⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 14 findings
F1
Page 12
There is no overall plan for wastewater/ground water/surface water use and protection for any governmental entity within the county.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 13
Begin the creation of a master plan that includes ground water, surface water, and waste water.
F2
Page 12
There is an integral relationship between recycled water distribution, its usage and the need for potable water.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Page 12
The SCWA has no ability to impose use reductions or other requirements directly on consumers.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Page 12
There is no consensus on wastewater priorities or objectives throughout the county.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Page 13
Determine overall county priorities regarding wastewater and examine sewer rate models to see if they are designed to accomplish the desired goals. 44
F5
Page 12
Regarding water issues, the Board of Supervisors and the Sonoma County Water Agency Board include the same people.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Page 12
The number and diversity of the wastewater treatment districts makes coordination difficult.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
Page 14
Reopen the examination of consolidation of smaller facilities and continue consolidation efforts.
F7
Page 12
There is inadequate funding for capital improvements and facilities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 13
The cities and county should consider creation of a common fund, pooling grants and a percentage of user fees to cover capital improvements.
F8
Page 12
Not one entity can afford the cost of its capital improvements from user fees alone.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 13
The cities and county should consider creation of a common fund, pooling grants and a percentage of user fees to cover capital improvements.
F9
Page 12
The planned SCWA reserve for needed wastewater projects is inadequate.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Page 14
Determine how much, realistically, should be set side for capital improvements.
F10
Page 12
Changing discharge points cannot resolve the wastewater issue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Page 14
Develop a plan to increase the quantity of water that can be discharged from Lake Sonoma.
F11
Page 12
The estimate for the number of customers for recycled tertiary water was based on well pump-out limits, since overturned in a court decision. Information regarding aquifer capacity is largely unavailable.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
Page 14
Continue and expand the study of the aquifers to better determine their health and capacity.
F12
Page 12
F13 Water allotments were based on getting the 35% additional water rights from the state, but the request was not approved.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
Page 12
Water allotments were based on getting the 35% additional water rights from the state, but the request was not approved.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Page 12
The SCWA may not be able to meet its current contractual commitments. Conclusions 43 Effective overall management of Sonoma County's water and waste may be limited by the absence of a central decision making entity. Each district, large or small, maintains its independence. This is the case even when there is inadequate or no funding to provide or improve water quality or increase quantity. Certainly few, if any, are in a financial position to improve their facilities. While it is clear that complete physical plant consolidation is not feasible or desired, consolidation of some of the smaller entities might well lead to cost saving efficiencies. Further, there is currently nothing to compel performance or to make decisions based on the overall impact those decisions will have on the county as a whole. Decisions, therefore, tend to be made primarily on what is best for that particular entity. Failure to consider the county as a whole in the process can lead to short term, expedient "solutions." For example, Santa Rosa might enhance its ability to get rid of waste, but that does not resolve the wastewater problem, and could create problems for others in the county. It appears that the Board of Supervisors, sitting as the Board of Directors for the Sonoma County Water Agency and the Board of Public Utilities being appointed by the Santa Rosa City Council are organizational structures that can serve to politicize decisions about resources. Decisions regarding our precious natural resources might be better made on a non-partisan basis. The system of financing capital improvements almost entirely with user fees coming from the individual entity's users is clearly a concept that is past its time. While no one is happy about paying for improvements they will not personally use, the fact is that virtually none of the districts can afford, on their own, the improvements that are needed. There is no uniformity of user fees across the county. Over five years ago, the SCWA recommended consolidation of the smaller districts (under 2500 connections served) to provide less expensive service. To date there has been only one consolidation, and that one has been partial. All of this has a very direct impact on healthy growth and development of the county and its cities. The extent to which water and wastewater will constrain future growth will depend on the amount of ground water available to supplement the surface water supply, and the amount of treated wastewater used to offset potable water use and agricultural demand. Making wise decisions requires the kind of stake holder cooperation that brought the geysers project to a successful conclusion. Commendations The grand jury commends the stakeholders whose cooperation across partisan lines enabled the successful completion of the Geysers Project.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 13
The SCWA and the BPU should contact other counties that have created a central, separate water board to examine its feasibility and adaptability to Sonoma County.
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 13Effective overall management of Sonoma County's water and waste may be limited by the absence of a central decision making entity. Each district, large or small, maintains its independence. This is the case even when there is inadequate or no funding to provide or improve water quality or increase quantity. Certainly few, if any, are in a financial position to improve their facilities. While it is clear that complete physical plant consolidation is not feasible or desired, consolidation of some of the smaller entities might well lead to cost saving efficiencies. Further, there is currently nothing to compel performance or to make decisions based on the overall impact those decisions will have on the county as a whole. Decisions, therefore, tend to be made primarily on what is best for that particular entity. Failure to consider the county as a whole in the process can lead to short term, expedient "solutions." For example, Santa Rosa might enhance its ability to get rid of waste, but that does not resolve the wastewater problem, and could create problems for others in the county. It appears that the Board of Supervisors, sitting as the Board of Directors for the Sonoma County Water Agency and the Board of Public Utilities being appointed by the Santa Rosa City Council are organizational structures that can serve to politicize decisions about resources. Decisions regarding our precious natural resources might be better made on a non-partisan basis. The system of financing capital improvements almost entirely with user fees coming from the individual entity's users is clearly a concept that is past its time. While no one is happy about paying for improvements they will not personally use, the fact is that virtually none of the districts can afford, on their own, the improvements that are needed. There is no uniformity of user fees across the county. Over five years ago, the SCWA recommended consolidation of the smaller districts (under 2500 connections served) to provide less expensive service. To date there has been only one consolidation, and that one has been partial. All of this has a very direct impact on healthy growth and development of the county and its cities. The extent to which water and wastewater will constrain future growth will depend on the amount of ground water available to supplement the surface water supply, and the amount of treated wastewater used to offset potable water use and agricultural demand. Making wise decisions requires the kind of stake holder cooperation that brought the geysers project to a successful conclusion.
Commendations 1
-
CM1 Page 13The grand jury commends the stakeholders whose cooperation across partisan lines enabled the successful completion of the Geysers Project.
Agency Responses 3
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.
Sonoma County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office
Sonoma County Water Agency
Special District
Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District
Special District
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.