Water ordinances held up by lively protest
Property owners on the east side of Highway 1 want their own conservation regime
A special meeting held by the Mendocino City Community Services District on Jan. 9 to consider the Groundwater Extraction Permit and the Water Conservation plan and ordinance drew approximately 15 attendees and Supervisor Ted Williams.
The purpose of the meeting was to announce the intent to vote on the water conservation measures at the upcoming Jan. 27 regular meeting. The permits, plan and ordinances passed in 2007 had become null and void due to a lawsuit brought by Steven Gomes. In that lawsuit, the judge ruled that the process for approving the measures by the previous board did not meet the guidelines of California Water Code. The current board was making an effort to correct the previous error and the customers who were unhappy with the water conservation measures passed in 2007 showed up to stop the process.
Belief that the plans are unfair
Gomes brought his attorney and neighbors to protest about the fairness of the permit, plan and ordinance as proposed. The permit, plan and ordinance were identical to the ones thrown out by the judge on May of 2019. According to Harold Hauck, acting President of the Board, the judge did not rule on the substance of the permit, plan or ordinance and that this effort was merely
to correct the previous process. Gomes and his followers objected and wanted the Board to rewrite the water conservation measures before bringing it back out for a vote.
The center of the controversy is that some who live on the east side of Highway 1 do not believe they should be subject to the same water restrictions during a drought as those on the west. According to Bruce Levene, a ratepayer from the east side, the hydrological model used to justify the water use restrictions is only valid for the west side. Gomes, also from the east side, presented drawings and studies that he said proved the aquifers are different on the other side of the highway and that water from their homes does not flow towards the west side, but south towards Big River. Gail Lauinger complained that she had to follow water use restrictions during the last drought. “My issue is not with being metered, but how the allotments are set up,” Lauinger said. “An AirBnB gets the same allotment as I do.” Lauinger further stated that “I watched my garden die even though my well was full.”
In addition to the water use restrictions, the ratepayers objected to the requirement that they install meters at their own expense and be required to self-report their water usage to the district. Meters were required in the now-defunct water conservation ordinance should the district declare a stage four drought. A stage four drought was declared in the 2014/2015 water year. After the meeting, Hauck clarified that ratepayers can either self-report or opt to have the district read the meters for $10 per month.
Hauck tried to calm the audience by explaining that the intention of the board is to conduct scientific studies to ensure that the water use plans are equitable. “I hear you,” Hauck said. “We will look at the plan and try to make it effective and as fair as possible for everyone.”
Attendees claim process flawed
Several attendees complained that the process which requires that over 50% of the registered voters protest in writing to stop the Board from approving the permit, plan and ordinance is in itself flawed.
Lauinger said, “When do you get 50% of Mendocino to respond to anything?”
Several people claimed they did not receive any notice from the district. District Superintendent Mike Kelley said that two letters were sent to all registered voters and that the list was given to the district by the County Board of Elections. Other members of the audience confirmed receiving the letters.
Several people expressed doubt that their protests would be counted and complained that a ballot was not sent out. Hauck indicated that all the letters received would be available for review at the Jan. 27 meeting and that letters will be accepted at the meeting. He also explained that this process was the standard process used throughout the State and was codified in California Water Code.
Others complained that the district did not provide proper notice of this meeting or of the meeting held on Jan. 6 to appoint a new board member to replace the recently deceased President Roger A. Schwartz. Kelley indicated the notices were on the web site and placed in three locations throughout the town. Others stated they read about it in the Beacon but that it was buried in the article about Schwartz death.
District received some support
Former Fire Chief and former MCCSD Board Member Ed O’Brien spoke in support of the resolutions. “When I was on the Board, the district spent $300,000 on studies to find a second source of water. The only source is the water under us,” he said. “This led us to control groundwater. It’s not perfect. The meters have helped us to understand where the water is.” O’Brien also stated that this town needs control over its water but it can take into account different aquifers.
One attendee called for a floor vote from the audience. Three people supported the district’s resolutions. The remainder did not respond.
Resolutions failed
A vote was taken by the board on the Ground Water Extraction Permit Resolution and it was 2-2, with board members Hauck and Jean Arnold voting yes and Otto Rice and Robert Kerstein voting no. With no majority, the intent to vote on the permit failed. After the permit resolution failed the board voted to table the Water Conservation Plan and Ordinance resolutions.
Kelley said he believes the previous groundwater extraction permit from 1990 is by default still in place. Hauck has asked that the district’s legal counsel confirm this. However, as previously reported the district no longer has a water conservation ordinance or plan and will be unable to respond to a drought until they are replaced.
Jean Arnold appointed to MCCSD board
Four residents applied for the board vacancy left by Schwartz death on December 25. They were Ed O’Brien, Jean Arnold, Barbara Reed and Jim Sullivan. The board voted on each individual based on the order of the receipt of their letter of interest. Ed O’Brien was not confirmed. Jean Arnold was confirmed. Neither Reed or Sullivan were voted on, once Arnold was appointed. Arnold is a recent arrival to Mendocino, having moved here after retiring from Marin Municipal Water District.