California water board may issue revised water use policy

The state water board might allow local revisions of drought-mandated water restrictions|

Despite the comfortably wet winter that El Niño brought the northern part of California, state and local officials remain obligated to maintain state-required emergency regulations to ensure water conservation continues in 2016, as reflected in the State Water Resources Control Board’s February renewal of drought control measures.

But grey skies may be clearing up, at least from a water-flow standpoint. The Water Resources Control Board (WRCB) is re-evaluating those emergency regulations in the wake of the wet winter, replenished reservoirs and successful conservation efforts that parts of California, including Sonoma, have enjoyed.

Just last week, on April 20, they held a five-hour public workshop in Sacramento to explore the possibility of a “mid-stream adjustment” to the drought control measures. Recommendations from that meeting could be issued as early as next week, and might lead to local revisions of the latest regulation renewal. These relaxed water restrictions may be announced as soon as May 5.

“We made a commitment back in February that we would hold a public workshop, take public comment from water districts, and look at revising the current regulations,” said George Kostyrko, communications director for WRCB. “The changes we made in the last version were a direct response to water suppliers coming to us and saying, Would you consider this?”

The first emergency regulation in 2014 asked for a voluntary 20 percent reduction statewide; when Gov. Brown made his dramatic snow-line announcement in March 2015 that a mandatory 25 percent reduction was necessary, the WRCB responded with a renewed emergency regulation, which had to be renewed yet again in February 2016.

State drought water use regulations have been renewed every nine months because, according to Kostyrko, the 275-day renewal period allows the Board to continue emergency regulations without going through the more permanent process of rewriting state code. That would require legislative action and probably time-consuming, expensive CEQA analysis.

“During all the revisions, we’re getting feedback from water districts saying we understand why you had to act quickly, we’re behind it, but there are some unintended consequences,” said Kostyrko. Those consequences included a number of water districts that have made great strides toward water conservation, and have less pressing drought conditions than other areas.

Inevitably, local water districts are asking why their customers have to suffer the same stringent restrictions that may make sense in Indio, but not so much in Sonoma.

Both Lake Sonoma and Lake Mendocino are at or near 100 percent capacity.

The North Coast, as well as receiving more rain than California, also has cooler and cloudier weather patterns, which means evaporation is a fraction of that in hotter, sunnier areas. More rainfall, and greater storage potential in large reservoirs like Shasta, mean that Northern California’s vulnerability is different than that found in the Southland.

The Valley of the Moon Water District was among over 100 water districts, county boards and other governments and utilities that formally requested the Water Resources Control Board modify its mandatory requirements to conserve water during a three-week period of public comment prior to last week’s meeting.

In that five-hour informational workshop, the Water Control Board evaluated the comments and testimony and heard presentations from WRCB staff, the Regional Water Authority of the Sacramento Region, and others.

“As our reservoirs are full and have returned to normal supply levels, state-mandated conservation could lead to the need for artificial rate increases that the District nor our customers feel is appropriate,” read the strongly-worded VOMWD letter to the Water Control Board, co-signed by president Jon Foreman and general manager Daniel Muelrath.

Foreman and Muelrath wrote that “we can no longer condone the continued use of generalized statewide water supply and hydrologic conditions to drive local decisions regarding water supply.”

“It is time for local water decisions to be made at the local level again,” they argued.

The water suppliers also requested recognizing past performance in reducing customer demand beyond conservation targets, exempt or reduce requirements for small suppliers, but keep end-user requirements to comply with water conservation measures.

VOMWD, for instance, recently boasted on its Facebook page of a 32 percent reduction in water use over the previous March – well ahead of state-required conservation goals. Any adjustments or modifications to the drought control measures would be a significant step for the Water Resources Control Board, which has been adamant about enforcing draconian water use restrictions state-wide.

Recommendations from that meeting could be issued as early as next week. Any revisions could be passed on May 18 at the regularly scheduled WRCB meeting. The new requirements, if adopted, would go into effect June 1.

Just what those relaxed water use standards would be is anybody’s guess. “With that said,” noted City of Sonoma Public Works Director Dan Takasugi, “it would be helpful to stand down from our Stage 2 Water Conservation Alert status, which mandates restrictions on outdoor irrigation.”

Muelrath echoed Takasugi’s caution and hopes. “It is premature to predict the state, but there is an expectation to relax the percent-level of conservation, or to hopefully eliminate the mandatory component altogether in areas that have returned to normal water conditions.”

“While we are hopeful that we are turning the corner on this drought, the truth is that it’s just too soon to tell,” said Felicia Marcus, chair of the State Water Resources Control Board. “Any additional water we can conserve today will serve us well tomorrow if the drought continues.”

Contact Christian at christian.kallen@sonomanews.com

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.