Do state laws apply to everyone?

Maybe not if you are a developer in Sonoma County

A Penngrove-based geohydrologist warns Sonoma County officials that they might be violating important state laws. Are officials unaware of these laws or are they deliberately ignoring them?

February 10, 2003
ATTN: Scott Briggs, Project Manager
Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management Department
2550 Ventura Ave
Santa Rosa, CA 95403

FOR FULL AND IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact Report for Sonoma County General Plan Update (GP 2020) EIR

Dear PRMD and Dr. Briggs:

I am concerned that the Permit and Resource Management Department (PRMD), the Citizens Advisory Committees (CAC’s), the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), and the County Supervisors are either unaware of or deliberately ignoring recent State legislation that is directly relevant to effectively addressing hydrology and water quality issues for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sonoma County General Plan Update. This statement is based on my review of the most recent draft of the Water Resources Element of the General Plan Update and my observations at the most recent February 4, 2003 Water Resources CAC public hearing.

According to the public record, the CAC has received a copy of the “Draft Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 of 2001” by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The DWR Guidebook specifically states its purpose on the cover, “To assist water suppliers, cities, and counties in integrating water and land use planning”. In effect, DWR is handing all agencies in Sonoma County a rational, easy-to-follow, blueprint for addressing hydrology and water quality issues as required by State Law in water and land use planning decisions, as well as for developing a legally viable General Plan policy.

According to the Guidebook, SB 610 and SB 221, which became effective January 1, 2002, “…promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to the city and county decision-markers prior to approval of large development projects. Both statutes also require this detailed information be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects.” The Guidebook points out that, “Under SB 610, water assessments must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects (as defined in Water Code 10912 [a] subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply.”

Specifically, the SB 610 and 221 legislation “…will coordinate local water supply and land use decisions to help provide California’s cities, farms, and rural communities with adequate water supplies.” To ensure adequate water supplies everywhere in Sonoma County, including rural communities and farms, all local agencies of Sonoma County involved with land use decision-making – PRMD, the Supervisors, LAFCO, the Cities, and SCWA - must make strong coordinated efforts to abide by this legislation. In particular, PRMD must utilize State Law in its full capacity to defend against illegal and immoral decision-making by local agencies that approve development projects, land use designations, and zoning changes and variances without ensuring adequacy of water supplies for all affected users in a groundwater basin. To fulfill its responsibility to update the General Plan in legally sound manner, PRMD must fully incorporate the legal ramifications of Senate Bills 610 and 221 of 2001 and AB 901 of 2001, which includes consideration for water quality in assessing adequacy of water supplies, into the General Plan Update.

A serious shortcoming of the Water Resources Element of the General Plan Update is a complete lack of coordination with cities, which is absolutely essential to management of groundwater resources and conformance with State Law. According to the Guidebook, “ A foundational document for compliance with both SB 610 and SB 221 is the Urban Water Management Plan” (UWMP). The Guidebook continues “…UWMPs serve as important source documents for cities and counties as they update their General Plan.

Conversely, General Plans are source documents as water suppliers update their UWMPs. These planning documents are linked, and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent. It is crucial that cities, counties, and water suppliers work closely when developing and updating these planning documents.” Two “Special Recommendations” of the Guidebook are· “…that city and county planning staff immediately identify water supplies serving their land-use planning area and determine the availability of water supply information to facilitate compliance with SB 610 and SB221.”

· “Both SB 610 and SB 221 suggest that UWMPs may be a good source of information for developing water assessments and verifications. Therefore, it is recommended that each water supplier review its adopted UWMP to determine if the supply and demand analysis meets the requirements of these two laws, including the substantial evidence required by SB 221.”

In light of the recommendations of the Guidebook, I am raising the following questions for immediate consideration toward obtaining an adequate assessment of hydrology and water quality EIR issues for the General Plan Update:

1. Will PRMD be reviewing the UWMPs for cities in Sonoma County to ensure accuracy and usefulness for assessing sustainability of groundwater resources relied upon as the sole water supply for most rural communities and farms?

2. Do policies of the General Plan Update fully comply with the water supply planning requirements of SB610, SB221, and AB 901 legislation of 2001?

3. Do General Plans for cities in Sonoma County provide accurate information on current and projected groundwater extraction rates?

4. Is the information on current and projected groundwater extraction rates in City and County General Plans consistent with information presented in the UWMPs?

5. Do City records and hydrologic assessments indicate overdraft of groundwater basins?

6. Are the PRMD, County Supervisors, and SCWA working closely with cities in updating the hydrology and water quality policies for the General Plan Update?

7. Will Cities, PRMD, County Supervisors, LAFCO, and SCWA obtain adequate information to ensure compliance with SB610, SB221, and AB 901 before any development project is allowed to proceed in an area of known groundwater overdraft?

8. Do any of the UWMPs for a city in Sonoma County provide “a good source of information for developing water assessments and verifications” of groundwater extraction by municipal pumping?

9. Do any of the UWMPs provide a detailed description of the analysis and amount and location of groundwater pumped by Cities for past and projected use?

10. Do any of the UWMPs provide an analysis of the sufficiency of the groundwater from the basin(s) to support initial and projected demand for any future development projects?

11. Has PRMD determined (either by its own study, examining the City of Rohnert Park General Plan Update, or contacting DWR) whether the southern portion of the Santa Rosa Plan groundwater basin, including the cities of Rohnert Park and Cotati and
much of the rural community of Penngrove, is overdrafted or is projected to become overdrafted if present management practices continue?

12. Given that an overdraft condition has been identified by the City of Rohnert Park in its own EIR, what substantive and coordinated efforts (such as “in-lieu recharge” of SCWA surface water) will be specified in the Sonoma County General Plan Update and the UWMPs to ensure elimination this long-term overdraft condition?

13. Does the General Plan Update or any UWMP describe plans to supplement water sources that may not be available at a consistent level of use for farms or rural communities, as required by AB 901 of 2001?

14. Will PRMD work with the Cities to ensure that excessive municipal pumping does not lead to degradation of water quality beyond city limits?

15. Given that the draft General Plan Update now states that Sonoma County wishes to acquire state funding through DWR, will the County develop a groundwater management plan with adequacy to qualify for state funding under State Law (see SB 1938 of 2002)?

16. Given the Draft General Plan’s claim of “limited factual data on existing levels and use” of groundwater, will a plan to acquire more groundwater data qualify as one of several appropriate components to a groundwater management strategy?

17. Will the County develop a groundwater management plan as a means to exercise more authority over cities? (State Water Code Section 10755 states: “If a local agency annexes land subject to a groundwater management plan… the local agency annexing the land shall comply with the groundwater management plan for the annexed property.”)

18. Will the County propose to coordinate with the SCWA and the Cities to develop an“ Integrated Water Management Plan” (see SB 1672 of 2002), considering the complexity of the water resources issues in Sonoma County?

The “STAFF” response to the following comment by CAC Water Resources Subcommittee member Craig Harrington (CH) in the 2/4/03 Draft Water Element is woefully inadequate: (CH: It would be helpful at the February 4th WRE meeting to provide the public and subcommittee with a clear understanding as to whether or not the County has any jurisdiction over the incorporated cities as to groundwater use within their respective incorporated boundaries.)

An adequate response would require the General Plan Update to appropriately address the eighteen questions I have presented above. For your convenience, my Penngrove neighbors John E. King and H.R. Downs and I have provided you with sufficient information to appropriately address all eighteen of these questions through submittals to the public record and the website www.penngrove.info.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or are in need of further information.
Sincerely,
Steven F. Carle
Penngrove CA