Water Management in Santa Barbara County Keep Up the Good Work

Conclusions 4

• CL1
  Despite a 2016-17 Grand Jury finding that limitations existed in coordinating water management, the Jury finds that coordination among different water management entities in the County has improved significantly.
• CL2
  Despite community concerns about water scarcity, all of the public entities the Jury investigated that provide and manage water in Santa Barbara County have made proactive plans to fortify against future droughts and provide sufficient water necessary to support future housing growth and commerce.
• CL3
  The City of Santa Barbara has gone beyond the basic management of water resources for its residents by utilizing desalination to innovatively expand local water availability. REQUIREMENTS FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code §933 and §933.05, the Grand Jury requests each entity or individual named below to respond to the findings and recommendations within the specified statutory time limit. 2024-2025 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 8 Responses to Findings shall be either: - Agree - Disagree with an explanation - Disagree partially with an explanation Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: - Has been implemented, with a summary of the implementation actions taken - Will be implemented, with an implementation schedule - Requires further analysis, with an analysis completion date of fewer than 6 months after the issuance of the report - It will not be implemented with an explanation of why City of Santa Barbara – 90 Days Findings 1, 2, 3 Board of Directors, Santa Barbara County Water Agency – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Goleta Water District – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Carpinteria Valley Water District – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Carpinteria Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency – 90 Days
• CL4
  Water continues to be a scarce resource in Santa Barbara County, one which must be managed if the needs of the County—residential, commercial, and agricultural—are to be met. The Jury investigated the current status of water management in the County and was pleased to learn that not only are the current, relatively abundant, water resources being well managed, but also that all of the agencies the Jury examined have solid plans in progress or ready for implementation for the next inevitable drought. Water agencies and districts in Santa Barbara County know and understand that the drought cycle is a fact of life. Recognizing this, water agencies and districts face challenges in providing water for residential, commercial, and agricultural needs as well as meeting state-mandated housing requirements. Nevertheless, each entity the Jury interviewed has plans in place to both meet fluctuating drought pressures as well as future demand due to population growth and development. Yet the people of Santa Barbara County, and the officials tasked with providing their water, should not be complacent in these good tidings. Appropriately meeting Santa Barbara County’s water needs in the future requires the maintenance of existing water treatment and distribution infrastructure and a continued insistence on water conservation. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Finding 1: Despite community concerns about water scarcity, all of the public entities the Jury investigated that provide and manage water in Santa Barbara County have made proactive plans to fortify against future droughts and provide sufficient water necessary to support future housing growth and commerce. Finding 2: Despite a 2016-17 Grand Jury finding that limitations existed in coordinating water management, the Jury finds that coordination among different water management entities in the County has improved significantly. Finding 3: The City of Santa Barbara has gone beyond the basic management of water resources for its residents by utilizing desalination to innovatively expand local water availability. REQUIREMENTS FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code §933 and §933.05, the Grand Jury requests each entity or individual named below to respond to the findings and recommendations within the specified statutory time limit. 2024-2025 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 8 Responses to Findings shall be either: - Agree - Disagree with an explanation - Disagree partially with an explanation Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: - Has been implemented, with a summary of the implementation actions taken - Will be implemented, with an implementation schedule - Requires further analysis, with an analysis completion date of fewer than 6 months after the issuance of the report - It will not be implemented with an explanation of why City of Santa Barbara – 90 Days Findings 1, 2, 3 Board of Directors, Santa Barbara County Water Agency – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Goleta Water District – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Carpinteria Valley Water District – 90 Days Findings 1, 2 Carpinteria Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 San Antonio Basin Water District – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 San Antonio Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 Cuyama Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency – 90 Days Finding 1, 2 2024-2025 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury 9

Agency Responses 5

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

No Responses Found 3

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.