The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVina Subbasin Governance Working Group Meeting Summary Menchaca, Clarissa From: [arlone Tania <tcerlone@ccp.csms.edu> Sent: Wednesday, March O7 20181:48PKH To: [adune' Tanie Cc: tcar|ome@cbiorg Subject: MEETING SUMMARY Vima Subbasim Groundwater Meeting, February 22, 2018 Attachments: SUK4K4ARY-VimaGovernance VVGMtg_2-22-18-F|NALZ.pdf Importance: High VimaSubbasin Interested Parties: Find attached the meeting summary (including presentation materials)from the Vlna SubbasimGovernance Working Group meeting which occurred onThursday, February 22, 2018. The next VinaSubbas[nWorking Group meeting will take place on Thursday, March 29, 2018 from 3-5 PM at the Chico Masonic Center. Amagenda will bedistributed via email inadvance mfthe meeting. Please feel free to contact me with any questions(and see below for more information). Regards, Tania Tan�aCar|one SeniorK4ediator/Fad|itm1or California State University, 5acramentm Direct Line/Mobile: 916-200-5149 The central purpose of Vina Subbasin Governance Working Group meetings is for the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and other interested parties inthe Vina groundwater subbasin tudiscuss governance options that support Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) development and implementation.This meeting is a continuation of Sustainable Groundwater Management Act /5GK&A\ implementation inButte County. The meetings are open tothe public and will be facilitated by Tania Car|mne,Senior Facilitator with CSU,Sacramento. Facilitation suipport for this,effort has been provided by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). If you have any questions about Butte County SGMA implementation, please contact Paul Gosselin, Director, Butte County Water and Resource Conservation, or 530.538.4343. If you any questions about Tehama County SGMA implementation, please contact Ryan Teubert,Tehama County Flood Control and Water Resource Manager, ; 530.385.1462x302O. For more California statewide information abou1SGK4A: 1 SGAIA hnplemen talioir Ono Subbasin Governance Working Group meeting Sununar.y, rebruary 22,2018 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act(SGMA) Implementation Vina by (5-,0,2'1.57) Governance Working/ Group Meeting, Thursday, February 22, 2018 MEETING SUMMARY Agenda Review and Process Overview Tania Carlonie, facilitator, reviewed the agenda(See Attachment A: PowerPoint Presentation) and reviewed the purpose of facilitation support in the Vina subbasin which is to help stakeholders establish a governance structure that all Groundwater Sustainability Agency(GSA)entities agree meets their needs for decision-making and planning to develop and implement a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). An additional purpose is to collaborate with GSRs and stakeholders to develop and implement a communications and engagement plan that meets SGMA requirements. Tania reiterated that facilitation support is provided through the Department of Water Resources' (DWR) Facilitation Support Services(FSS) Program. Butte County applied for FSS services on behalf of the four subbaasins (Vina, West Butte, East Butte, and Wyandotte Creek), Tania explained that the facilitators working in Butte County include:Tania Carlone, Senior Facilitator, who is the primary contact in the Vina and Wyandotte Creek Subbasins; Dave Ceppos, Managing Senior Facilitator, who is the primary contact for West and East Butte; and, Malka Kopell, Senior Facilitator, who will be working with Dave and Tania to coordinate countywide elements of CCP's work and to provide expertise on stakeholder communications and engagement. SGIVIA Updates and Announcements DWR and Vina subbasin GSRs provided statewide and local SGMA implementation updates respectively. DWR: Debbie Spangler with DWR's Northern Region Office GIRO) presented an updated timeline of SGMA implementation milestones (see Attachment A: Slide 4). Debbie informed participants that the draft GSP grant awards were announced and the comment period for the awards is open until the end of February. She also reported that the public release of the final basin prioritization has been delayed.A participant asked if DWR would consider pushing back the basin boundary modification submission date of June 30, 2018, pendling the release of the results of the basin prioritization. Rock Creek Reclamation District(GSA): Paul Behr told meeting participants that he's been having discussions with other reclamation districts about the governance approaches neighboring basins have been taking. He expressed interest in looking at the Yolo and Colusa basins' governance models and possibly applying aspects of them to the Vina subbasin. He will be sharing all of this information with his Board of Directors for their consideration. Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District(GSA): Ryan Teubert informed meeting participants that the Tehama County Groundwater Commission's ad hoc committee 1 SGAIA Implemenlation: Vina Subbasin Governance Working Group Weling Summa,ly ,b, I( ruary 22, 2018 charged with considering basin boundary modifications has recommended to separate the Vina basin at the county line.The recommendation will be formally considered by the Groundwater Commission. If the Groundwater Commission concurs with the ad hoc committee, the decision will go before,the Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's Board of Directors for action in the third week of March. For more information about the Tehama County GSA and upcoming meetings, go to the following link: http://www.tehamacountypublicworks,ca.gov/flood/Asa,html County of Butte (GSA): Paul Gosselin informed meeting participants that DWR has recommended to,award the GSP grant for$1.5 million for GSP development in the four subbasins. He also shared that the recharge project final report will be published soon, The report identifies good recharge options to improve,groundwater sustainability in the basin. Additionally, Paul said that County staff will provide a SGIMA update as an information item at the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 13th. Finally, he encouraged participants to attend that next Groundwater Pumpers Advisory Committee(GPAC) meeting on March 22nd at 8:30 AM at the Chico State Farm, For more information about Butte County SGIVIA implementation and meetings, go to the following link: https://www.buftecounty,neUwaterresourceconservation/SustainableGroundwaterManagementAct. ash ;� City of Chico(GSA): Erik Gustafson informed meeting participants that the City of Chico continues to explore a basin boundary modification that is anticipated to bring the city limits into the Vina subbasin. The City is principally considering a basin boundary modification due to limited staffing and capacity to engage in two Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) planning and implementation processes.Also, he explained that about two thirds of the city limits fall in the Vina subbasin, Erik clarified that the City would continue to have a presence in West Butte since the city's wastewater treatment plant is located there. One of the possible options is to form a Management Area in the West Butte basin that would include the treatment plant. Governance Considerations and Options Vina Governance Subcommittee Report: The second Vina Governance Subcommittee(GSA Managers) meeting was held on 2/8/18. The purpose of the Subcommittee is to develop governance proposals,which all GSA parties consider workable for GSP development and implementation in the Vina Subbasin. The draft proposals developed by Subcommittee will be presented to the Working Group/public for input and feedback. The key outcomes from the Subcommittee meeting can be found in Attachment A: Slides 6-8). Guiding Principles for Governance: The Governance Subcommittee identified several guiding principles that are foundational to a governance agreement(See Attachment A: Slides 9-11). Working group participants offered one additional principle--to ensure a commitment by GSA(s)to engage and receive input from stakeholders. Governance Options Discussion: The Working Group considered three high level governance models and discussed the tradeoffs associated with them, The Working Group also explored the possible application of Management Areas to one or more of the governance models. See Attachment A: Slides 13- 20. Several working group members stated a preference for a centralized GSA that would form a new agency through the exercise of a Joint Powers Authority(JPA) in large part because this model creates a clear mechanism for non-public agency stakeholders to participate in decision-making. One participant also 2 SGA14 Implementation: Tina Subbasin Governance Pf"orking Group Mee ting Summary, February 22,2018 asked if GSRs had considered the formation of advisory committees and their possible composition, purpose and roles and responsibilities. Stakeholder Communication & Engagement Tania briefly reviewed the SGIVIA requirements associated with stakeholder outreach and engagement, See Attachment A. slides 21-23. She also gave an overview of DWR's Stakeholder Communications and Engagement Guidance framework and requested stakeholder ideas on how best to conduct outreach and engagement to some stakeholder groups that are particularly challenging to reach, such as domestic well users and disadvantaged communities, A few meeting participants requested the opportunity to provide comments on the Communications&Engagement(C&E) Plan (See Attachment B), Next Steps Vina Governance Working Group Meetings occur the last Thursday of every month through June 20,18. Working Group meetings are open to the public. The next meeting will occur on 3/29 from 3-5 at the Chico Masonic Center, The GSA Managers Meetings (Governance Subcommittee) take place between Working Group meetings. A Vinila subbasin evening public meeting will occur on April 26, 2018 from 6-8 PM at the Chico Masonic Center in lieu of the April Governance Working Group meeting, Action Items Item Responsible Timeframe for Parftt Completion 1. The City of Chico will continue discussions with DWR and Butte City of Chico Basin Boundary County to understand the implications and identify next steps to DWR NRC Modifications must be potentially pursue a basin boundary modification. Butte County submitted to DWR by June 2018. 2. Tehama County's Water Commission will continue to discuss a Tehama County Basin Boundary possible basin: boundary modification to the county line. DWR NRC Modifications must be submitted to DWR by June 2018, 3. Distribute meeting summary with PowerPoint Presentation and Tania Carione By March 2018 draft C&E Plan to the Interested Party list and post to the Butte Paul Gosselin County Water and Resource Conservation Website at the following link: https://www.buttecounty.neVwaterresourceconservation/SustainableGr oundwaterManagementAcLaspx 4. Other self-organizing groups, such as the Agricultural Interested Parties Ongoing Groundwater Users of Butte County, etc, contact the facilitation team with any questions,and to discuss governance options and 3 S'GAIA Implenrentation Vina Subbasin Governance Iforking Group Meeting Swmnarryr,Fehrunl y 22,2018 Item Res, 6nsiWe;,,,,, 'T mefrAme fpr Paies ; arnpiletion possible proposals to agendize at future Vina Subbasin Governance Working Group meetings. Contact: Tania Carlone, Senior Facilitator, 916-2010-5149 or tcarlone@ccp.csus.edu. 5. Prepare and distribute meeting agenda to Working Group Tania March 23, 2018 approximately a week before the March meeting. Meeting participants 1. Paul Gosselin, Butte County(GSA Representative) 2. Ryan Teubert,Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District(GSA Representative) 3. Erik Gustafson, City of Chico(GSA Representative) 4. Paul Behr, Rock Creek Reclamation District(GSA Representative) 5.. Christina Buck, Butte County 6, Darren Rice, GPAC 7. John Schooling, GPAC 8. Brian Mori, Crain Orchards 9. Todd Turley„ Growner 10. Rich McCowan, RMF Inco, 111. Bruce Smith, City of Chico Resident 12., George Barber, CalWater 13. Ron Ginuchio, Grower 14. John Crowe, Grower 15. 'Natalie Carter, BEC 16.. David Skinner, Butte Water Commission 17. Susan Strachan, GPAC 18. Pete Bonacich, CalWater 19, Steve Glaz, Grower 20. Debbie Spangler, DWR 21. Tania Carlone, Facilitator Attachments Attachment A: PowerPoint Presentation Attachment B: Vina Subbasin Communications & Engagement Plan 4 Sustainable � �mt � ��t t � � Er�tt� n iJVina r Goverriai,xe Group , a ornia State University Sacramento Tania Carlone� Senior Facilitator � r February 22, 201 Mfr Agenda Oveirview m SGMA Updates and Announcements T Governance Subcommitteertim SG,MA Guiding Principles Discussion Stakeholder Communications Et Engagement Implementation Discussion Next Steps adlietat"lon Support Services I Purpose of Phase 11 DWP Facilitation Support Services (FSS) Program l Basin-specific establishment of overnance structure for Groun water Sustainability Plan (GSP) development and implementation Communications and Engagement Plan and Implementation Facilitation Team Dave Ceppos, Associate Director (East and. 'West Butte) l% Tania Carlone, Senior Facilitator (Fina and 'Wyandotte Creek) t Malka Kopell, Senior Facilitator (Countywide support and Community ` f1 Engagement Specialist) ��% �% �j%%%' ''�I �f t�� 1�'�i /��% i�//j %j�% ,,�i�,�� /�%/�� ,%, /i, � � ��/i /� ��i,// ��i//;/ //,ff iii/��,,; �,�,�jl AIS � iip ' %,/�,i��,�/% iii/�J�f rv, ✓ii i��f �, � . j�%� ��j/ �� y %��/,� , �i��i� � GSA Updates i Butte ��,o� e County Rock reek Rectarnation District oo, City of Chico 000, Questions Et Answers for Clarification � r jirr SII i ��tee e p �r oo Second meeting hued on February , x.01 (meets %i monthly between Working Group meetings) pio- Purpose of Subcommittee (GSA Managers): To develop governance proposals which all GSA parties rrrrr/!% consider workable for GSP development and implementation in the ` ina Subbasin. The draft i t 1 proposals developed by Subcommittee will be �r % presented to the Working Group for input an feedback. GSA governing bodies will make final i% decisions about governance. oo, Key Discussion Themes. r ;, Io, GSA managers confirmed interest in developing two ,✓i�f governance options: (1 ) retain single GSA statuses and coordinate on development of one GSP; 2) create a multi-agency GSA that would establish a Joint Powers Agency �o, Butte County reaffirmed commitment to include groundwater pumpers in SGMA governance beard � structure io,, Afirm ° f 11 affirmed a commitment to establishing an equitable representation of all GSs Discussed the possible use of Management Areas Vina r r� �� Subcommittee Rep ✓i %i ;Poey Discussion Themes (continued): Uo§. Some discussion that Joint Powers Authority may offer %f an advantage, particularly related to fee assessment because it could help avoid overlapping and inconsistent fee assessments on groundwater users that could occur if the basin were governed by multiple GSAs. Ioj Formerly discussed the inclusion of different options to involve stakeholders acknowledging that particularly given the Bina subbasin's reliance on groundwater that all are affected by the SGA Po � �� agreed that guiding principles may offer a good f� i /�� . �% starting pont for the agreements Iing Pdriciples 'r Po Intend to work together in mutual cooperation to develop and implement a GSP for the Vina subbasin in compliance with S ! A. oo ill affirmed � commitment to est�blishn �n equitbl� representation of all GSAs. !, ,; olo jRI,j . t�S�s are responsible for the sustainability of the basin, ll ��/;/,, MSAs will not be responsible to bear that costs to remedy the problems of individual j,urisdiotions. ipo, y y � No other agency will have the authority o l"�rn�t or interfere with the respective rights and authorities of any other agency's internal ratters including but not limited to rights to surface water supplies and assets, groundwater supplies and assets, facilities, operations, water /,�� rnana ,ennent and water supply matters. t %yp GUiding Www ��w� �� Pd,, , s is consistent with Water Code section 10720. 5(b), SGMA does not determine or alter surface water rights or groundwater rights under common law or any provision of later that determines or grants surface water rights. opo All groundwater users in the i a subbasin have r sustainability n, h an equal . tae roa�nabilit.�u� r the assn. I � he intent of governance in the Vina subbasin is to seek a cost effective practicable approach to SGMA implementation that takes advantage of economies of scale RM Guiding rDISCLISSIon What are other principles you would like to see reflected in SGMA governancein Vinad f Governance Diagram Teh�rth�a aunty Caunty of Rack geek Flaa l Cantral Butte City pf Chica clamat�arr mnd'wYater �j��/�� ,,,,.,�%.:--„.,,,,,.... � , K'�istrict Carbseu^vat�amr ✓��j�f ' m A 1//� m ro s m m u�� " G m m�' •.m m m m��i 1�� )) � �i/�G��/�� ji SGMA r"f ill e � Tradeoffs ai Models aes r / P,+� #1 Distributed GSA o,,� Each GSA assumes all responsib,ilities for their service areas (develop own CSP implement, monitor, conduct investigations, outreach, Individual fee assessment, etc.) �o, Coordination Agreements required Considerationsw �f,,�,, uio, allows for more localised control (agencies not only retain existing ��;� authorities but assume all new authorities as granted in Chapter 5 of �P, More costly and may lead to duplicative efforts and inconsistent %! regulatory framework011 Requires significantnificant coordination to ensure basun-wade sustainability Coes not provide a clear mechanism for non-public agency beneficial i��,�� users to hold decision-making roles SGMA Governance: Understanding Tradeoffs af' U"I'ffeireat Models o #2 Centralized GSA t % o,. Covers entire basin v,,h Assumes all authorities and responsibilities r New or existing, agency Considerations: Pr« Efficient and more cost effective for management and oversight of GSP o Data management and modeling more streamlined io,, Consistent regulatory framework across the basin r, opConcern about delegating authority to one entity if it results in a local Ox agency having less control in its service area 1 P;,, With the formation of a new agency where two or more eligible agencies exercise the Joint Powers Act provides a clear mechanism for non-public agency beneficial users to participate ate in decision-making % � 10, i, , �WIN ,o SGMA Goverriance: Tradeoffs P,�, #3 Combination of Centralized and Distributed oo, Centralized GSA assume some shared responsibilities o Multiple GSAs assume remaining responsibilities Considerations: lip, Offers flexibility for distributing authorities and responsibilities 01 Depending on hove configured could require more coordination (encompassing tradeoffs from Distributed models op- Requires more responsibility and cost for individual GSAs (%! pp,. Mechanism(s) for non- ublic agency beneficial users participation p i unclear (could occur on Centralized GSA or at the individual GSA investigation) l %% level but req wires further i mime®moi m f w IIIben r ue Mo Open Discussion t Management Areas: Brief Overvie Could be applied to governance model #2 or f� opo� Area within a basin for which a GSP may identify: Iiev,,,different minimum thresholds �w�r,,,, easurable objectives f Monitoring, r� Projects and management actions too GSP rest describe each Management Area, including rationale for approach �I Demonstrate it can be managed without causing undesirable results outside the Area. GSA Member Agencies Governance Opti 9 p' rnbination Centralized and Distributed: Model)- tio n Multiple GSAsretain individual GSA status and develop one GS, rl/1 through Legal Agreement I de r, ToMarnm Coalnty �//ii o/��j✓' Rock Creek � FlnndConerot � //'�j//� CltyafCln�ca tion and'tYater /G,ri/�/i�� ukte ci CoVnso�atjord N� � �j�;j, i';/ ... 16666�muuuuuuuumiiiiiiiiiuuuuum uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuumum uuuuuuuuuu c� G t�/%!%G/l/iiJ1�/�//%i%%f/; � ///%�/i�/%/,"l%///%%/i'%�//1�� f'��i/%/%%%�1/�!/F//ri/- ✓%/%�1%�,%% iii uumm i u it ON r GSA Member Agencies Ron #2- (Centralized GSA Mode li z l- Single inti-Agency GSA with interest-based seats develops one GSA through Legal Agreement(JPA) t Lanpiaap�n JPA "x�serving a shat - 9Y�k�rese/� `l% �/,�r on kxrar�l Rnr fuGuce , ;;�laas�s�s �i%' li��/��o//�� e�fgf6�c apupci�s �sruraty+ ifimck C� �p��/�� i c R �9 n GSA Board %i/G� in Mo 'stk ,,,a Wit j 11 ll1�j Tehama Ca�amrty ,,i� Ftrond CrsnkraaG � r1�/ t Ji,� � Ccr�se BLiatM ///%p GSA Member Agencies Governance Conic Multi-Agency GSA with eligible current and future eligible, 0 agencies develops one GSP through Joint Powers Author Flasxt Conkrot / �i,/ y �5�Baard � anal rNarc�er` �j�i%%j Cor�servak9on �;/�, [oumky of �kock Creek, ��G��i��i C�k of Chaco Reclawrkation GSA kcr7rd //��///,� ��11I yCd Vu' ail uuuuiji, ii �jl iN��, r tg, C,ID N A Nm m amm om h. m Pw a a . �! IIIA p I„„III +f/ Communication & Engagement Plan Steps Developing a C&E Plan consists of seven general steps,These steps are illustrated in Figure 2 and explained in further detail below. G 0 100 ) 0 0 0 (9 Se J0sa nd Identify t 7Audience Messages Venues for Implementation Evaluation 'r Desired� You r Survey and andTalking Engaging Timeli!ne and Outcomes Audiences Mapping Points Assessment Describe the Develop a brood Conduct a Define the key identify Create a timeline At certain points situat;on at a high list of 5 takeholdets, stakeholder messagesyou I opportunities to inform the on the thneline level—set clear goofs groups,and survey to develap need to effectively (venues and process and evofuoteif(oodto and objectives, organi7atlons Who a"Lay of the convey to your methods)to highlight wh en to whato(egiee)you Identify a verridir)y need to engage in Land"document various oudiencesengage engage with are meeting the concerns theptoces5 stakeholders audiences C&EPJanwols I A sDWR Guidance Document for C&E Plan ii Nett:p://vv'ww,wat,,(,,,,,�,,r--a,fl)o,v/ lr,o(,ind\A�a,ter/!s�?,T�,i/l,?(Jfs/GD UH �-iria[ 2()17-06�?-9�pof iii mxg "In 0, ;ro iuuurusMA C i mw Engagement (CF.t-E) e f Uum %y I • All Groundwater lasers • Local Landowners f • Holders of Overlying Rights • Disadvantaged (agriculture and domestic) Communities • Municipal Well Operators • Business and Public Water Systems • Federal Government • Tribes • Environmental Uses � • County • %�„� �t Surface Water Users (�f • PlanningDepartments !i De artments connection between surface and r Land Use ,�r�r�a��d grater) Iwo, �'Prii�Grfi Io Hew can this process effectively engage and be inclusive of the relevant beneficial users in this subbasin? Who are the key audiences? po, '"khat information de these groups, need? ol), Hew best to communicate with thesegroups? ormp What are your recommendations for hew to conduct outreach and communications for the public workshop that ' will take place later this s ring? From your perspective, what should be the goals and %i outcomes, of the public workshop (agenda)? IM ff �iii Iqext inM, i Overview �� Governance Process, Tvrnel�ne (through June 201 8) Governance perk Group Meetings (the last Thursday of every month) .feint GSA , anagerseetin s (Governance %, Subcommittee) (the seven Thursday of every month) /�,, -basin Public Meeting (April, 26 2018 from 6-8BinaSuluwI— Z- rV U pm instead of Working, Group from 3-5) Passible Legal Review Subcommittee (Late Spring 20,18) ,JJ Communications and Engagement plan Draft (February meetings 7.4 'I... uuuwm HANK Tania ar C e, California State University, Sacramento (916) 200-5149 ( eon) ';% d l /� Prepared by the Center far Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Implementation WORKING DRAFT Vina Subbasin Butte/Tehama Counties Stakeholder Communication and Engagement Plan Version: February 28, 2018 NOTE: In order to ensure on adaptive, responsive approach to stakeholder outreach and engagement, it is intended that the components of this plan be developed in collaboration with the Vina Subbasin stakeholders. This process has already begun, and this version incorporates the results of that collaboration to date. The plan will be updated as the collaborative process continues. Goal and Desired Outcomes of the Plan The central objective of this Plan is to provide a framework and identify tools to engage stakeholders in current and future Sia UIL activities in the Vina Subbasin. 'I'he engagernent and communication process is intended to be concurrent with the activities to refine basin governance, which are presently underway. Stakeholder communication and engagement will continue throughout the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) planning process. l"igure 1 below illustrates the timeline for the concurrent processes of stakeholder engagement and other SGMA activities in the Subbasin: *Finalize GSA *Continue GSP •Continue,GSP -GSPdocument governance planning process planning process preparation and *Begin GSP planning aSTAKEH�OLDER eSTAKEHOLDER adoption process ENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT *STAKEHOLDER *STAKEHOLDER i ENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT 17,{qure 1. Subbasin Governance/GSP PlanniRy Timeline and Stakeholder Communication at a Glance (See Attachment I for a more detailed project schedule for the Vina Subbasin (3 SR) I I P a g e Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy,Colifomia State University,Sacramento This Plan articulates a differentiated approach and explicit activities to engage three broad stakeholder categories: ✓ Mai-iagcrs ,,iiidgoNrerningbt)diesofparticipating GSAs; ✓ Managers and governing bodies of non-participating, eligible GSAs; and ✓ Other affected parties. The Plan also identifies a variety of communication tools that will be employed to address the distinct interests of each group and provides a schedule of activities that clearly outlines the timeline for Plan implementation. SGMA Requirements for Stakeholder Outreach and Engagement SGMA requires GS,,ls to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater as a part of GS.A formation and GSP development and implementation. Further, as is stated in Water Code Section 10727.8, -rhe GSA shall encourage the active involve me of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the groundwater basin prior to and during the development and Implementation of the GSP." In addition, the GSI? Regulations require that GSAs document in communications section of the GSP the opportunities for public engagement and active involvement of diverse social,cultural and economic elements of the population within the basin. Relevant Participants/Potential Audiences in the Vina Subbasin Participating GSAs There are four GSAs within the Vina Subbasin that are actively participating in GSP development: Rock Creek Reclamation District-, City of Chico: ✓ County of Butte, and Teharna County Flood Control and Conversation District .At present, there is agreement among the participating GSAs that they will collaborate in the development of one GSP for the subbasin. Non-Participating Eligible GSAs Currently, there are two non-participating eligible GSAs in the Vina Subbasin: V Viva.Irrigation District; and V Stanford Vina Ranch Trrigation Private Water CotTipanies California Water Service Chico, as the primary water supplier for the (-,try of Chico, has an interest in either having a decision making or other significant role in SGMA implementation in the Vina Subbasin. 21 mage Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento Agricultural Stakeholders Groundwater dependent agricultural stakeholders have a strong interest in pursuing an influential role in Vina Subbasin governance. The newly-formed association called the Agricultural Groundwater Users of Butte County offers one vehicle for communication and engagement with agricultural stakeholders that rely on groundwater. Domestic Well Users A significant number of Butte County residents are served by domestic wells. There are over 12,000 domestic wells in Butte County. The distribution by subbasin is: • Vina 2,297 • East Butte 1,799 • West Butte 1,471 • Wyandotte 587 • foothill 3,437 • Mountain 2,885 Most private wells serve a household with approximately 2.5 residents which means over 30,000 people in Butte County (>15'!/o) rely on a domestic well for their water supply. People who rely on domestic well face challenges. There are three areas that domestic well users could benefit from information: 1. Drought Impact Assessn-ients—Domestic well users can face loss of water supply during droughts. Butte County has sought to identify drought impacts to domestic well users. The purpose of identifying drought impacts is to assess the extent of drought impacts and to develop data to secure disaster assistance. Resource Assistance—Having the means to contact domestic well users can assist in providing inforrnation on drought assistance prograins. 2. Education Well maintenance—Many problems experienced by domestic well users are the result of inadequate well maintenance. The department has distributed well. maintenance information primarily through the monthly newsletter and through the media.. Water Conservation—Reducing the water demand can strengthen the water supply reliability of domestic wells. Education programs on water consermtion directed at domestic wen,users have Primarily gone out through the monthly newsletter and through the media. 3. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Domestic well users are a major component of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA is not applicable in the Foothill or Mountain areas. In SGMA, most domestic well users are defined as de min�irnis extractors, a person who extracts, for domestic purposes, 2,A]-,'/),r or less of groundwater. As a de mininais extractor, domestic well users are exempt from metering or reporting. But dornestic well users are one of the defined"Beneficial User of Groundwater". 3 1 1) a g e Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento In developing the groundwater sustainability plan (GSP),groundwater sustainability agencies (GSA) must consider interests of domestic well users and maintain a list of interested parties and provide notices on activities. Currently domestic well users are contacted through the department mailing list,webpage and media. At various public events, domestic well users are encouraged to sign up to receive notices from the department. During drought periods, the department has more opportunities to communicate with domestic well users. Media coverage provides contact information for domestic well users to report well problems and receive drought information via the department website. Although this method is not very efficient,Butte County leads the state in receiving reports from domestic well users. Proposed Domestic Well Outreach Program The current methods of contacting domestic well users is inefficient and can be improved. The program to broaden the outreach to domestic well users involves developing a method to identify domestic well users and establishing a protocol for messaging. • Identification Butte County GIS data layers provide the means of identifying residentially zoned parcels not served by domestic water purveyors. Employing the GIS data layers, the owners of the parcels has been generated. Follow up issues: ■ Not all parcels are serving a residence. It may be difficult to remove these from the list ■ The listed owner may not be the resident of the parcel. Additional data layers that identify the resident of the parcels should be sought. ■ The list of parcels should be sorted by subbasin. ■ .ability to remove existing contacts • Key Messages The identification of parcels not served by a water purvey identified over 10,000 owner addresses. The first/introductory mailing would include the following: o Brief introduction o Describe the interest of domestic in drought, sustainability and resources o Suggest that the well users/owner subscribe to one or more the contact lists at the department. The department is in the process of implementing Constant Contact to manage its email lists. Constant Contact can allow people to subscribe to specific topics (e.g, drought,SGMA). The introductory mailing could be done on an annual basis. The subsequent mailings could be direct mailing on specific topics (e.g.,Subbasin stakeholder meeting). SGMA Under SGMA,GSAs are obligated to maintain a list of interested parties and to consider the interest of beneficial users of groundwater. The Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) will include a notice 41 Page Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento and communication plan. The domestic well users outreach program can be incorporated into the GSI' notice and communication plan. Groundwater Purnpers Advisory Corninittee (GPAC) "I'he he County initially formed the GIIAC to advise the Board of Supervisors oil SGNIA in-tplernentation. It is another venue to keep the group informed, educate the community about SGMA, and to share/exchange information, The GPAC includes two private pumpers froth each of the four groundwater basins in Butte County plus one en-6roninental representative for the entire County. The future of the GPAC is unclear since it is a countywide advisory group and governance 1 and G 'SP n discussions transitioned to a basin specificapproach in late 2017, Environmental Uses There are not any wildlife refuges or reserves in the Vina subbasin. However,the environmental uses constitute a critical component of the subbasin. There are a number of interest groups focused on preserving the environmental uses including: • Sierra Club • Trout Unlimited • Butte Environmental Council • AquAlliance • Sacramento River Preservation Trust Tribes in Butte County There are four* federally-recognized Native American tribes in Butte County: o Berry Creek Rancheri'll of Maidu Indians o Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California o Mcchoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria + Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California The KonKow Valley Band of Maidu Indians is also recognized by the County and the State and has applied I 171 pplied for federal recognition. Two of the four Native American tribes are located in SUbbasins subject to SGMA. 'I'he Moomlomn Rancben'a of Maidli Jndians is located in the Wyandotte Creek subbasin. The Mechoopla Indican Dibe of Chim does not have designated hands but is considered to be in one or more subbasins subject to SGMA. The Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians and the Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians are not located in a subbasin subject to SG.N.Lk. Meaningful Tribal outreach, dialogue and consultation is a shared obligation of all the GSAs in the applicable subbasin where Tribal lands exist. flowever, since Tribal lands are predominately 11-1 unincorporated portions of Butte County, Butte County will lead SC;NLk related Outreach and consultation efforts with the Mechoopda Indian Tribeand the Mooretown Rancheria. *SOURCE: httl2://w-,%r\v.dot.ca.goN,/hq/`tl,)I)/offices/``ori l3/list/ageiicies files California Federally- recognized Tribes District MI'Os RJ'PAs,l-)d Outreach Steps — phase I 1. Confirm that the two Native American tribes identified above are correctly proposed for SGMA outreach. 2. Butte County will prepare background materials related to Native American tribal outreach and engagement.. The material will include a compilation of past Native.American tribal outreach 5 1 P a g e Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, C61ifornio State University,Sacramento methods,goals,and results (including primary points of contact). T lie materials will include SGMA- related obligations for(3TSAs pursuant to SGNIA, and interests and goals as they relate to tribal Outreach and potential Participation in sustainable groundwater management planning (see Relevani DIF'Rhifoiwalion below). 3. Butte County Will conduct an initial,informal communication with tribal primary points of contact to clarify interest in comi-nunicating formally regarding SGNLk and tribal interests; request advice about qpPt0j-)riate avenues for outreach; and identify next steps. In the event a tribal representative cannot be contacted within 45 days, the County will consult with DWR.'s Office of Tribal Policy Advisor for guidance (Anecita Agustinez,DV'RI ribal Policy Advisor 4. Following successful initial communication with the Native American tribes,Butte County will facilitate the implernentation of the next steps identified in #3. Actions may include preparation of a formal letter from the Board to each of the tribes, involvement of other GSA with the tribes, and/or establishing consultation framework. Outreach Steps -- 1111'ase 11 Contingent on Phase I Outcomes. Relevant D\X1`R 111COI.-Mation SGMA Section 10720.3. ...any federally recognized IndianTribe, appreciating the shared interest in assuring the sustainability of groundwater resources,may voluntarily agree to Participate in the preparation or administration of a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan under this part through a joint powers authority or other agreement with local agencies in the basin.A participating Tribe shall be eligible to participate fully in planning, financing, and management under this part,including eligibility for grants and technical assistance,if any exercise of regulatory authority, enforcement,or imposition and collection of fees is pursuant to the Tribe'sindependent authority and not pursuant to authority granted to a groundwater sustainability agency under this part, Draft Discussion Paper tribal Participation with Groundwater Sustainability Agencies httl)://www.w,,iter.c,-L.L)-ov/gyrr)Liiidwater/s ii/I-)df:s/SGN1A Tribal QSAs.pdf gL ................................. Must a local agency exclude federal and tribal lands from its service area when forming a GSA? No, federal lands and tribal lands need not be excluded from a local agency's GSA area if a local agency has jurisdiction in those areas; however, those areas are not subject to SGN1A. But, a local agency in its GSA formation notice shall explain how it will consider the interests of the federal government and California Native American tribes when forming a GSA and developing a GSP. DWR strongly recommends that local agencies communicate with federal and tribal representatives prior to deciding to become GSA, As stated in Water Code §\1 07203, the federal government or any federally recognized Indian tribe,appreciating the shared interest in assuring the sustainability of groundwater resources,may voluntarily agree to participate in the preparation or administration of a CUSP or groundwater management plan through a JPA or other agreement with local agencies in the basin. Water Code References: §10720.3, X10723.2, §10723,8 6 j P a g e Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy,California State University,Socromento Tribal Outreach Resc-mi-ces 'rhe follow are links to agency tribal outreach resources and considerations, each of which captures important principles and resources for tribal outreach. A short summary of key outreach principles can be found below. Draft Discussion Paper'tribal participation with Groundwater SustainabilityAgencies + CalEPA Tribal Consultation policy 'Aierno (August 2015. * DWRTribal Engagement Policy (May 201'1 Ci) + CA Natural Resources AgenQr Tribal Consultation policy November 20)12 4, SWR(sB Proposed'Fribal Beneficial Uses * But.te.CQLI.IlF..Associate of Governments: Policy For Gc)veriimeiit-'I'o-Govertiii-icnt Consultation With Federally recognized Native American"I'ribal Govemn-icrits (a imdel Jvzu Mn.�p e livorlafionsedoi) o ("A Court Tribal Outreach and F,,ngagemerit Strategies + Traditional .Ecological Knowledgre resources o Water Education Foundatiori 'tribal Water Issues Olilr-eaeh Prinriple.i- y and oft eta Consider lnbcil beneJit-l""ll lijzs hi dea*�-jo n-tvalsill'o (jdeiililied by troio n here),-idcnlaly rind s(,,ek lo proltel Ifil)(11 S&Ire docalliove.,11ion)vill)llilnd qffle-'I'als 6 Cew(ble'l Illewhos�V filv�,,s coln,�enienl "I .1i)r Reqllesl relpi,,e.,w1proc(isS lrilnu li-ibes/a eicl as Ifibal r111111ral rvsoltrtvs carelakerr Oesion ale a li-ibal jj)/Wnappropi-iale SAI)II I?S0II9'(YW.1i)r Ifibal invoh,nwenl as h'fiasibh, L)etJclop N'10'1,,T.� u-,he)-r relei,,,anl Be mindful of the traditions and cultural norms of tribes in your area 1<Cy Outreach Partners/Liaisons The following are potential partners for Butte County tribal SGM,.,N outreach: o SGNLN Tribal Advison7 Group (TAC,): —rhe'frlbal Advisory Group ("f-iNG) includes tribal leadership, subject matter experts,and technical and non-technical members of local, academic,and tribal governments that are actively engaged in local groundwater management and will be key in local implementation of SGNIA.TAG members will be responsible for distribution of information and resources to their respective tribes and organizations." o California Indian Water Commission, Inc. + DWR Office ofTribal Advisor # DWR Regional Office Other Issues Basin Boundary Modification: The City of Chico (City) may consider pursuing a basin boundary modification that would allow the entire city limits to be within the Drina Subbasin. Currently the City overlies two subbasins, (Viva and 7 1: P a g e Prepared by the Centerfor Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento West Butte). In addition,Tcharna County has, had active discussions about possibly pursuing basin boundary modifications to the county line in the Nina and Corning Subbasins. Other Affected Parties As noted above, SGMA requires GSAs to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater. The GSA must establish and maintain a list of interested parties and provide an explanation of how those interests will be considered.The County has cornpiledan initial list of interested parties including but not limited to the following, as required by Water Code Section 10723.2, a) I folders of ovetlyh(ggroundiwiter nA,bls, indlldilig: 1. ricrallaaraal 11sers 2. 1)omeslic [yell on)ners b) N111nitipal ipell operwors. r) Pubh�e.-maler.+).aetvs. d) Loeal land useplannin,y as eneies. e) Environmenlal aserr ofgroundipaler. fl Suface maler users, if'Ibere is a hydrologic connection belmeen slqface andSmundwaler bodies. Tl?efe(lei-(ilgot>ei-)i)7ietil, includii)91 Baal'realAmiled to, the wililag and ivanqei-(ql.fiedeml lands. b) Crlffornia Nafive..11)7ierican Tnbes. i) JXvadvan1qged colilmunilies, includi% Baal nol linfiled to, lbose served bj,pHrale doweslic wells or s1vall cozanvwly nwler ys/ews. J) Enfilhv lisled in Seclion 10927 Mal air moniton'ti ,g and mporlhi ,g,groundn)(iler elevall'ons hi all or Saar q'a ,givundmaler basin 1)),ana ,ged Ig Me GSA. The Center will coordinate with the Governance Working Group to further develop and maintain the County's Interested Parties List. Possible activities include sull7eying stakeholder organizations and conducting personal interviews. FOR FURTI-YER DISCUSSION: Expanding the interested party list and ottempting to be inclusive of oil interested porties. What are the next steps in engaging each of the identified stakeholder groups?Are any groups missing from the current list? m�mwomnwMMMNNHMM MEEMMZNMMWMMB��M nw Messages and Talking Points Currently, as the governance structure for the basin is still being developed, there is not yet clarity- about larityabout who will be responsible for messaging or implementation of the Plan. Currently, cornruUnications are being managed by the Center. The Center recommends that the GSA Managers work collaboratively to develop relevant messages. ,,\t a minimum, the messages should include information on the following topics-. V What is SGMA? V What is a GSA? V/ What is the governance structure in the Virga Subbasin and how will GS,As work together? 81 Pa g e Prepared by the Center far Collaborative Policy,California State University,Sacramento ✓ What is a GSP,what is the schedule for GSP development, and what opportunities exist for interested parties to participate in GSP planning? In addition, the GSAs could develop guiding principles defining their collaboration that they could communicate to other stakeholders. MUMMM FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION: Develop, ment of key messages andlor guiding principles to COMMUniccte to various audiences. M NDRINNN� �Mi Tools for Engagement Public Workshop One important engagement tool that is being considered is a public workshop in April of 2018. 'rhe date should be set for that at the earliest opportunity and the agenda developed. FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION:Dote and agenda for Spring 2018 public workshop., Media Outreach Besides sending announcements via the Interested Parties i,1st,'rraditional and web-based cornmunication tools can also be used to keep stakeholders informed and engaged during the governance formation process. 'I'hey include: V Print media/newspaper articles (the County currently issues press releases to the ("h co E-,'weipri.fe Reconl) Organizational and agency newsletters Organizational and agency websites V Facebook Outreach partners The Count), of Butte currently has resources in place (including the Interested Parties List, a website, and a monthly newsletter) to use for outreach. In addition, other organizations can also partner, including: ✓ Butte County Farrn Bureau; ✓ North Sacramento Valley (NSV) Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWNgroup ('!'he MSV Technical Advisory Committee meets the third Wednesday of each month and the Board meets quarterly);and V Butte County Resource Conservation District. V Butte Environmental Council V In addition, the communicatioris strategy should include internal government briefings and updates to educate and inform the Board of Supervisors, City Council mernbers, Butte County Water Comi-ritssion and their constituents. 9 1 P a g e Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento Targeted Engagement At a minirriurn, the communications strategy should also include ongoing engagernent with the targeted communities below: Agricultural Users: As mentioned above, the Agricultural Groundwater User of Butte County association provides an opportunity for engaging and communicating with agricultural stakeholders. Domestic Groundwater Users: Butte County will conduct direct outreach to all the landowners not served by water purveyors. Disadvantaged Communities (DACs): Butte County has rnaps that illustrate DAC areas within the Vina Subbaasiri. They could be helpful for targeted mailings. Tribes: Butte C aunty has developed a Tribal En agement Strategy that will facilitate outreach to and eng-agernent of tribal communities in the Vina Subbasin. Groundwater Pumpers Advisory Committee (GPAC): As of this writing, the future of the G13AC is unclear,but if it continues it could sell,e as another vehicle for outreach and engagement. Interested Party List Updates The Center and the Governance Working Group will collect the names and contact information of interested parties,at the public meeting, at a minimum.Through targeted outreach, the Center,in coordination with participating agencies, will build and refine the Interested Parties List. Educational Materials DWR has developed various educational materials about SGMA and GSA/GSP development. In addition to DWR materials, academic institutions and foundations have published useful reports about SGMA implementation. While not comprehensive,Table 2 lists some essential SGM.A educational and reference materials. Table 2. Educational and Reference Documents for SGMA Irnplementotion Groundwater Sustainability Agency Frequently Asked Questions DWR January 7, 11 ttl):/Z-,vww.wq,ter.ca.gov/groundwater/s /od fi-,/DWR GSA FAQ 2016-01- 2016 Q2udf Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSI) Emergency Regulations (3-uide DWR July 2016 101 Pa g e Prepared by the Centerfor Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento .MEMEMEMEMEMM I ://www.watei.-.c,,i.govZgroiitidwater/sgin/pdfs/GSP final lies Quidebook.)df Collaborating for Success: Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Groundwater Communit�� July 21115 Management Act 1niplenxentation Water httl7:! ✓w,,LtCrfoundat6c)ti.iictJ 4S+'l7- Center content n altrads 20115 07 'SGMA Stakeholder Engagement..-White ria)er.adf Clean ' ^pater Fund Union of Concerned Scientist 'rhe 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: A Handbook to eater October Understanding and Implementing the Law Education 2015 httpAvww.watereduca tj on.orgZ sites main Z files file- foundation attacli.ments roundwatei-na 7thandbook oct2fl15.-df Implementation Task and T rnefine As the:governance structure for the Subbasin is still being worked out,it is unclear at the moment how the communication and engagement:tasks will be allocated.'Fhat task plan also needs to include a timeline. FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION: Task allocation and timeline. FAMMMMAMIMMMOMM Evaluation and Assessrment. .An),communication strategy should,include opportunities to check in at various points during implementation to ensure that it is meeting the communication and engagement goals and complying with SGNIA law."I'hese cheek-ins can include: ✓ What worked well? V What didn't work as planned Meeting recaps with next steps v I.aisting lessons learned ... and developing mid-course corrections *' (As relevant) communications budget analysis FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Identification of opportunities for evaluation and assessment. 111 Page Prepared by the Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University,Sacramento 12 1 Page