Sacramento Water Committee Meeting – August 11, 2020
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Sacramento Water Committee Meeting – August 11, 2020
The Water Committee of the City of Sacramento met via teleconference on Tuesday, August 11, 2020, from 1:00 p.m. to 1:40 p.m. The meeting consisted of four informational presentations on water rights, water transfers, sustainability and efficiency efforts, and an update on the Water Forum Agreement. All items were received and filed without public comment or action votes.
Discussion Items
1. Water Rights and Water Supply Regulatory Processes
- Outside Water Counsel Wes Miller-Band provided an update on the State Water Resources Control Board’s water quality control plan update and voluntary agreements (VAs). Voluntary agreements have stalled due to litigation between federal and state governments over biological opinions adopted in October 2019. The state sued in February 2020, alleging the biological opinions insufficiently protect endangered fish species. The city’s potential contribution to flow measures would be groundwater substitution, leaving water in the lower American River. Non-flow measures include local projects for fish spawning and rearing. No public timeline exists for the formal regulatory process. COVID-19 has not directly impacted the process. The presentation was received and filed.
2. 2020 Water Transfer Update
- Senior Engineer Brett Ewart presented on the city’s groundwater substitution transfer, approved by City Council on June 16, 2020, by the State Water Board on July 6, and by the Department of Water Resources on July 8. The transfer involves six partner agencies; the city contributes the majority of the regional total of about 18,000 acre-feet. The water market price settled at $350 per acre-foot for the first three months, down from $400 in 2018. In the first month, 2,400 acre-feet were transferred. The city increases groundwater production by 10 million gallons per day (MGD) from its northern wells, receives 15 MGD through interties with Sacramento Suburban Water District, and 6 MGD from Sacramento County Water Agency. Revenue from the 2018 transfer ($1.8 million) was reinvested in groundwater infrastructure and leveraged a $1 million DWR grant. 2020 revenue will also be reinvested. The transfer is authorized through November 2020, with optional extension. Chair Harris noted benefits are monetary but also ecological (leaving water in the river). He raised concerns about dry-year triggers for scaling back, but Ewart noted off-ramps exist and the city has years of stored groundwater credits. No public callers. Received and filed.
3. 2020 Update on Sustainability and Water Efficiency Efforts
- Sustainability Program Manager Roshni Das reported that the Sierra snowpack final survey recorded 1.5 inches (3% of May average). The Sacramento Valley Index stands at 63% of average, similar to 2018. New state legislation (AB 1668 and SB 606) mandates indoor water use standards of 55 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) by 2025 and 50 GPCD by 2030, with enforcement starting in 2026. The city is participating in two pilot studies to inform rulemaking. The water conservation ordinance update was delayed pending state direction. Despite COVID-19, online workshops saw unprecedented attendance. Rebate applications dropped only 10% in FY2020, still the second highest ever. The smart meter program sends automatic leak notifications for continuous 24-hour use (five days/week). The Leak Free Sacramento no-cost direct install repair program completed 20 projects in FY20. The city’s overall water demand is now around 160 GPCD, down from ~300 GPCD pre-drought. Sustainability efforts include a climate risk assessment using EPA’s CREATE tool and a draft DOU Sustainability Policy focusing on carbon neutrality, climate resiliency, and equity. Chair Harris suggested more proactive leak alerts for commercial customers; staff noted existing notifications but will review. Councilmember Guerra thanked staff for outreach in disadvantaged communities. No public callers. Received and filed.
4. 2020 Water Forum Agreement Update
- Utilities Director Bill Busath provided a status update. The Water Forum Agreement (WFA), signed about 20 years ago, is being renegotiated early due to the upcoming retirement of Executive Officer Tom Gording. The process is expected to take 18–24 months. The three caucuses (water, public, environmental) have held educational meetings and will begin working groups. The city seeks continued support from the environmental caucus, which has backed most city activities over the past 20 years. Staff will report back at milestones and bring a draft agreement to the Committee before City Council approval. Committee members expressed appreciation for Gording’s work. Received and filed, with authorization for staff to engage in discussions.
Key Outcomes
- All four oral reports were received and filed by unanimous consent of the committee members present (Jeff Harris, Eric Guerra, Angelique Ashby).
- Staff was authorized to continue engagement in Water Forum Agreement negotiations and return to Council at key decision points.
- No public comments were received on any agenda item or on matters not on the agenda.
- The meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
Hey everybody. Hello, Councilmember Gatta. Mindy, it looks like we have a quorum. We can start any time. That is correct. We do have a quorum. So, Chair Harris, as soon as you're ready, we are ready to proceed. Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. Welcome everybody to the August 11th meeting of the Water Committee of the City of Sacramento. Will the clerk please call roll to make sure we have a quorum? Thank you, Councilmember Ashby. Councilmember Gatta. Here. And Chair Harris. Here. Very good. Well, all who can join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Well, thank you very much, committee members. Uh looks like today is mostly information. I don't believe we have any action items. Is that correct, Mindy? Mindy is on you. Okay, so we're good. All right. Can we start with the first item, please? So that would be uh Wes with the update on the state water board process. Welcome, Wes. Thank you very much. I'm just going to uh pull up the slides one moment, please. All right, hopefully that's visible to everyone. Good afternoon, Chair Harris, Vice Chair Gira, and Councilmember Ashley. It's a pleasure to be back with you today. I'm Wes Miller Band, outside Water Council for the City of Sacramento. We typically cover these topics for these committee meetings, and I'll do the same here, but today I'll be even more brief for two reasons. One, the voluntary agreements are stalled. There's not discussion happening with our voluntary agreement at the media moment because of litigation between the federal and state governments. And I'll explain a little bit more about that in a moment. As far as the state water resources control board's formal process uh for the water quality control plan update, there's not currently a public timeline on when or how that process will move forward. And it's basically the state's regulatory mechanism for regulating uh different beneficial uses while taking into account all whether it's fish wildlife habitat, municipal and industrial, or irrigation, among others. And it focuses on the Sacramento and the San Joaquin River watersheds. And among those things, voluntary agreements are identified as being a current priority, and then there are more or less implementation proposals as the document calls it for helping identify how state water, or excuse me, how state agencies can help uh water users uh work together and basically diversify the water portfolio. And so through that discussion of the document, voluntary agreements are repeatedly identified. I personally see that as a positive. It's showing that there still might be something there with voluntary agreements, just we're not very active with it at the moment. We've touched on these slides before, and happy to take any and all questions now or later, but I don't intend to necessarily get into too much detail here. But the groundwater substitution is really what the city of Sacramento's contribution would be as among the flow measures, which means the water flowing out of Folsom and down the Lower American River and making its way to the Bay Delta. The voluntary agreement also includes non-flow measures, which would be local projects here on the lower American River or spawning and rearing of fisheries. And these items also work hand in hand, uh, just like formal regulatory process with VAs, substantially here, having proper release flows and temperature management marries essentially the quantity and quality of water that not only creates more supply reliability but also better conditions for the fish. So back on October or in October of 2019, the federal government adopted what's referred to as biological opinions.
openpublica.com