IT WOULD BE FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS AND THEN THIS 2022 IT WOULD GO THROUGH 2024.

OK MR. CHAIRMAN I HAD A QUESTION. YES.

THAT SO BUT YOU SAID THEY WERE THE LOW COST PROVIDER TO THE FIRMS THAT YOU REACHED OUT TO. YEAH. SO THERE THERE WERE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT COSTS OVER THE COURSE OF FIVE YEARS.

THEY WERE THE LOWEST COST.

SOME OF THE OTHER FIRMS RECOMMENDED STRUCTURING, MAYBE DOING FOUR YEARS OF INDIVIDUAL AUDIT THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS AN AUDIT AND THEN ANOTHER SIX FOR THE REST, WHICH ADDED UP OVER A COURSE OF FIVE YEARS, DID ADD UP TO A LARGER AMOUNT, THE WAY THAT BROWN ARMSTRONG STRUCTURED IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO DO AN INITIAL AUDIT FROM FISCAL YEAR 2016 THROUGH 17, 18, AND 19, AND THEN A SEPARATE AUDIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 19 AND 20.

SO IT'S REALLY TWO AND THEN ANNUALLY GOING FORWARD.

AND SO THE NUMBERS ALL, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, THEY ALL ADDED UP TO DIFFERENT AMOUNTS. THIS WAS ACTUALLY THE LOWEST AMOUNT AND WE DID CAP IT ON IN THE CONTRACT AT THAT LOWER AMOUNT.

HOWEVER, THERE IS A CAVEAT THAT IF THE GSA IS FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES DO INCREASE A LOT AND SUDDENLY THERE'S A LOT MORE TRANSACTIONS THAN THAT.

COST COULD GO UP AS THE AUDIT WOULD GET MORE INVOLVED, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE GSA FOR THAT.

BUT DOES IT NOT MEET LIKE THE NORMAL STANDARD OR WHATEVER FOR COMPETITIVE? BECAUSE THE ALL THE DIFFERENT RESPONSES THAT WERE FOR FOR AN ANNUAL AUDIT, THEY WERE ALL BETWEEN FIVE THOUSAND AND SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.

THEY WERE ALL IN THAT RANGE.

OK. AND THAT'S BELOW THE THRESHOLD TO REQUIRE AN ACTUAL COMPETITIVE BID.

I DID GET DIFFERENT COST ESTIMATES.

I DID REACH OUT TO DIFFERENT FIRMS, THOUGH, JUST TO GET AN IDEA.

SO WE KNEW WHAT THE RANGE SHOULD BE.

I THINK JUST VERY QUICKLY, I THINK LACEY JUST COVERED IT WELL, BUT WE ACTUALLY TOOK THE ADDITIONAL STEP OF ACTUALLY REACHING OUT TO MULTIPLE FIRMS WHEN WE REALLY WEREN'T REQUIRED TO DO SO, TRYING TO GET THE BIGGEST BANG FOR THE DOLLAR.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONTRACT FOR BROWN ARMSTRONG ACCOUNTING CORP, AS LACY HAS INDICATED, FOR THE FINANCIAL AUDIT.

SECOND. OK, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT? CHAIRMAN, THERE'S NO COMMENT OR RAISED HANDS ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. ANY MORE COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. MARCHINI. YES.

[02:20:02]

MR. GALLO. AYE. OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. UPTON. YES.

MR. SWENSON. AYE.

MR. PARK. AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN.

YES. YOU HAVE A CONTRACT IN PLACE NOW.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM SO ITEM NINE IS THE BASIN WIDE, WELL, MONITORING, CONSULTING. SO AT THE NOVEMBER 2020 COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING, THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE APPROVED SOLICITING QUALIFIED CONSULTANTS TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL SUPPORT RELATED TO MONITORING RELATED TO THE GSP, REQUIRED MONITORING FOR GROUNDWATER LEVELS, GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND SUBSIDENCE THROUGH AN RFQ PROCESS.

SO THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT THAT THIS CONSULTANT MAY PROVIDE WILL INCLUDE MONTHLY MONITORING OF GROUNDWATER LEVELS IN THE CURRENT MONITORING NETWORK.

CURRENTLY, GROUNDWATER LEVELS ARE MONITORED IN MARCH AND OCTOBER BY MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT. AND THOSE ARE SO THOSE ARE WELLS THAT HAVE BEEN MONITORED FOR SEASONAL HIGHS AND LOWS FOR YEARS WE'LL MOVE FROM THAT TWICE A YEAR, MARCH AND OCTOBER TO MONTHLY MONITORING.

THIS FIRM WILL COORDINATE WITH OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE MONITORING FOR WATER QUALITY AND SUBSIDENCE. GSP IDENTIFIES WORKING WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS AND THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, WHO ARE ALREADY PERFORMING MONITORING FOR WATER QUALITY AND SUBSIDENCE, WORKING WITH THEM TO COLLECT THE DATA NEEDED IN THE MERCED SUB BASIN.

IF THE GSA CHOOSE TO EXPAND ANY OF THE MONITORING NETWORKS FOR GROUNDWATER LEVELS, WATER QUALITY OR SUBSIDENCE, THIS FIRM MAY ASSIST IN REFINING THE EXISTING PROGRAMS AND ALSO HELPING FILL DATA GAPS THROUGH THE INSTALLATION OF NEW MONITORING SITES.

SO STAFF FROM THE THREE GSAS WORK TOGETHER TO DEVELOP AN RFQ THAT OUTLINES SOME OF THE SUPPORT THAT I JUST COVERED.

IT WAS RELEASED ON JANUARY 15TH,2021, AND HAD A DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION.

ON FEBRUARY 12TH, 2021, THE BASIN RECEIVED TWO SUBMISSIONS BY THAT DEADLINE.

A SMALL GROUP OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM ALL THREE OF THE GSAS REVIEWED THE RESPONSES AND INTERVIEWED BOTH OF THE FIRMS AND FROM THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, MIKE GALLO AND MYSELF, LACEY MCBRIDE WERE THE REVIEWERS FOR THE MERCED SUB BASIN GSA.

THE UNANIMOUS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE SMALL COMMITTEE WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE ON MONDAY, AND THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE WAS TO CONTRACT WITH THE FIRM QK, LED BY QK HAS EXTENSIVE MERCED SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION, AS WELL AS LONG STANDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH LOCAL AGENCIES.

THEY WERE A SUBCONTRACTOR TO WOODARD AND CURRAN DURING THE GSP PROCESS GSP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, SO THEY ARE FAMILIAR WITH PORTIONS OF OUR GSP.

THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION IS FOR MSGSA, TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT WITH QK IMMEDIATELY WITH AN INITIAL BUDGET OF TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS TO COMPLETE THE SPRING MONITORING. AND THEN THE GSA IS WILL WORK TOGETHER ON A LARGER SCOPE AND CONTRACT FOR THE TECHNICAL SERVICES NECESSARY BY APRIL.

BUT THE INTENT HERE WAS TO BE ABLE TO GET QK UNDER CONTRACT VERY QUICKLY TO GET THAT SPRING MONITORING COMPLETED, AS WITH OTHER CONTRACTS THAT THE GSA IS ENTER INTO TOGETHER, MSGSA. SO WE'LL ADMINISTER THE CONTRACT AND THE COSTS WILL BE SHARED ACCORDING TO THE COORDINATION AGREEMENT.

AND EACH OF THE GSA WILL WORK TOGETHER WITH THE CONSULTANT ON THESE MONITORING TASKS AND BE INVOLVED IN THE SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.

CURRENTLY, THE MAJORITY OF THE WELLS THAT ARE TO BE MONITORED ARE WITHIN MSGSA.

AND MID HAS BEEN MONITORING THOSE WELLS HISTORICALLY FOR YEARS.

BUT AS WE BRING NEW WELLS ONLINE AND INCREASE THE MONITORING IN THE BASIN, A LOT OF THOSE NEW WELLS ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE IN THE MERCED SUB BASIN GSA SINCE THAT WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE DATA GAPS ARE. SO THE RECOMMENDATION HERE, UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, IS TO APPROVE QK AS A CONSULTANT AND AUTHORIZE MSGSA TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT WITHIN INITIAL BUDGET OF TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS.

AND IS AT TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS OUR SHARE OR THAT'S A TOTAL. AND IF THAT'S? THE TOTAL AMOUNT OUR SHARE, THIS GSA SHARE WOULD BE 58 PERCENT OF THAT.

AND THAT'S JUST THE SMALL AND THEN THERE WILL BE A LARGER CONTRACT LATER.

OR ANY QUESTIONS OF LACEY.

WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS CONSULTANT FOR

[02:25:04]

OKAY. I SECOND THAT.

ALL RIGHT. BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER PARK.

AND SECOND BY MEMBER SWENSON, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, NO PUBLIC COMMENT OR HANDS RAISED ON THIS ITEM? ANY OTHER BOARD COMMENTS? OK, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, MR. MARCHINI.

AYE. MR. GALLO. AYE. MR. UPTON. YES.

MR. SWENSON. AYE.

MR. PARK. AYE.

MR. CHAIRMAN.

AYE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

ITEM TEN, THIS IS THE STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

IF YOU RECALL, IN 2018, THE GSA HAS APPOINTED A BASIN WIDE STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE TO ADVISE THE GSA AND THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE DURING GSP DEVELOPMENT.

THEY DISCUSS TOPICS AROUND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS, MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND NEEDS AND PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS.

DURING GSA GSP DEVELOPMENT, THE STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE MET MONTHLY THROUGH THE END OF 2019 WHEN THE GSP WAS COMPLETED AND SCHEDULED FOR ADOPTION.

AT THAT TIME, THE COMMITTEE WAS A DIVERSE GROUP OF TWENTY THREE MEMBERS REPRESENTING URBAN, AGRICULTURAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY AND OTHER INTERESTS IN THE BASIN. SO THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE IS NOW RECOMMENDING THAT THE GSA IS REAPPOINT A STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE GSA, GSP IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS, AND THE STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS ANTICIPATED TO MEET QUARTERLY FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM.

SO THERE WAS AN OPEN PROCESS TO IDENTIFY THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, STARTING WITH THE RELEASE OF A PUBLIC APPLICATION, WHICH WAS DUE ON FEBRUARY 1ST.

OVER 30 APPLICATIONS WERE RECEIVED AND STAFF REPRESENTING EACH OF THE GSA HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATIONS AND TRIED TO FIND A PLACE ON THE COMMITTEE AS EITHER A MEMBER OR AN ALTERNATE FOR A COMMITTEE FOR APPLICANTS WHO WERE REPRESENTING THE SAME INTERESTS FOR AS MANY OF THE APPLICATIONS AS POSSIBLE.

AND SO THAT RESULTED IN THE RECOMMENDED LIST BEFORE YOU BEING 30 MEMBERS AND IT INCLUDES REPRESENTATION FROM BROAD STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS IN THE BASIN, FROM AGRICULTURE, INDUSTRY, LOCAL COMMUNITIES, DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, BUSINESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS.

IN ADDITION TO GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION FOR THE MERCED BASIN GSA, THERE ARE REPRESENTATIVES ON HERE FROM MEMBER AGENCIES OF THE GSA REPRESENT REPRESENTATIVES OF DOMESTIC WELL USERS, GRAZING AND GRASSLANDS AND WHITE AREA LANDOWNERS.

SO THE LIST YOU SEE BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN IS THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

AND THE FIRST MEETING WOULD TAKE PLACE IN MARCH.

2021 AT THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEED TO PUT TOGETHER SOME FORWARD PLANNING ON IN TWO YEARS.

HOW DOES THIS STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE CONTINUE OR DO THE MEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE CONTINUE? IS THERE ANOTHER APPLICATION PROCESS DURING THAT TIME? SO THOSE DETAILS DO NEED TO BE WORKED OUT THROUGH THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE ON HOW THIS STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE IS GOING TO CONTINUE PAST THE MEMBER'S TWO-YEAR TERMS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS.

I HAVE A QUESTION, ROBERT BOARD? IT IS.

OK, ANOTHER.

I MOVED TO ADOPT THE STAKEHOLDER LIST AS SUBMITTED.

IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. ALL RIGHT.

BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SWENSON AND SECONDED BY MEMBER MARCHINI.

IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? NO, NOT THIS TIME.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MR. MARCHINI. AYE.

MR. GALLO. AYE. MR. UPTON. YES.

MR. SWENSON. AYE.

MR. PARK.

AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES.

PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU.

ITEM 11, THIS IS APPOINTMENT OF THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

SO IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE COORDINATION IN THE BASIN BETWEEN THE THREE GSAS, THE GSA THAT HAD ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED A COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

THE COMMITTEE WORKED TOGETHER THROUGH GSP DEVELOPMENT AND IS NOW PLANNING ON WORKING TOGETHER THROUGH GSP IMPLEMENTATION, THE SCHEDULE FOR COMMITTEE MEETINGS, COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETINGS. RIGHT NOW WITH QUARTERLY.

[02:30:01]

HOWEVER, WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THOSE COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETINGS COULD HAPPEN SOONER SHOULD TOPICS COME UP.

THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE, ACCORDING TO THE AGREEMENT WE SIGNED, IS MADE UP OF FOUR REPRESENTATIVES PER GSA.

HOWEVER, DUE TO THE BROWN ACT, THE MERCED BASIN GSA ONLY PLACES THREE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE A QUORUM OF THEM ARE SAID TO BE IN GSA BOARD.

WE HAVE THREE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ONE BOARD MEMBER IS RECOGNIZED AS AN ALTERNATE TO THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE.

SO DUE TO SOME CHANGES IN BOARD MEMBERS, THERE ARE VACANCIES ON THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE FOR THE GOVERNING BOARD TO APPOINT.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPTIONS FOR THE GOVERNING BOARD.

THE VACANCIES INCLUDE BOB KELLEY, WHO IS NO LONGER ON THE BOARD AS A MEMBER, BUT IS NOW ON THE BOARD AS AN ALTERNATE.

AND GEORGE PARK, WHO WAS AN ALTERNATE TO THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE AND IS NO LONGER ON THE BOARD AS A MEMBER, BUT IS ON THE BOARD AS AN ALTERNATE.

AND SO THE BOARD MEMBERS MAY TAKE ACTION TO FILL THESE VACANCIES.

THEY CAN REAPPOINT CURRENT MEMBERS.

THEY CAN APPOINT A NEW SLATE OF COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER MAINTAINING SOME CONSISTENCY IN THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUE AND THE UNDERSTANDING THAT HAS BEEN BUILT BETWEEN THESE COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE OTHER GSA MEMBERS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS.

SO THE ACTION FOR CONSIDERATION IS TO IDENTIFY COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND AN ALTERNATE OK.

AND CURRENTLY IT IS CURRENTLY IT WAS BOB KELLY, NIC MARCHINI, MIKE GALLO AND GEORGE PARK AS THE ALTERNATE. ALL RIGHT, AND WHAT A PLEASURE THE.

CAN I OFFER UP A SLATE OR HELP? OK, I JUST LIKE TO OFFER UP THE TWO REMAINING THAT ARE STILL ON THE BOARD, MIKE AND NIC, WITH ERIC SWENSON SUBSTITUTING FOR BOB KELLY AND GINO PEDRETTI SUBSTITUTING FOR ME AS ALTERNATE. OK.

ALL RIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SEEING NONE, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

OH, OK. ALL RIGHT, OK.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NO. OK, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, CHAIRMAN THERE ARE NONE.

ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL CALL.

SO JUST TO RESTATE, AS IT WERE, I HEARD IT CORRECTLY, MR. GALLO, MR. MARCHINI, MR. SWENSON. WITH THE ALTERNATE BEING MR. PEDRETTI, THAT CORRECT MR. PARK? COULD WE DO A MOTION SECOND? MR. MARCHINI. AYE.

MR. GALLO. AYE.

MR. UPTON. YES.

MR. SWENSON.

AYE. EXCUSE ME. MR. PARK. AYE. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES.

PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME.

SO WE HAVE MORE STAFF REPORT? WE DO REALLY QUICK.

WE'RE COMING TO THE END.

THERE ARE TWO ITEMS THAT I JUST WANT TO MENTION FOR YOU.

ONE IS RELATED TO INTERFACE AND COORDINATION.

THE DELTA MENDOTA HAS SECURED A FACILITATOR THROUGH D.W.R FOR INNER BASIN COORDINATION MEETINGS. AND THESE WILL BE A SERIES OF REGIONAL MEETINGS THAT WILL INCLUDE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE MERCED BASIN, THE TOTAL OF BASIN MADERA AND DELTA MENDOTA STARTING IN THE FIRST WEEK OF MARCH.

IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT THESE MEETINGS ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON THE COMMON REGIONAL ISSUE OF SUBSIDENCE ALONG ALL OF THE BASINS AND THE REQUEST FOR THESE TO BE INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUAL INNER BASIN MEETINGS BETWEEN MERCED AND THE REQUEST CAME FROM THE MERCED BASIN TO MAKE THIS MAKE THESE MEETINGS REGIONAL, SINCE THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS A REGIONAL ISSUE.

SO INITIALLY THEY REQUESTED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THESE MEETINGS TO THREE FROM EACH OF THE GS EACH OF THE BASINS AND FROM THE MERCED BASIN.

THERE WILL BE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT, GSA, MSGSA AND THE MERCED SUB BASIN GSA.

STAFF IS PLANNING ON ATTENDING TO LISTEN IN.

BUT I'VE ALSO LET THE FACILITATOR KNOW THAT IT'S POSSIBLE WE WOULD HAVE A BOARD MEMBER FROM THE MERCED SUB BASIN GSA.

IF THERE IS INTEREST FROM A BOARD MEMBER TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE MEETINGS AND REPRESENT THOSE AREAS THAT ARE PROBABLY IMPACTED BY THE ISSUES THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AND ALONG THE

[02:35:01]

SUBSIDENCE AREAS.

SO IF THERE IS SOME DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD ON MEMBER WHO MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THOSE MEETINGS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

THE SECOND ITEM I HAVE FOR YOU REAL QUICK AND THEN YOU CAN GIVE ME ALL OF YOUR FEEDBACK IS VIRTUAL VERSUS IN-PERSON MEETINGS.

SO THIS MEETING WAS SCHEDULED IN PERSON BECAUSE IT WAS WE HAD TO SWEAR IN A NEW MEMBER AND THERE WAS ALSO AN ELECTION OF OFFICERS.

SO IT JUST SEEMED APPROPRIATE TO HOLD THIS MEETING IN PERSON.

THE QUESTION FOR THE BOARD IS, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE HOLDING THE MEETINGS IN PERSON OR DO YOU WANT TO HOLD THE MEETINGS VIRTUALLY VIA ZOOM? WE HAVE SEEN BOARD MEETINGS BEING HELD BOTH WAYS AT THE COUNTY OF MERCED, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALL MEET IN PERSON.

WE HAVE OTHER GSAS IN NEIGHBORING BASINS WHO CONTINUE TO MEET VIA ZOOM.

AND SO REALLY THE CHOICE IS UP TO THIS BOARD ON HOW THEY'D LIKE THEIR MEETINGS TO BE HELD FOR IN THE FUTURE. OK, WELL, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I'LL TAKE DIRECTION, YOU KNOW.

I MEAN, I'M USED TO MEETING IN PERSON.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, THIS THIS VIRUS IS, YOU KNOW, AFFECTS EVERYBODY DIFFERENTLY.

AND SO WHAT YOUR PLEASURE IS.

I DO. WE JUST WANT TO.

MR. UPTON, DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE? WE'LL JUST GO DOWN THE ROW AND SEE WHERE WE END UP.

NO, I DON'T HAVE A PREFERENCE.

OK, MR. SWENSON.

AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO BE REMOTE, I THINK THERE'S A LOTS OF DIFFICULT ISSUES AHEAD.

AND I THINK IT'S EASIER TO INTERACT IN PERSON.

IN PERSON.

MR. MARCHINI. IN PERSON, MR. GALLO. IN PERSON.

WHAT DO YOU THINK, MARK? I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE IN PERSON.

THANK YOU. AND THEN WAS THAT IT FOR YOUR ITEMS? THAT'S ALL I HAD. OK, AND THEN IS ANYBODY INTERESTED IN BEING THE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE I'D CERTAINLY BE WILLING TO DO THAT IF THE BOARD DESIRES THAT.

I'VE ACTUALLY DONE WORK FROM A STOCKTON DOWN INTO THE SOUTH PART OF THE CENTRAL VALLEY, SO I'M SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE ISSUES THEY FACE.

OK, SO ANYBODY ELSE INTERESTED BUT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ELECTED.

OK, THANK YOU. NO, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. ANY BOARD MEMBER REPORTS? I'LL START AT THE LEFT.

I'D JUST LIKE TO. I MISSED MY CHANCE TO THANK MEMBER KELLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR EVERYTHING YOU DID.

YOU WERE A GREAT MENTOR TO ALL OF US, AND.

I'M NOT GOING AWAY. OH, I KNOW YOU'RE NOT.

I NOTICED THAT.

SO I APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING.

MR. GALLO. LIKEWISE.

THANK YOU, BOB, FOR BEING HERE AND BEING PART OF THIS.

ON A CONTINUING BASIS, THAT'S VERY GOOD OF YOU TO DO THAT.

I GUESS I.

WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BOARD MEETINGS THEN AND THE NEXT BOARD MEETINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I WONDERED IN LIKE MAYBE FOR THIS YEAR AT LEAST, CONSIDERING ALL THE GROUND WE NEED TO COVER WHETHER WE SHOULDN'T HAVE MONTHLY BOARD MEETINGS, NUMBER ONE, AND NUMBER TWO, MAYBE ONCE A QUARTER, DO A WORKSHOP TYPE BOARD MEETING LIKE TODAY, WHICH IS NORMALLY LONGER AND, YOU KNOW, COVER SOME OF THE DEEPER SUBJECTS THAT WE NEED TO COVER FOR THIS YEAR.

THAT WAS A QUESTION TO THE BOARD.

OK, MR. UPTON.

WELL I WANT TO THANK BOB.

I SORT OF LOOK AT HIM AS THE PIONEER IN THIS EFFORT FROM MERCED COUNTY AND A LOT TO BE SAID FOR ALL THE WORK HE'S DONE.

MR. SWENSON, ANY BOARD REPORT? NO BOARD REPORT, BUT I HAVE MET WITH BOB KELLEY AND I'VE TOLD HIM WE WILL CONTINUE TO MEET ON A REGULAR BASIS TO TALK ABOUT ISSUES OF THIS BOARD.

MARK.

I THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH MIKE'S COMMENTS THAT THERE'S JUST SO MUCH MATERIAL TO COVER.

IT'S HARD TO STAY CURRENT TO WHEN YOU GO THREE MONTHS AND MEETING THE MEETING.

SO I THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER, MORE FREQUENT INTERVAL.

OKAY. ANYBODY OBJECT TO MEETING MORE OFTEN OR AS NECESSARY? OK. ALL RIGHT.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT YOUR MEETING, BOB, AND ACTUALLY BEFORE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU PUT YOUR HEART, LIFE, SOUL INTO THIS GROUP AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO STEP BACK.

BUT ANYWAYS, I'M GLAD THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU PLAN TO FULLY BE ENGAGED AND I ASSUME WE'LL SEE

[02:40:05]

QUITE OFTEN AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR INPUT AND THE LIKE TO INVITE YOU TO CALL ME, YOU KNOW, IF IF YOU THINK I NEED TO KNOW STUFF.

ALL RIGHT. OK, OUR NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING, APRIL 8TH.

SO DO WE WANT TO, CAN WE DO A MARCH MEETING? IS THAT YOUR DESIRE? I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE DIRECTION.

IS THAT.

SO THIS MEETING IS THE FOURTH WEEK IN FEBRUARY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THE FOURTH WEEK IN MARCH AND THEN JUST BUMP BACK YOUR APRIL MEETING, OR DO YOU WANT TO DO ONE MID-MARCH AND KEEP APRIL EIGHT? WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? I MEAN, CAN WE.

SOMWEHERE HALFWAY IN BETWEEN MID-MARCH BE FINE AND KEEP THE APRIL 8TH.

OK. I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVERYONE ELSE THINKS BUT.

I ASK STAFF WHAT THEY'RE THINKING IS, IN OTHER WORDS, PREPARATION FOR THE NEXT MEETING, YOU KNOW, BETTER LACEY YOU KNOW.

AND I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE SPACE.

WE COULD DO MARCH 8TH AND THEN GO MONTHLY FROM THERE, IF YOU THINK IT'D BE.

I MEAN, APRIL.

THAT'S NEXT WEEK. YEAH.

APRIL 8TH, IT'LL BE OUR NEXT MEETING.

AND THEN AFTER THAT WE'D GO MONTHLY BECAUSE THAT MAKES SENSE.

I'M GOOD WITH THAT. OK, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING FOR US.

YES. SORRY, BECAUSE I KNOW I'M KIND OF AN EXTENSION OF LACEY ON STAFF ASPECTS.

SO I WAS LOOKING AT THE 8TH WAS A THURSDAY.

THIS WAS A WEDNESDAY.

IS THERE A STANDING I'VE FORGOTTEN HONESTLY.

IS IT THURSDAYS THE STANDING MEETINGS HAVE BEEN THURSDAYS AT TWO P.M.

OF COURSE, IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD IF ANOTHER DATE WORKS BETTER.

THERE WAS NOT A THURSDAY IN FEBRUARY THAT WORKED FOR THIS MEETING AND THIS ROOM.

OK, SO THURSDAY IS GOOD FOR YOU.

AND IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE.

SOMETIMES AS YOU KNOW, THERE WAS AN OCCASION WHERE I AM OUT OF TOWN AND SO THERE'S THURSDAYS ARE OFTEN TRAVEL DAYS, BUT I WILL WORK AROUND SCHEDULES.

SO OK, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.

OK. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, THEN WE WILL.

SO APRIL 8TH IS OUR NEXT SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING.

ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE COME FOR THE MEETING? CALL IT ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.