Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
2021-2022
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
Vegetation reduction must become a major priority for the County to adequately protect communities, critical infrastructures, and ingress/egress routes from increasing wildfire risk.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R4:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should require the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience to report directly to the Board of Supervisors on vegetation reduction planning and execution every six months. (F1, F10)
F2:
The Santa Cruz Public Libraries website states that Measure S funds would be used to address the “most urgent needs” identified in the Facilities Master Plan, which stated no new library branches were needed and focused only on the needs of the existing ten library branches—likely misleading voters. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Santa Cruz Public Libraries (SCPL) website provides general information on the facilities master planning process conducted in 2013. This eventually led to the development of the LFFA and related CFD No. 2016-1, which placed Measure S on the ballot in 2016. The Facilities Master Plan (FMP) was conducted prior to Measure S and covered needs at the time. The FMP was not part of the Measure S ballot measure language and voter materials. However, as stated on pages 3 and 4, the FMP identified the need to upgrade, renovate or replace the Downtown Branch Library. The FMP also identified the need to create program space for the Live Oak Branch Library. Since program space could not be accommodated at the Live Oak Branch Library, it was done at the Live Oak Library Annex. The new facility is explicitly authorized under the plain language of Measure S. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the Santa Cruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: First, Government Code Section 50075.1 sets forth requirements for identifying “specific purposes” for any local special tax measure that is subject to voter approval. Section 50075.1, subdivision (a) requires that the ballot measure include “[a] statement indicating the specific purpose of the special tax[,]” while subdivision (b) requires “that the proceeds be applied only to the specific purposes identified pursuant to subdivision (a).” The Measure S ballot language met this requirement because it did inform voters that monies generated through the measure would go to Live Oak, including to “support growing use by children, senior, veterans, and others; expand access to modern technology, and construct/expand facilities where necessary.” Secondly, the law does not require a public agency to identify how each dollar generated by a specific tax measure will be spent. In fact, courts have consistently held that “the rule is that public bodies may submit bond propositions in broad and general terms.” (Monette-Shaw v. San Francisco Bd. of Supervisors (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1210, 1221 [finding that a measure for “the acquisition, improvement, construction and/or reconstruction” of a specific hospital did not limit the County to building a new hospital at a different location].) Under the plain language of the ballot measure and the related resolutions, it is reasonable to expect the voters had no interest in micromanaging the SCPL or exactly which projects should be undertaken. As previously noted, the ballot materials also described how the funds would be distributed to specific member agencies. Details on how each member agency planned to specifically use Measure S funds is neither required by law nor practical. While this report focuses on Live Oak, note that the ballot language did not include how funds would be spent in other County areas (Felton, Aptos, Boulder Creek, etc.), nor was it required to do so. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 281
F3:
Voter materials disclosed how Measure S funds would be divided among the Santa Cruz Public Libraries’ Member Agencies, but did not disclose the allocation of $5 million to a Live Oak Library Annex within the Live Oak Community Center— likely misleading voters. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Measure S funds are not limited to existing branches, and the division of Measure S funds was identified in the LFFA’s Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). This information was not required as part of voter materials. Member agencies were given an allocation of funds in the JPA, and their governing bodies could determine how those funds were spent. The JPA provided member agencies the flexibility to determine how their allocations would be used on existing or new facilities in their jurisdictions. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 277
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the Santa Cruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: First, Government Code Section 50075.1 sets forth requirements for identifying “specific purposes” for any local special tax measure that is subject to voter approval. Section 50075.1, subdivision (a) requires that the ballot measure include “[a] statement indicating the specific purpose of the special tax[,]” while subdivision (b) requires “that the proceeds be applied only to the specific purposes identified pursuant to subdivision (a).” The Measure S ballot language met this requirement because it did inform voters that monies generated through the measure would go to Live Oak, including to “support growing use by children, senior, veterans, and others; expand access to modern technology, and construct/expand facilities where necessary.” Secondly, the law does not require a public agency to identify how each dollar generated by a specific tax measure will be spent. In fact, courts have consistently held that “the rule is that public bodies may submit bond propositions in broad and general terms.” (Monette-Shaw v. San Francisco Bd. of Supervisors (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1210, 1221 [finding that a measure for “the acquisition, improvement, construction and/or reconstruction” of a specific hospital did not limit the County to building a new hospital at a different location].) Under the plain language of the ballot measure and the related resolutions, it is reasonable to expect the voters had no interest in micromanaging the SCPL or exactly which projects should be undertaken. As previously noted, the ballot materials also described how the funds would be distributed to specific member agencies. Details on how each member agency planned to specifically use Measure S funds is neither required by law nor practical. While this report focuses on Live Oak, note that the ballot language did not include how funds would be spent in other County areas (Felton, Aptos, Boulder Creek, etc.), nor was it required to do so. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 281
R6:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should direct County Fire, with support from the Resource Conservation District and the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience, to report annually to the public on progress toward published goals for improving safe movement and community protection. The first report should be published by June 30, 2023. (F3, F7, F8) Commendation C1. The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County is commended for its successful efforts in obtaining significant grants for vegetation reduction. Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By
F4:
No single agency guides the County vegetation-reduction programs and projects, a situation that contributes to the observed lack of strategic planning. Funding Vegetation Reduction through the Grants Process
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F5:
The Annex is an expansion of the Live Oak Community Center and not an expansion of the Live Oak Branch Library. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): As identified in the FMP and stated previously, there wasn’t adequate program space at the Live Oak Branch Library, and the Live Oak Library Annex (Annex) provides that space. The Annex is an expansion of library facilities in the Live Oak community. It establishes a learning center with meeting/study room space that complements the existing Live Oak Branch Library and provides additional opportunities for library-related activities and services that the existing Live Oak Branch Library could not accommodate. SCPL can provide digital literacy classes, job training, coding, and other programs for youth and adults that are not possible in the existing Live Oak Branch Library due to size and noise constraints. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the Santa Cruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: First, Government Code Section 50075.1 sets forth requirements for identifying “specific purposes” for any local special tax measure that is subject to voter approval. Section 50075.1, subdivision (a) requires that the ballot measure include “[a] statement indicating the specific purpose of the special tax[,]” while subdivision (b) requires “that the proceeds be applied only to the specific purposes identified pursuant to subdivision (a).” The Measure S ballot language met this requirement because it did inform voters that monies generated through the measure would go to Live Oak, including to “support growing use by children, senior, veterans, and others; expand access to modern technology, and construct/expand facilities where necessary.” Secondly, the law does not require a public agency to identify how each dollar generated by a specific tax measure will be spent. In fact, courts have consistently held that “the rule is that public bodies may submit bond propositions in broad and general terms.” (Monette-Shaw v. San Francisco Bd. of Supervisors (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1210, 1221 [finding that a measure for “the acquisition, improvement, construction and/or reconstruction” of a specific hospital did not limit the County to building a new hospital at a different location].) Under the plain language of the ballot measure and the related resolutions, it is reasonable to expect the voters had no interest in micromanaging the SCPL or exactly which projects should be undertaken. As previously noted, the ballot materials also described how the funds would be distributed to specific member agencies. Details on how each member agency planned to specifically use Measure S funds is neither required by law nor practical. While this report focuses on Live Oak, note that the ballot language did not include how funds would be spent in other County areas (Felton, Aptos, Boulder Creek, etc.), nor was it required to do so. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 281
F6:
The County’s decision to use Measure S funds for the Live Oak Library Annex in the Live Oak Community Center will impact the Santa Cruz Public Libraries operating budget. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Establishing the Annex with Measure S funds will not adversely impact SCPL’s operating budget. As part of future budgets, the Library Joint Powers Authority Board will consider offering programs and services at the Annex that would have been provided at the Live Oak Branch Library if there were space to accommodate them. SCPL is also exploring establishing a small free library of materials and resources at the Annex that will also not have an adverse impact on the operating budget. Library patrons will be able to use the Annex for program and meeting or study space. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 279
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R3:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the Santa Cruz Public Libraries should inform voters of the impact of facility expansion on its future operating budgets. (F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize __ what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: As noted above, State law does not require ballot measures issued for a specific purpose (i.e., construction, repairs, expansion of library facilities) to include projected impacts on various budgets in the future. It is also reasonable that voters would be aware that the construction of new facilities may require additional costs to staff and maintain those facilitates. Accordingly, the purpose of Measure S was to finance construction, repairs, and expansion of library facilities. It is unclear how the construction of the Annex impacts SCPL’s operating budget, and even if the Board authorizes future expenditures on services at the Annex those impacts would not be any more than other infrastructure upgrades or expansions to other library facilities would. For example, the Grand Jury Report points to SCPL’s responsibility for “replacing lost or damaged equipment in the Annex” as evidence that Annex will have an outsized impact on the SCPL operating budget. This concern is misplaced as it relates to the Annex and could be applied to any library improvements funded through Measure S. Funds spent to upgrade any equipment or facilities, as well as the costs to replace or repair them, are a natural and necessary portion of any library budget, regardless of location. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 283 Reducing Our Community’s Risk from Wildfire It Will Take Money, Time, and Serious Cooperation Santa Cruz and San Mateo are 100 years behind in fuels management efforts—that is, reducing the brush and other burnable material that can fuel devastating fires. “If we don’t start reducing the fuels around our communities and protecting them, it’s only a matter of time before we have another catastrophic event.” Ian Larkin, retired CAL FIRE Chief, Good Times, November 2, 2021
F7:
County residents do not have easy access to grant prioritization and project selection criteria. County Fire Organization
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should direct County Fire, with support from the Resource Conservation District and the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience, to report annually to the public on progress toward published goals for improving safe movement and community protection. The first report should be published by June 30, 2023. (F3, F7, F8) Commendation C1. The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County is commended for its successful efforts in obtaining significant grants for vegetation reduction. Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By
F8:
Neither County Fire nor the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience have staff or funding that are charged with creating, managing, and reporting on vegetation-reduction strategy, planning, and execution for the benefit of County residents.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should direct County Fire, with support from the Resource Conservation District and the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience, to report annually to the public on progress toward published goals for improving safe movement and community protection. The first report should be published by June 30, 2023. (F3, F7, F8) Commendation C1. The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County is commended for its successful efforts in obtaining significant grants for vegetation reduction. Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By
F9:
The County Fire/CAL FIRE Chief reporting to General Services does not give vegetation reduction sufficient priority and visibility.
F10:
The Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience reporting to the County Administrative Officer does not give vegetation reduction sufficient priority and visibility. Reducing Community Risks from Wildfire published June 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 305
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should require the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience to report directly to the Board of Supervisors on vegetation reduction planning and execution every six months. (F1, F10)
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R5:
By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should allocate funding for the strategic plan and community outreach recommended in this report. (F1, F2, F3,
R9:
Each year, during the budget presentation, the County Board of Supervisors should require County Fire to provide a vegetation-management plan, including a priority list of projects and a timeframe for their completion. Board of Supervisors’ Response to Recommendation 9: REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS: There is currently no funding for a vegetation-management plan for the County Fire Department. We currently coordinate with CAL FIRE on a priority list of projects that have timelines related to available funding. In order to implement such a process will require additional analysis and potential funding. To summarize the position of the Board of Supervisors two years ago: 1. Property owners are responsible for vegetation reduction on their property, not the County. 2. The County could improve its vegetation reduction activity on County-maintained roads. 3. County Fire does not have a plan. It coordinates with CAL FIRE to identify priority projects. 4. Because there is no funding for vegetation-management planning, the planning isn’t being done. 5. Priority projects are only done after grant funding has been obtained. Santa Cruz County Fire (County Fire) is Santa Cruz County’s fire department, discussed later in this report. CAL FIRE is the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, also discussed later in this report. The Grand Jury determined that vegetation reduction along roadways is a major problem that the County must lead in solving. We wanted to understand what is really needed to protect our community from future wildfires, who is responsible for achieving it, and the County’s role in ensuring this work gets done. Protecting Communities from Wildfires The highest priority areas for vegetation reduction are those that are located within, or are adjacent to, the WUI, especially high-density, special needs, or disadvantaged communities.[14] [15] Within the WUI, vegetation reduction addresses the following high-priority community protection elements: ● Costly and difficult to rebuild public infrastructure ● Above-ground utility transmission lines for water, gas, and electricity ● Communications infrastructure, such as cell towers ● Water infrastructure, such as pump stations, water tanks, pipelines, and water treatment plants Reducing Community Risks from Wildfire published June 24, 2022 290 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury ● Communities ● Schools, hospitals, and government or commercial buildings ● Homes and agricultural buildings ● Transport and natural resources ● Ridges, truck trails, access roads, and evacuation routes ● Areas where fires pose a considerable threat to water supply and water quality Beyond the WUI, where infrastructure supporting nearby communities exists, that infrastructure must be protected. During the CZU Fire, communications infrastructure failed, limiting the ability to warn residents to evacuate. Protecting this infrastructure is critical.[4] The San Lorenzo Valley Water District also suffered significant damage to above-ground pipelines.[16] Much other essential infrastructure was damaged, slowing recovery operations. Creating fuel breaks is a well-understood and commonly applied vegetation reduction method. There are two types of fuel breaks: ● A fuel break is a gap in vegetation created by removing most of the vegetation in an area to prevent the spread of a fire, as shown in Figure 3. ● A shaded fuel break is created by the thinning of dense tree cover and removal of lower-level vegetation. Less material is removed than a full fuel break, as shown in Figure 4. Fuel breaks are more effective than shaded fuel breaks, but are generally used away from residential areas because of their aesthetics. Fuel breaks are often employed to protect critical infrastructure. A large fuel break constructed by the University of California at Santa Cruz enabled firefighters to halt the advance of the CZU Fire and protected the campus.[17] Another large fuel break was constructed during the CZU Fire in Henry Cowell State Park along a heavily forested ridge to prevent the fire from reaching San Lorenzo Valley High School and Highway 9. Shaded fuel breaks are frequently used along roadways, particularly those that may become evacuation routes in the event of a wildfire. Shaded fuel breaks are cheaper and easier to maintain, are less detrimental to sensitive habitat, and often have more community support.[18] Reducing Community Risks from Wildfire published June 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 291 Figure 3. Construction of a fuel break along a ridge[19] Reducing Community Risks from Wildfire published June 24, 2022 292 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Figure 4. Construction of a shaded fuel break along an existing road[19] Reducing Community Risks from Wildfire published June 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 293 Two Major Elements to Protecting Our Communities Ensuring Safe Movement During Wildfires Providing safe evacuation routes, shelter-in-place locations, and access routes for fire crews enables safe movement for affected residents and emergency services. Safe movement is the responsibility of the state and local agencies described in
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The urgency for, and availability of, drought resilient water projects varies significantly throughout the County. There is not a simple one-size-fits-all solution as this finding implies. Through the projects already underway, the water supply agencies are making significant progress at tackling water supply security.
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): This Finding does not describe what the “establishment of a groundwater reserve” is a first step in achieving. The MGA does identify “maintaining a drought reserve” as part of the Sustainability Goal included in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan. The Groundwater Sustainability Plan outlines several critical projects that should happen concurrently for the Basin to reach sustainability, not one before the other as the Finding implies. One of these projects is the City of Santa Cruz Water Department’s Aquifer Storage and Recovery project in the Mid-County Basin. The Pure Water Soquel Project is another. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 87
F7:
Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The MGA agrees that the City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are not fully utilized. The MGA is not directly involved with the City of Watsonville and Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency on their wastewater resources and cannot respond to that item. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We partially disagree with this finding because, while we agree that the water agencies in Santa Cruz County typically communicate well, we don’t agree that the collaboration is “limited and narrow in scope”. The collaboration between agencies is ongoing and expanding. The breadth of collaboration varies depending on the alignment of each individual agency’s activities in support of their objectives and strategic work plan. There is a clear trend toward more comprehensive collaboration among larger groups of stakeholders. The proposed projects and management actions in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency’s (SMGWA) Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) are evidence of the extensive collaboration between San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD), Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD), the County and the City of Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD). As initial steps in those collaborations, SVWD and SCWD applied for and received grant funding to construct a pipeline that will enable water supplies to be managed more efficiently across the region, and SLVWD and SCWD signed an agreement to cooperate regarding the process to enable SLVWD to exercise its contractual right to Loch Lomond water and are currently in discussions on how to advance this project. SMGWA is working on the implementation of its GSP agreeing on the approach of advancing a suite of projects (conjunctive use, aquifer storage and recovery, purified recycled water recharge) to be further investigated by SLVWD, SCWD and SVWD.
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): There are many agencies that collectively span the entire County, and there have been county-level efforts for decades to help our region become more water secure. Another county-level agency is not necessary, and potentially not even desirable, due to the proven collaborative efforts of the local water agencies and the high cost of creating and running an agency. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury ADDITIONAL FINDINGS (invited responses from the Mid- County Groundwater Agency Point of Contact)
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The MGA operates under the powers and responsibilities provided by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA). These powers and responsibilities are limited to achieving groundwater sustainability within the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin. To the extent that achieving groundwater sustainability will also deliver drought-resiliency, the MGA is committed to take action. Specifically, the Sustainability Goal in the adopted and approved Groundwater Sustainability Plan includes “ensure operational flexibility within the Basin by maintaining a drought reserve.” During the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan, the MGA Board determined that the MGA would take a limited role in project development and implementation. Rather, the Board understood that the water supply agencies that comprise the Joint Powers Authority are better positioned to lead the design and implementation of multi-benefit projects. Neither the MGA nor the SMGWA have any direct staff. To change the charter of the MGA would require substantial funds to hire staff to plan for projects beyond those already in the approved GSP; it would lead to questions of “scope-creep” as it is beyond the powers and responsibilities authorized by SGMA; it would be ineffective, as the water supply agencies are better suited to focus on drought response; and it would be unnecessary, as the MGA is already committed to maintaining a drought reserve within the Basin. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 89
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: 90 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Cross-agency collaboration towards regional water supply security has been ongoing for decades. This is documented in publicly available resources, which include the following: • Individual water agency Urban Water Management Plans, water supply plans, and associated studies • The Groundwater Sustainability Plans for MGA and SMGWA which feature projects developed by several partner agencies • Agreements put in place to promote collaborative work including those for water transfers and operational studies between the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District, and a Memorandum of Understanding between the County of Santa Cruz, the City of Santa Cruz, San Lorenzo Valley Water District, and Scotts Valley Water District to investigate options for conjunctive use • The Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for Santa Cruz County • The Annual Water Resources Status Report produced by the County of Santa Cruz with updates on all the major water management programs throughout the County. Neither the water supply agencies, nor the MGA and SMGWA, have the staff, money, or bandwidth to develop the proposed action plan. Further, the plan would be duplicative of existing efforts and not provide any tangible benefit to the taxpayers/ratepayers that would be funding it.
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The plain language of Measure S required use of Measure S funds for the modernization, upgrade, and repair of the existing local library branches— not community centers. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): As described in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 2016-001 for the Santa Cruz Libraries Facilities Financing Authority (LFFA) Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2016-1, the types of public facilities to be financed included but weren’t limited to library facilities in Aptos, Boulder Creek, Branciforte, Capitola, Downtown Santa Cruz, Felton, Garfield Park, La Selva Beach, Live Oak and Scotts Valley, but excluded library facilities in the City of Watsonville. Pursuant to Exhibit A, Measure S allowed for existing or new library facilities in these locations and supported various improvements and needs. This included any of the following: new construction, building renovations and service model upgrades needed to provide service desks, an area for displaying materials, separate areas for teens and children, flexible spaces and/or meeting rooms and study rooms, places to display art, new flooring, paint, shelving, furniture and technology, power/data to support library technology, and other upgrades. This is consistent with Measure S, which explicitly stated that the funds are to be used, among other things, to “construct/expand facilities where necessary.” 266 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 271 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Library JPA response to Grand Jury Report 'Mali LaGoe' via Santa Cruz Grand Jury Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:39 AM Reply-To: Mali LaGoe To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Judge Cogliati and Santa Cruz Grand Jury, Attached you will find the response from the Santa Cruz Library Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors regarding the Grand Jury Report titled “How a Community Center Became a Library.” The response was approved at our regular public meeting on August 4th, 2022. Thank you for your service to the Santa Cruz County community. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Mali LaGoe | City Manager/ Chair, Santa Cruz Library JPA Board of Directors City of Scotts Valley, CA 1 Civic Center Drive | Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Main: 831.440.5600 | Direct: 831.440.5606 Mlagoe@scottsvalley.gov | www.ScottsValley.gov Book 30 minutes with Mali 2022-3b_MeasureS_SCPL-JPA_Required_Packet final.pdf 240K 272 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Santa Cruz Public Libraries Joint Powers Authority to Respond by September 20, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and governing boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 273 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated _August 4, 2022___. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F4:
Following the dissolution of redevelopment agencies in California, County Parks was left without a ready source of capital funds needed to fulfill the vision of the Live Oak Community Center as the heart of Live Oak, and Measure S filled the void. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Facilities Master Plan (FMP) conducted by Santa Cruz Public Libraries identified the need to create program space for the Live Oak Branch Library. Since program space could not be accommodated at the Live Oak Branch Library, it was done at the Live Oak Library Annex. This expanded facility is explicitly authorized under the plain language of Measure S. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 267
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 271 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Library JPA response to Grand Jury Report 'Mali LaGoe' via Santa Cruz Grand Jury Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:39 AM Reply-To: Mali LaGoe To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Judge Cogliati and Santa Cruz Grand Jury, Attached you will find the response from the Santa Cruz Library Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors regarding the Grand Jury Report titled “How a Community Center Became a Library.” The response was approved at our regular public meeting on August 4th, 2022. Thank you for your service to the Santa Cruz County community. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Mali LaGoe | City Manager/ Chair, Santa Cruz Library JPA Board of Directors City of Scotts Valley, CA 1 Civic Center Drive | Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Main: 831.440.5600 | Direct: 831.440.5606 Mlagoe@scottsvalley.gov | www.ScottsValley.gov Book 30 minutes with Mali 2022-3b_MeasureS_SCPL-JPA_Required_Packet final.pdf 240K 272 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Santa Cruz Public Libraries Joint Powers Authority to Respond by September 20, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and governing boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 273 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated _August 4, 2022___. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F5:
The Annex is an expansion of the Live Oak Community Center and not an expansion of the Live Oak Branch Library. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): As identified in the FMP and stated previously, there wasn’t adequate program space at the Live Oak Branch Library, and the Live Oak Library Annex (Annex) provides that space. The Annex is an expansion of library facilities in the Live Oak community. It establishes a learning center with meeting/study room space that complements the existing Live Oak Branch Library and provides additional opportunities for library- related activities and services that the existing Live Oak Branch Library could not accommodate. SCPL can provide digital literacy classes, job training, coding, and other programs for youth and adults that are not possible in the existing Live Oak Branch Library due to size and noise constraints. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 271 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Library JPA response to Grand Jury Report 'Mali LaGoe' via Santa Cruz Grand Jury Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:39 AM Reply-To: Mali LaGoe To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Judge Cogliati and Santa Cruz Grand Jury, Attached you will find the response from the Santa Cruz Library Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors regarding the Grand Jury Report titled “How a Community Center Became a Library.” The response was approved at our regular public meeting on August 4th, 2022. Thank you for your service to the Santa Cruz County community. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Mali LaGoe | City Manager/ Chair, Santa Cruz Library JPA Board of Directors City of Scotts Valley, CA 1 Civic Center Drive | Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Main: 831.440.5600 | Direct: 831.440.5606 Mlagoe@scottsvalley.gov | www.ScottsValley.gov Book 30 minutes with Mali 2022-3b_MeasureS_SCPL-JPA_Required_Packet final.pdf 240K 272 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Santa Cruz Public Libraries Joint Powers Authority to Respond by September 20, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and governing boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 273 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated _August 4, 2022___. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F6:
The County’s decision to use Measure S funds for the Live Oak Library Annex in the Live Oak Community Center will impact the Santa Cruz Public Libraries operating budget. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Establishing the Annex with Measure S funds will not adversely impact SCPL’s operating budget. As part of future budgets, the Library Joint Powers Authority Board will consider offering programs and services at the Annex that would have been provided at the Live Oak Branch Library if there were space to accommodate them. SCPL is also exploring establishing a small free library of materials and resources at the Annex that will also not have an adverse impact on the operating budget. Library patrons will be able to use the Annex for program and meeting or study space. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 269
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should reassess its decision to use Measure S funds to improve the Live Oak Community Center and either reimburse the Library Facilities Financing Authority or commit additional funds to establish the Annex as a library resource consistent with other SCPL branches. (F1, F4, F5, F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The use of Measure S funds on the Annex is appropriate. It is not necessary to reimburse the LFFA or commit additional funds to establish the Annex. In addition, as previously stated, no adverse impact on SCPL’s operating budget is anticipated. The Measure S ballot language as well as Exhibit A of the ballot measure specifically allow for the expansion and construction of library facilities, including Live Oak, in order to provide flexible spaces, such as meeting and study rooms, and expand access to library technology. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 271 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Library JPA response to Grand Jury Report 'Mali LaGoe' via Santa Cruz Grand Jury Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:39 AM Reply-To: Mali LaGoe To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Judge Cogliati and Santa Cruz Grand Jury, Attached you will find the response from the Santa Cruz Library Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors regarding the Grand Jury Report titled “How a Community Center Became a Library.” The response was approved at our regular public meeting on August 4th, 2022. Thank you for your service to the Santa Cruz County community. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Mali LaGoe | City Manager/ Chair, Santa Cruz Library JPA Board of Directors City of Scotts Valley, CA 1 Civic Center Drive | Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Main: 831.440.5600 | Direct: 831.440.5606 Mlagoe@scottsvalley.gov | www.ScottsValley.gov Book 30 minutes with Mali 2022-3b_MeasureS_SCPL-JPA_Required_Packet final.pdf 240K 272 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Santa Cruz Public Libraries Joint Powers Authority to Respond by September 20, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and governing boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 273 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated _August 4, 2022___. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.
R3:
Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown ________________ in our minutes dated August 9, 2022 .
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 265
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Local water agencies and groundwater sustainability agencies are making substantial progress on tackling the challenging set of water storage and delivery infrastructure issues. They are doing so through a number of inter-agency collaborations; however, the urgency assigned to drought storage and the priorities of local water agencies vary based on their specific supply sources and technical challenges, making an over- arching, county-wide infrastructure neither desirable nor likely to be achievable.
F3:
Interdistrict water sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Acceleration and expansion of various water sharing plans must be considered in the context of mutual benefit, cost effectiveness and practicability. Also, it is important to note that not all residents are served by the public water agencies. Such water users are very likely the most vulnerable in severe drought conditions and it is notable that MGA and SMGWA have included private pumpers as key stakeholders in working towards a sustainable groundwater supply. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve is well-understood in principle, but many studies and tests are required before any particular aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) project can be deemed achievable. SCWD is currently in the recovery phase of an ASR demonstration project in which excess winter surface flows were injected into Beltz wells #8 and #12. Much has been learned, and much remains to be learned about the ongoing feasibility of ASR in the Mid-County groundwater basin. Studies of creating drought storage in the over-drafted Lompico aquifer in the Santa Margarita groundwater basin are in an early stage but advancing feasibility studies is a high priority for SMGWA. The practicability of any particular ASR project will need to be assessed in comparison with alternative solutions that are also being evaluated. An important initial step in fully implementing ASR projects in the Santa Margarita and Mid-County basins is the approval of petitions by SCWD and SLVWD before the California Water Resources Control Board to modify their water rights, changing points of diversion and places of use. This will allow water supplies to be managed regionally and more efficiently, which can support a variety of conjunctive use projects, including ASR. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 103
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that water providers typically emphasize conservation and sustainability in their communications with the public, but this is driven by California regulations requiring water purveyors to implement water shortage contingency plans. In reality, achieving drought resilience is a natural outgrowth of water shortage contingency planning and sustainability planning. The mandate of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies such as SMGWA as defined by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 is, first and foremost, to ensure groundwater sustainability. That said, the GSP developed by SMGWA includes a number of potential projects that would also improve drought resilience. This is because the climate scenario used in modeling groundwater conditions in the Santa Margarita basin for the next 20-50 years includes extended dry periods. Thus, all the projects are or will be modeled and evaluated in the context of their resiliency to drought. The planning process used in developing the GSP was noticed to the public at great expense and effort, and open for public comment every step of the way. The public was informed and encouraged to participate not only at SMGWA Board meetings but at various public and community outreach events that allowed for open dialogue and conversation. Drought resilience will no doubt be a positive by-product of implementation of projects in the GSP, and, as SMGWA moves forward with eliciting public input on the projects, planning for drought resilience will be a major component of the agency’s communications. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 99
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies in the County cannot focus their resources on County-wide strategies. They could participate in regional or County-wide projects to the extent such projects benefit the groundwater basins and are consistent with agencies’ mission under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Regardless of their lacking the charters, staff and resources, the Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) and Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency are joint unions of multiple public agencies, small water systems, and private well owners, all of whom are affected by climate conditions. As such, they have considered and will continue to consider how their collective actions might address and mitigate drought impacts. Several of the proposed management actions in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan recently adopted by SMGWA involve regional collaborations that address drought resilience -- in particular the proposed projects to use the Lompico aquifer as a drought supply storage for the City of Santa Cruz and to use wastewater generated at Santa Cruz Wastewater Reclamation Facility and further treated by Soquel Creek Water District to augment groundwater supplies in the Santa Margarita basin. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 101 Invited responses on additional findings by SMGWA representative, Piret Harmon
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 provides a list of powers that SMGWA and MGA may exercise with the objective of achieving groundwater sustainability in the basin of their particular jurisdiction. Such authority includes the ability to collaborate on drought resiliency projects to the extent such projects benefit the groundwater basins and are consistent with SMGWA’s and MGA’s purpose and jurisdiction as groundwater sustainability agencies. As documented in the SMGWA charter and guiding principles, it plans to work collaboratively with its member and partner agencies to achieve groundwater sustainability and, through this, drought resilience in the long run. SMGWA and MGA are public agencies and offer ample opportunities for public to provide input to their governing bodies on defining and prioritizing issues that would serve and benefit the stakeholders. Achieving groundwater sustainability in itself is an ambitious task that by and large is an unfunded mandate. Neither SMGWA nor MGA have dedicated staff or permanent funding sources beyond the ratepayers of local water purveyors. The groundwater sustainability agencies have neither the legal mandate nor the human and financial resources to add the task of proactively delivering drought-resilience project planning and execution to its portfolios. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Developing the suggested integrated plan would be expensive and time-consuming, requiring extensive political and legal frameworks, public education and input, planning and environmental documents and much more. It would not be an appropriate use of staff time and ratepayers/taxpayers money. The individual water agencies are already implementing projects for each respective jurisdiction as well as working on plans to collaborate and cooperatively link the districts together via projects that are feasible. Through the various water agencies participation in SMGWA and MGA, they already have made significant contributions toward prioritizing a list of potential projects set forth in their groundwater sustainability plans. The lists include high-level regional programs and projects that would have drought resiliency benefits. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 105 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Scotts Valley Water District Response to Findings and Recommendations Donna Paul Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 11:30 AM To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Cc: Piret Harmon , Ruth Stiles The Honorable Judge Syda Coglia and the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury , th On May 25 the District Board of Directors and General Manager received the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury Report: Our Water Account is Overdrawn that included a required response th to the findings and recommendations. On June 9 the Board, discussed the matter and determined that: 1) it would compile one response on behalf of the District that would include the answers to the findings presented to the invited respondent, the General Manager; 2) Board President Ruth Stiles and Vice President Chris Perri would work with staff to prepare a draft response for consideration at its next meeting; and 3) would staff conduct a survey and invited all Board Members to submit individual responses to be used th to prepare the draft response. On August 11 the Board approved and authorized staff to submit the response for the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Report: Our Water Account is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience (file attached). As requested, the response is submitted as a PDF file attachment to this email. Please direct any questions about the response to Piret Harmon, General Manager at pharmon@svwd.org. Cordially, Donna Paul Assistant to the General Manager Sco s Valley Water District 2 Civic Center Drive Scotts Valley, CA 95067-0006 Direct: 831-600-1919 dpaul@svwd.org SVWD Required Response to Findings and Recommedations (08-17-22).pdf 71K 106 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Board of Directors, Scotts Valley Water District to Respond by August 22, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The District Manager3 of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District agrees with this finding to the extent that existence of conditions leading to Stage 5 of the City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan would likely be a serious concern to the entire region. The District Manager partially disagrees with the finding because the District does not have information indicating that the City’s Stage 5 would have an extreme economic impact on the District or the San Lorenzo Valley. No-growth policies have been in effect for decades in the San Lorenzo Valley, which help this area live within its means in terms of water resources and allow for potentially high local resiliency to drought conditions. The District is fortunate to have access to a diversity of water supplies, which has helped the District continue to provide reliable, safe and high quality water to the local community despite serious damage to water infrastructure caused by the CZU wildfire. Wildfire damage has kept several major water intakes offline while the District’s water system undergoes repairs. Many of the same factors that allow the District to maintain water service under emergency conditions in the San Lorenzo Valley also create the potential to conjunctively manage District water supplies to enhance local water supply reliability while creating environmental benefits in the San Lorenzo River watershed. The Grand Jury invited the District Manager to respond to this finding and did not assign it to the District’s the Board of Directors, and accordingly this response is offered by the District Manager and not the Board. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 175
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Board of Directors and the District Manager of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District agree with the finding that there is an urgent need to create drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. This need is present throughout the State of California and particularly affects areas such as Santa Cruz County and neighboring areas that lack direct access to imported water. The District and many other governmental and non-governmental entities and individuals have been working diligently to address such issues for decades -- and with increased urgency after years of experiencing the effects of climate change including prolonged drought and wildfire. We partially disagree with the finding to the extent that a County-wide approach may not be the most effective way to meet the needs that exist within the County. In fact, areas within the County served by various water agencies have different geographical and hydrological characteristics and water-supply challenges. For example, the District is geographically distinct because of its location in the San Lorenzo Valley, which is distinguished as a no-growth area with declining water demand due to effective conservation efforts. Moreover, the District is fortunate to have access to diverse sources of surface and groundwater within the San Lorenzo Valley. For all of these reasons, the most critical drought resiliency issues facing the San Lorenzo Valley and the District, and the most practicable solutions, are quite distinct from other areas of the County. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 176 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F3:
Interdistrict water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): -- Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 177
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that groundwater reserves provide a valuable buffer against drought-related water shortages. We partially disagree with the finding because the District’s approach for achieving such reserves is described in the District’s proposed Conjunctive Use Plan (CUP). The CUP was developed in partnership with the County’s Water Resources Division. It was published in July 2021 and currently is undergoing review and possible revisions in light of legal and other comments received during the environmental review process. The District is working toward finalizing and implementing its CUP in cooperation with neighboring water agencies and regulators. The District is fortunate to have access to diverse sources of surface and groundwater that give the District the ability to conjunctively manage its water supplies to enhance water supply reliability while creating environmental benefits. The CUP envisions increasing the ability to call upon unused or underutilized water sources when water is available in order to rest groundwater wells and thereby promote recharge in the Santa Margarita groundwater basin. Increased recharge of the basin would, in turn, increase minimum base flows in streams within the basin. The CUP presents a straightforward and achievable project for enhancing aquatic habitat and water supply reliability within the San Lorenzo River watershed and the Santa Margarita groundwater basin. The proposed project described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz Water Department and, more recently, in the groundwater sustainability plan adopted by the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency, involves pumping excess winter flows into the overdrafted Lompico aquifer in the Santa Margarita groundwater basin to create drought storage for the City of Santa Cruz. The principle behind storing excess surface water flows in an aquifer and then extracting the water during a drought is well understood, but, in practice there are many challenges to implementing aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) projects. For example, pumping into a deep, confined aquifer consisting of only moderately permeable sandstone/siltstone such as the Lompico aquifer is different than many successful ASR projects in shallower, more permeable aquifers. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 178 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F6:
Limited interdistrict water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Required Response from the City Council, City of Watsonville Exhibit “A” Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 166 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Water conservation and sustainability are both significant components that help communities become more resilient. The City of Watsonville communicates regularly with its community and meets regularly with local public water agencies to discuss its water. We highlight our water resources through local events such as Day of the Child, World Wetlands Day (in partnership with Watsonville Wetlands Watch) and Coastal Cleanups. The City of Watsonville’s programs of water use efficiency have effectively lowered the gallons per capita per day of water consumption, allowing the water system to maintain a flat level of water production, despite changing populations. For areas outside City limits, the City has continued its nearly twenty-year working relationship with the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency (PV Water) to focus on sustainable drought resiliency for the agricultural community. Continued agency collaboration within the Pajaro Valley groundwater basin, combined with residential and commercial programs aimed at conservation will continue this trend towards resiliency. Required Response from the City Council, City of Watsonville Exhibit “A” Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 167
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why.
R2:
For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City of Watsonville and PV Water have been operating and distributing recycled water since 2009 with the intent to continue this partnership for many years to come. In 2021, over 3000 AF of wastewater was recycled and reused as a supplement to PV Water’s Coastal Distribution System. When there is agricultural demand, all the available wastewater is being recycled and reused. Required Response from the City Council, City of Watsonville Exhibit “A” Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 168 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 169 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Required response to Grand Jury report is due on August 22, 2022 Rosemary Menard Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 5:19 PM To: "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Hello Terry, I sent a note to this email address last week indicating that I don’t plan to respond to the report as an invited responder. Rosemary Menard Rosemary Menard Aug 2, 2022, 1:49:12 PM to grandjury@scgrandjury.org Good Afternoon – I wanted to let you know that as I will not be providing additional responses as an invited respondent to the Civil Grand Jury’s 2022 report “Our Water Account is Overdrawn.” I appreciate the offer to review your report. Best Rosemary Menard Rosemary Menard Water Director City of Santa Cruz rmenard@cityofsantacruz.com Office: 831-420-5205 Cell: 831-345-6309 170 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 171 Santa Cruz Grand Jury SLV Water Grand Jury Final Response -Our Water Account is Overdrawn Rick Rogers Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 6:11 AM To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Cc: Gail Mahood , Holly Hossack To the Honorable Judge Cogliati and the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury: Attached, please find the San Lorenzo Valley Water District’s (SLVWD’s) completed response packet in connection with the 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report, entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn, Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience.” The attached response packet includes responses made on behalf of the Board of Directors and the District Manager. The responses were approved by SLVWD’s Board on July 21. Rick Rogers District Manager SLV Water District 831-430-4624 SLVWD Board and DM - Final Grand Jury response packet - approved 7-21-2022.pdf 452K 172 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Board of Directors, San Lorenzo Valley Water District District Manager,1 San Lorenzo Valley Water District to Respond by August 22, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. This response packet is submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager Rick Rogers, in fulfilment of their obligations under PC § 933 et seq. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 173 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: The Board of Directors of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District approved these responses at a regularly noticed public meeting conducted on July 21, 2022, as shown in the Board meeting minutes.2 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. All the responses set forth herein are submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager, except that the response to F1 is offered solely by the District Manager because the Grand Jury invited such response from the District Manager and not the Board. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 174 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. All the responses set forth herein are submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager, except that the response to F1 is offered solely by the District Manager because the Grand Jury invited such response from the District Manager and not the Board. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 174 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F6:
Limited inter-district water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): It is not correct to say that the limited experience with water transfers between Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek demonstrates that this approach can work elsewhere. As noted in the responses to findings F3 and F4 above, numerous technical factors contribute to the success or failure of water transfer proposals and their ability to contribute to increased drought resiliency in mid and northern Santa Cruz County.
F7:
Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): It is correct to note that City of Santa Cruz’s wastewater resources that could potentially be used as part of a recycled water drought-resiliency project are not fully allocated and are available for potential development. We understand this Finding to be incorrect for the City of Watsonville. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 70 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Grand Jury correctly finds that substantial communication and collaboration occurs among local water agencies, but incorrectly finds that collaboration is narrow and limited in scope. Santa Cruz County’s water agency staffs work well and effectively together over a wide range of topics, including forming collaborative staffing groups to support local groundwater sustainability planning, working on regional grant applications and their implementation, collaborating among surface water providers to update the state- required source water protection focused Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo River watershed, engaging in ongoing communications and coordination about water conservation, drought messaging, and education and outreach and, over many decades, financially supporting the Regional Water Management Foundation that facilitates a range of collaborative efforts including IRWM planning. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 71
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): A review of the problem statement in the 2015 Water Supply Advisory Committee Final Report on Agreements and Recommendations demonstrates that this statement is incorrect (see of the document in reference #3 in the Grand Jury’s report). For Santa Cruz, water conservation has been a long-standing commitment and an element of its water supply reliability strategy, but the Committee’s problem statement clearly indicated that conservation alone cannot solve Santa Cruz’s water supply reliability problem. Since City Council approval of the Water Supply Advisory Committee’s
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The premise underlying this finding is if a water supply district had the funding, resources, and charter to develop county-centric drought resilience infrastructure the problem the Grand Jury has identified would not exist. This premise is false. Individual water agencies in the County do have or have the authority needed to generate the resources and funding needed to address the issue the Grand Jury has described. Many local water agencies are taking steps needed to improve their district’s drought resiliency. As described elsewhere in this response, there is ample evidence that these agencies work effectively together and are continuously demonstrating regional cooperation and collaboration necessary to address the County’s water supply reliability, resiliency and sustainability.
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Groundwater Sustainability Agencies were formed for a specific purpose and, in many cases, are focused on a specific groundwater basin that may not cover an entire county. Their task is specific to the issues in a particular groundwater basin and to the mandated to plan for and implement strategies to achieve groundwater sustainability in their specific groundwater basins within a 20-year timeframe. Their charters reflect this focus. Staffing and agency resourcing strategies actively engage leaders and technical staffs of local water supply and water resource management agencies to maximize the effectiveness of both the planning process and the implementation of groundwater sustainability plans, which directly and indirectly affect all the agencies involved. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 73
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Grand Jury is correct that there is no single agency with county-wide jurisdiction that is responsible for developing and implementing actions to ensure drought resilience. However, the City of Santa Cruz disagrees with the assertion that a central county-level agency would do a better job of planning for and implementing county drought resilience for the following reasons: 1) The Grand Jury’s recommendation for creating a new, single agency is based on the premise that it could and would do something the existing water supply agencies are not doing. The City’s perspective is that: a) Any county-wide drought resiliency system must be built on the foundation of existing water resource management infrastructure and systems. To contemplate any other approach would be impractical due to the cost of duplicating existing facilities and systems. b) The water resources needed to actually achieve drought resiliency in the County are already in use by existing water providers in meeting the needs of their customers. c) Even if funding for infrastructure and systems apart from those already in existence was identified, there are no additional, un-allocated water resources available to be developed and deployed to produce drought resiliency. d) So the new agency would have to work so closely with existing water providers in achieving its mission, making it difficult to imagine how this additional layer of government would add value or have any real scope for exercising authority over existing water agencies, or their infrastructure, systems or resources. 2) Because of Santa Cruz’s geographical isolation and lack of access to any of California’s state water resources and facilities, existing water agency leaders know that regional and individual agency drought resiliency solutions are going to have to come from working together. As demonstrated in several responses to the Grand Jury’s report, regional elected officials and staff of these agencies are already and have been for years actively engaged in this work. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 74 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The City of Santa Cruz does not believe that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies are the right agencies to undertake the task described. Rather, the City’s perspective is that existing water suppliers are the agencies with the right kind of staff, experience and the financial resources needed to undertake the planning and projects necessary to provide regional drought resiliency and, in fact, have been taking concrete steps in recent years to achieve this goal. The Pure Water Soquel project, the City’s Water Supply Augmentation Strategy, including active work on ASR in the Mid-County basin, and active work on ASR and recycled water applications in both the Santa Margarita and Mid-County basins are providing actionable results highlighting project development and implementation. Funding has been allocated, and financing for project planning and construction has been included in annual budgets and multi-year capital improvement programs. These steps are indicative of significant progress by just the City and Soquel Creek water agencies and other local agencies have similar actions underway. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 75
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The implication of this recommendation is that what is lacking is a “one stop shop” solution where interested members of the community can go to see the whole problem and solution laid out. The City’s perspective is that, to the extent that there is public interest in water supply reliability, those interested want to know more about what is going on to address climate change and drought resiliency in their specific service areas than about the broader picture described in this recommendation. Santa Cruz uses a variety of communication and outreach mechanisms to communicate to its water service customers about what problems the utility is working to solve, and what solutions are under consideration or development. Regional collaboration is always described but system specific issues that drive project selection in individual water service areas aren’t usually included because the details quickly become complicated and thus, actually reduce the effectiveness of the intended communication. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: This recommendation is duplicative of work already planned and completed by several of the local water agencies and is not needed at this time. Required Response from the City Council, City of Santa Cruz Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 77 Santa Cruz Grand Jury MGA Response to Civil Grand Jury Report Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 2:43 PM To: Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org, grandjury@scgrandjury.org Cc: Tom Lahue The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati and the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury, On May 19, 2022, the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) received the Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury Report, Our Water Account is Overdrawn, Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience. The report required a response from the MGA Board to identified findings and recommendations. The MGA Board of Directors initially discussed the report at its meeting on June 16th. At its meeting on August 18th, the Board approved the responses to the findings and recommendations and authorized staff to submit the response for the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. As requested, the response is submitted as a PDF file attachment to this email. Respectfully, Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency MCGMA_Required_Response_Final.pdf 218K 78 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Board of Directors, Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency to Respond by August 22, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 79 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated August 18, 2022. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that the agencies evaluated in this Grand Jury report work well together; however, we disagree that collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. A few examples are: (1) in 2007 Central Water District and Soquel Creek Water District formed a Joint Powers Authority and associated committees (Basin and Implementation Group and Basin Advisory Committee) to formally document groundwater conditions and make recommendations for the Mid-County region’s Groundwater Management Plan, (2) in the mid 2000s the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District joined together to partner on the scwd2 Desalination Project (although ultimately the desalination facility was not built), (3) the Department of Water Resources recognized our previous local collaborative efforts during the formation of the SC Mid-County Groundwater Agency and provided us seed grant funding to serve a model for collaboration. More recently, our local SC Mid-County Groundwater Agency (which is comprised of Santa Cruz County, City of Santa Cruz, Soquel Creek Water District, Central Water District, and private well representatives), had the first approved Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for a full groundwater basin, (4) The City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District have several agreements to facilitate water transfers and recycling water (5) about $1.9M of a $7.6M dollar state grant to the Mid-County Groundwater Agency is being shared by the City of Santa Cruz and the Soquel Creek Water District to evaluate how we can best collaborate our shared water resources, (6) the Scotts Valley Water District and the Soquel Creek Water District both have formed an ad-hoc committee to evaluate how to maximize shared resources of all types, and etc. The agencies’ staff, and various elected officials, work together consistently on a wide scope of issues and opportunities to address our local water shortage and reliability challenges. The collaborative efforts of all the agencies are a super strength of this region and are not limited or narrow in scope. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Since the late 1990s, the District’s outreach and communications incorporated strong conservation messaging. This was necessary to reduce pumping and to slow further seawater intrusion as we evaluated and developed supplemental supplies. Since drought conditions may take years to show their impacts to a groundwater supply, drought resiliency has not been the primary focus for our agency since we are currently 100% dependent on groundwater as our only water supply. However, since the exploration of desalination between the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District was jointly pursued by the two agencies, drought was a critical factor and the concept was communicated to the regional public that a diversified water portfolio needs to include conservation, curtailment, and a new supply for groundwater protection and drought needs. Further, during the Soquel Creek Water District’s formation of the Community Water Plan around 2015, conservation, climate change, and drought-resiliency were core environmental stewardship values expressed by our customers and hence this partially led to the selection of the Pure Water Soquel project being constructed since recycled water can provide a reliable source of water (not as impacted as surface water sources are during drought times). [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 143
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We would be remiss not to recognize and appreciate all the funding for the Pure Water Soquel Project, including a $50M grant and approximately $25M low interest loan from the State Water Resources Control Board, $9M grant from the Federal Bureau of Reclamation, and an $88M low-interest loan from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Additional funding is needed to create broader community-wide water resiliency whether it be to expand the Pure Water Soquel project or other capital infrastructure projects. Due to the past and current robust collaboration amongst the water agencies and the formation of the two Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (for the Santa Margarita and SC Mid-County basins), the District believes that no additional charters are needed at this time. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Groundwater Sustainability Agencies were provided some autonomy in how they solve their water challenges and thus the ability to help solve even drought-resilience issues that are more relevant to surface water reliant agencies such as the City of Santa Cruz. For example, the Mid-County Groundwater Agency has designed its goals for the basin to become sustainable and to enable the basin to become a potential source of supply during drought. This is provided in the recent state approved Mid-County Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Staffing seems to almost always be a challenge as we aim to keep water rates as low as possible, but the two local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies are collaborating to share a common administrative support, which will be a significant help and value to all our customers. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 145
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): There have been county-level efforts for decades to help our region become more water secure. Another county-level agency is not necessary, and potentially not even desirable, due to the proven collaborative efforts of the local water agencies. One demonstrative example of strong community leadership is shown by the Soquel Creek Water District Board of Directors directing staff to prepare the EIR analyzing environmental impacts for the Pure Water Soquel Project, which has the potential to double the capacity needed by Soquel Creek Water District so that other agencies may also consider/collaborate on an expanded portion of the project to help their drought-needs. This is real leadership and caring for not just its own District, but for the entire community – taking commitment and money. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: There is no need to extend their charters. While the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies, by definition, focus on groundwater sustainability and not just drought resilience – their respective groundwater sustainability plans can be designed to help with proactively addressing drought resilience (even to help agencies with surface water systems). [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 147
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: It is not necessary because of the following: Groundwater Sustainability Plans have been submitted to the state (as required) and at least one plan (SC Mid-County Groundwater Agency) has been approved. The City of Santa Cruz is working with local partners to help solve their more acute drought impacted surface water supply. For example, the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District will be administering approximately $1.9M in grant funding from the Mid-County Groundwater Agency to evaluate optimizing water security/reliability/cost via collaborative project study efforts. This is anticipated to start in the next six months and will take several years to complete. It is envisioned that the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency may also obtain funding to potentially extend this collaborative exploration effort. We hope this can occur over the next 3-10 years. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F6:
Limited interdistrict water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency Board (“PV Water”) of Directors is aware of the “Pure Water Soquel Project,” which is presently under construction, and the “Surface Water Pilot Project - Phase 1,” which includes an inter-tie between the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District (“SCWD”). Given that Pure Water Soquel is in the construction phase, and the Surface Water Pilot has occurred, it is clear that some inter-district water transfers have been achieved. PV Water is different than many of the other water districts in Santa Cruz County in that it 1) is a groundwater sustainability agency that does not deliver potable water, and 2) the area within its boundaries includes multiple counties and is composed of portions of Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito counties. Given the relatively large distance from the heart of the Pajaro Valley (Watsonville/Pajaro), water transfers with districts located in the mid-county area would be challenging and costly. Furthermore, there appears to be a need and a use for Santa Cruz’s wastewater within the mid-county area as noted above. PV Water has collaborated with the City of Watsonville to construct and operate the Watsonville Area Water Recycling Facility (“RWF”). The Watsonville Wastewater Treatment Plant collects and treats wastewater from the surrounding communities including Freedom, Salsipuedes Sanitary District, Pajaro, and the City Watsonville. The RWF treats the secondary effluent water to meet Title 22 standards for tertiary treated water. PV Water then distributes this recycled water, along with other sources, to agricultural customers in the coastal area where use of the recycled water reduces reliance on groundwater and helps to reduce seawater intrusion and groundwater overdraft. PV Water developed a connection to the City of Watsonville’s potable water supply and purchases groundwater supplied from inland wells to blend with recycled water and other supplemental sources to offset groundwater pumping in the coastal area. These projects are not that different in concept than the inter-district transfers occurring between the City of Santa Cruz and SCWD, and they’ve been occurring the Pajaro Valley since ~2008. The next project to come online for PV Water will be the College Lake Integrated Resources Management Project (“College Lake Project”). The College Lake Project will produce between 1,800 and 2,300 acre-feet of water per year on average, and a maximum amount of 3,000 acre-feet in a year. PV Water anticipates using every drop that the College Lake Project will produce to augment the supply of delivered water sold to coastal growers to offset groundwater production and stop seawater intrusion. As Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 153 noted above, PV Water’s service area includes portions of both Monterey and Santa Cruz counties. Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 154 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): In a groundwater basin such as Pajaro Valley, which depends on groundwater for over 90% of the water demand for both agricultural and urban uses, any action that bolsters groundwater supplies during wet periods increases the resiliency of basin aquifers to withstand increased pumping during times of drought. PV Water’s planning for sustainability is also planning for drought resiliency. Projects and management actions included in the 2014 Basin Management Plan (“BMP”) Update, and more recently in the BMP: Groundwater Sustainability Update 2022 (“GSU22”), such as conservation of water resources and increased recycled water deliveries, should be considered drought resiliency actions even as they are implemented in all years. Data from implementation of these projects and management actions show that they help reduce groundwater extraction during all periods, including times of drought, such that groundwater level and storage declines are less than what they were prior to these management actions being put in place. As a result, drought periods should not negate the benefits from recovery of groundwater levels and storage in wet periods. Therefore, the GSU22 provides resiliency by reducing the annual average shortfall over the long-term to meet the Pajaro Valley’s sustainability goals even with the inevitable occurrence of periodic drought. PV Water has many ongoing programs to help achieve sustainable groundwater resources. A brief update follows. In support of PV Water’s agricultural water conservation program, the Board, in December 2020, voted to increase its water conservation budget to $1.25 million over a 3-year period. In April 2022, the Board voted in favor of increased rebates for the “home and garden” domestic water conservation program. In the past two years the Board approved contracts that extended the delivered water service area approximately a mile further north to Monterey Bay Academy, thus reducing groundwater pumping by hundreds of acre-feet per year when the College Lake and Watsonville Slough System Managed Aquifer Recharge and Recovery (“WSS-MARR”) projects bring additional water supply to the coast. The Board directed staff to evaluate and improve Harkins Slough Recharge Facility recovery wells, located west of San Andreas Road. The WSS-MARR projects will create a new point of diversion for surface water on Struve Slough, one that is more protected from brackish water incursions that occur periodically and negatively impact PV Water’s ability to divert fresh water from Harkins Slough as allowed by an existing Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 155 water-right permit. WSS-MARR also includes a new infiltration basin and recovery wells, which will allow PV Water to divert, recharge, and recover a greater volume of winter rainfall runoff when available; PV Water has submitted a water-right permit for up to 4,000 acre-feet to the State Water Resources Control Board. PV Water is also implementing an innovative and exciting program called “Recharge Net Metering,” which partners with local landowners, the University of California at Santa Cruz, and the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County, to plan and develop infiltration basins that capture rainwater runoff and infiltrate the water into the critically overdrafted aquifers of the Pajaro Valley Groundwater Basin. Outreach and engagement with Pajaro Valley customers, stakeholders, and the general public is a critical aspect of what PV Water does. The work described above, along with information about the state of the basin, including drought conditions, is continually communicated through social media, a quarterly newsletter, press releases, informational ads on television and radio, special community meetings, and at monthly Board and Committee meetings. PV Water does not downplay agency planning to achieve drought resilience, as plan development and implementation are critical to both achieving sustainability and drought resiliency. Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 156 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
This action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), in that adopting a Resolution approving a response to the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury report entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” does not meet CEQA's definition of a “project,” because the action does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and if a “project,” is exempt under the “common sense” exception (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 1 Reso No. 184-22 (CM) DocuSign Envelope ID: EF7053BB-56C7-43BF-9CAD-ED352BDC10C5 Meeting Date: 08/30/22 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 161 15061(b)(3)) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this action may have a significant effect on the environment.
R2:
The City Council hereby approves the response to the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Report entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn-Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Response”).
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Unlike the other water districts and agencies being asked to respond to this recommendation, the jurisdiction of the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is not confined to Santa Cruz County. PV Water’s jurisdiction extends into north Monterey County and includes a portion of San Benito County. To the south is the Salinas Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency and the Castroville Seawater Intrusion Project, the first and largest project in the state to deliver recycled wastewater to coastal growers for the purpose of reducing overdraft and seawater intrusion at the coast. In other words, in looking for partners to collaborate on efficient use of wastewater, it might make just as much sense for PV Water to look south as to look north. County boundaries don’t really count for much when it comes to groundwater basins. In addition, PV Water in partnership with the City of Watsonville, has been producing and distributing recycled water since 2009 with the intent to continue for years to come. Since 2009, the partnership has led to the delivery of over 35,000 acre-feet of recycled water; in 2021 alone, over 3000 acre-feet of wastewater was recycled and reused to help stop seawater intrusion. PV Water and the City of Watsonville are already recycling a majority of the wastewater produced each year, with the exception being wastewater produced from homes connected to septic systems, but even discharge from septic systems may serve as a source of recharge to the Basin. The 2014 BMP evaluated potential projects to put to use excess wintertime wastewater, but these projects were expensive and complicated and did not make the cut for Phase 1 implementation (i.e. by 2025). PV Water is a small Agency with a staff of 14 people and a service area that Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 157 extends from Monterey Bay Academy, just south of La Selva Beach, down through the Springfield Terrace, which abuts Moss Landing. PV Water is in the midst of bringing two major water supply projects to completion by 2025. If another body – perhaps the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Dept. – or a collaboration between several districts and agencies, takes the leadership role in developing the Integrated Wastewater Plan called for by R3, the PV Water Board and staff would do our best to participate and contribute. Note also that the Santa Cruz County Water Advisory Commission is a hub for all things water resources related in Santa Cruz County. Required Response from the Board of Directors, Pajaro Valley WMA Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Due by August 22, 2022 158 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 159 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Required response to Grand Jury report is due on August 22, 2022 'Beau Kayser' via Santa Cruz Grand Jury Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 1:42 PM Reply-To: Beau Kayser To: Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org, grandjury@scgrandjury.org Dear Honorable Judge Cogliati and the members of the Grand Jury, As the City of Watsonville Water Division Manager, I am submitting responses to the invited response from the Grand Jury. Unfortunately, I misinterpreted that responses from me could also represent the response from the City Council. Our Council had a recess between July 12 and August 30. A formal response from our Council, which will be the same response attached here from me, will be delivered after the 8/30 Council meeting has been held. Please let me know if I should further discuss this with yourself or one of the Jury. thank you, Beau Beau Kayser City of Watsonville Water Division desk phone: (831) 768-3193 beau.kayser@cityofwatsonville.org ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Santa Cruz Grand Jury Date: Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 5:17 PM Subject: Required response to Grand Jury report is due on August 22, 2022 To: Santa Cruz Grand Jury [Quoted text hidden] 2022-2q Water OS-WatsWD Invited.pdf 324K 160 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury RESOLUTION NO. 184-22 (CM) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE APPROVING RESPONSE TO THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT ENTITLED “OUR WATER ACCOUNT IS OVERDRAWN – BEYOND CONSERVATION: ACHIEVING DROUGHT RESILIENCE”; AND DIRECTING THE WATER DIVISION MANAGER TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO THE GRAND JURY WHEREAS, the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury published a report regarding the water supply situation in Santa Cruz County titled, Our Water Account is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience; and WHEREAS, the Grand Jury has assigned two Findings and one Recommendation for which the Council is to respond; and WHEREAS, the Grand Jury has assigned the same two Findings and one Recommendation, plus an additional Finding, for which the Water Operations Supervisor (i.e. Water Division Manager) may respond. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. This action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), in that adopting a Resolution approving a response to the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury report entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” does not meet CEQA's definition of a “project,” because the action does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and if a “project,” is exempt under the “common sense” exception (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 1 Reso No. 184-22 (CM) DocuSign Envelope ID: EF7053BB-56C7-43BF-9CAD-ED352BDC10C5 Meeting Date: 08/30/22 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 161 15061(b)(3)) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this action may have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The City Council hereby approves the response to the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Report entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn-Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Response”). 3. The City Council directs the Water Division Manager to submit the Response to the Grand Jury. ******************************* 2 Reso No. 184-22 (CM) DocuSign Envelope ID: EF7053BB-56C7-43BF-9CAD-ED352BDC10C5 Meeting Date: 08/30/22 162 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Watsonville, held on the 30th day of August , 2022, by Member Dutra , who moved its adoption, which motion being duly seconded by Member Hurst , was upon roll call carried and the resolution adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Dutra, Estrada, García, Hurst, Montesino, Quiroz-Carter, Parker NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ____________________________ Ari Parker, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 9/6/2022 | 3:37 PM PDT _______________________ Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ City Attorney ************************************ I, Irwin I. Ortiz, City Clerk of the City of Watsonville, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 184-22 (CM) was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Watsonville City Council at a meeting thereof held on the 30th day of August , 2022, and that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of said Resolution. ________________________________ Irwin I. Ortiz, City Clerk 9/6/2022 | 3:37 PM PDT Date__________________________ 3 Reso No. 184-22 (CM) DocuSign Envelope ID: EF7053BB-56C7-43BF-9CAD-ED352BDC10C5 Meeting Date: 08/30/22
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Executing Stage 5 of any agency’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan will have extreme impacts, economic and social, to the customers of that agency. The impacts to the regions’ residents will also be significant but will partially depend on the specific activities implemented by the City of Santa Cruz and their duration.
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Although we agree that county-wide collaboration makes a lot of sense, it might be more practicable to focus on planning and implementing regional solutions that eventually can be connected to/into county-wide system.
F3:
Interdistrict water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Conjunctive use and other water sharing initiatives that have been investigated benefit the residents that are served by public water agencies. A considerable number of people in the County are served by small systems or private wells and they remain vulnerable to the impacts from changing climate patterns.
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Although the City of Santa Cruz has already completed several investigative activities, there are many more studies that will need to be undertaken before it can be concluded which project(s) are the best suited for Santa Margarita basin and offer the highest benefit for all stakeholders. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 109
F6:
Limited interdistrict water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
F7:
Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): 112 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE X DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Scotts Valley Water District along with the other public water agencies has been actively and strategically working on increasing its drought resilience for more than a decade. We try hard communicating the District’s strategic goals and workplan to our stakeholders and have used a wide variety of channels for reaching the public: e- Newsletter, social media, booth at Scotts Valley Farmers Market, presentations to the local service groups, at the Senior Life Online Webinar and at the annual Mayor’s State of the City. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE PARTIALLY DISAGREE DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 111 ADDITIONAL FINDINGS (invited responses from SVWD General Manager)
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency and Mid-County Groundwater Agency have a lot of work to do to fulfill their existing charter. Neither agency has designated staff nor dependable funding sources. Even if developing the drought resiliency is not explicitly the objective of the groundwater sustainability agencies, most of the projects and management actions included in their Groundwater Sustainability Plans will address the drought resiliency by improving the groundwater basin’s storage capacity and implementing regional projects that increase supply diversity. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 113
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Local water districts are required to have Urban Water Management Plans (UWMP) and Water Shortage Contingency Plans (WSCP) that include action plans for various water shortage scenarios. Scotts Valley Water District and San Lorenzo Valley Water District developed a joint UWMP/WSCP in 2021, realizing that regional planning and collaboration yields better results for the community. All local water agencies and water resource management agencies are signatories to the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, which is a collaborative effort to comprehensively manage all aspects of water resources in the region. In 2019, an addendum to the 2014 plan was completed to comply with the State’s new standards, one of them an inclusion of Climate Change chapter. Developing a thorough and useful integrated plan requires extensive political and legal agreements, public education and input, planning documents and much more. The existing framework is sufficient to support continued alignment and collaboration between the public and water management agencies in the County. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – X summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months) WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Local water and wastewater agencies have been in discussions on how to better utilize the wastewater resources regionally. There are many factors that need to be considered, studies and investigated before arriving at a solution that will benefit the most stakeholders. The exploration phase for regional projects that cross jurisdictions typically takes years and it is not feasible to develop and publish an action plan in such a short timeline. Scotts Valley Water District continues to work with the City of Scotts Valley (Public Works), City of Santa Cruz (Water and Public Works) and Soquel Creek Water District to determine the best utilization for the wastewater generated by the residents and businesses in the Mid- and North-County. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 115 Santa Cruz Grand Jury SLV Water Grand Jury Final Response -Our Water Account is Overdrawn Rick Rogers Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 6:11 AM To: "Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org" , "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Cc: Gail Mahood , Holly Hossack To the Honorable Judge Cogliati and the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury: Attached, please find the San Lorenzo Valley Water District’s (SLVWD’s) completed response packet in connection with the 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report, entitled “Our Water Account is Overdrawn, Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience.” The attached response packet includes responses made on behalf of the Board of Directors and the District Manager. The responses were approved by SLVWD’s Board on July 21. Rick Rogers District Manager SLV Water District 831-430-4624 SLVWD Board and DM - Final Grand Jury response packet - approved 7-21-2022.pdf 452K 116 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Board of Directors, San Lorenzo Valley Water District District Manager,1 San Lorenzo Valley Water District to Respond by August 22, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. This response packet is submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager Rick Rogers, in fulfilment of their obligations under PC § 933 et seq. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 117 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: The Board of Directors of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District approved these responses at a regularly noticed public meeting conducted on July 21, 2022, as shown in the Board meeting minutes.2 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. All the responses set forth herein are submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager, except that the response to F1 is offered solely by the District Manager because the Grand Jury invited such response from the District Manager and not the Board. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 118 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. All the responses set forth herein are submitted on behalf of both the Board of Directors and the District Manager, except that the response to F1 is offered solely by the District Manager because the Grand Jury invited such response from the District Manager and not the Board. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 118 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
Government agencies made all required responses to the 2018–2019 reports within the requested time frame.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F2:
The Santa Cruz Public Library system has honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Patron Privacy at Santa Cruz Public Libraries.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F3:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F4:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, that related to revisions to the County’s contract policies. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 14 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F5:
Santa Cruz County considered the Conflict Attorneys’ use of the County’s Watsonville office space, as committed in its response to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, but has deferred action to the next round of contract renewal.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R5:
If the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors has formally established budget priorities for an upcoming revenue measure, the County Counsel’s impartial analysis should state this fact and note that the Board’s budget priorities are subject to change. (F5)
F6:
The County’s failure to address the Conflict Attorneys’ use of free office space means the value of this benefit may not be apparent to the Auditor and reported to appropriate tax officials, and there is no binding obligation on how the Conflict Attorneys may use this space.
Related Recommendations (4)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R4:
The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should explain how all aspects of the ballot measure will operate, including provisions for an annual audit or independent citizens oversight. (F6)
F7:
Several invited responses to the 2018–2019 reports were not made, most notably from the Santa Cruz County Counsel’s Office with regards to the report on the County’s Public Defense Contracts.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R6:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require that the County Administrative Office use its financial and budget tracking tools to provide more detail on the planned and actual use of Measure G funds than is shown in the Measure G Financial Summary of the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22. (F7)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R9:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 22. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=23 17. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R11:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 23. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=24 18. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R20:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 32. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=33 19. Jessica York. September 18, 2021. “Santa Cruz County hires local attorney as new Public Defender,” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/09/18/santa-cruz-county-hires-local-atto rney-as-new-public-defender/ 20. Confidential Grand Jury document. 21. Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. January 14, 2020. County Policy and Procedures Manual, Title V. Section 400. https://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us//personnel/vpolandproc/ProceduresManu al/PM5400.pdf 22. Confidential Grand Jury document. 23. Internal Grand Jury documents. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 17 Appendix A—Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Response Packet Instructions for 2018–2019[23] Instructions for Individual Respondents: Instructions for Respondents California law PC §933.05 (included below) requires the respondent to a Grand Jury report to comment on each finding and recommendation within a report. Explanations for disagreements and timeframes for further implementation or analysis must be provided. Please follow the format below when preparing the responses. Response Format 1. For the Findings included in this Response Packet, select one of the following responses and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding and specify the portion of the
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
Government agencies made all required responses to the 2018–2019 reports within the requested time frame.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F2:
The Santa Cruz Public Library system has honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Patron Privacy at Santa Cruz Public Libraries.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F3:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County Probation—Officers Inadequately Equipped and At Risk.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F4:
Santa Cruz County honored the commitments it made to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report, Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, that related to revisions to the County’s contract policies. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 14 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F5:
Santa Cruz County considered the Conflict Attorneys’ use of the County’s Watsonville office space, as committed in its response to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, but has deferred action to the next round of contract renewal.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R5:
If the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors has formally established budget priorities for an upcoming revenue measure, the County Counsel’s impartial analysis should state this fact and note that the Board’s budget priorities are subject to change. (F5)
F6:
The County’s failure to address the Conflict Attorneys’ use of free office space means the value of this benefit may not be apparent to the Auditor and reported to appropriate tax officials, and there is no binding obligation on how the Conflict Attorneys may use this space.
Related Recommendations (4)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County 90 Days
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R4:
The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should explain how all aspects of the ballot measure will operate, including provisions for an annual audit or independent citizens oversight. (F6)
F7:
Several invited responses to the 2018–2019 reports were not made, most notably from the Santa Cruz County Counsel’s Office with regards to the report on the County’s Public Defense Contracts.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R6:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require that the County Administrative Office use its financial and budget tracking tools to provide more detail on the planned and actual use of Measure G funds than is shown in the Measure G Financial Summary of the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22. (F7)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 76 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 41
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R9:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 22. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=23 17. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R11:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 23. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=24 18. Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer. September 25, 2019. Response to
R20:
in the Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts Report, p. 32. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2019_final/CAO %20Response.pdf#page=33 19. Jessica York. September 18, 2021. “Santa Cruz County hires local attorney as new Public Defender,” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed February 2, 2022. https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2021/09/18/santa-cruz-county-hires-local-atto rney-as-new-public-defender/ 20. Confidential Grand Jury document. 21. Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. January 14, 2020. County Policy and Procedures Manual, Title V. Section 400. https://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us//personnel/vpolandproc/ProceduresManu al/PM5400.pdf 22. Confidential Grand Jury document. 23. Internal Grand Jury documents. Honoring Commitments Published May 17, 2022 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report 17 Appendix A—Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Response Packet Instructions for 2018–2019[23] Instructions for Individual Respondents: Instructions for Respondents California law PC §933.05 (included below) requires the respondent to a Grand Jury report to comment on each finding and recommendation within a report. Explanations for disagreements and timeframes for further implementation or analysis must be provided. Please follow the format below when preparing the responses. Response Format 1. For the Findings included in this Response Packet, select one of the following responses and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding and specify the portion of the
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We recognize a Santa Cruz Stage 5 curtailment of duration would have a significant impact to the City of Santa Cruz and its customers. However, to our current knowledge, no economic study has been conducted to evaluate the impacts throughout Santa Cruz County from the City of Santa Cruz implementing Stage 5 curtailment. The vast majority of water used in the County is from groundwater sources and not water provided by the City of Santa Cruz, which gets 95% of its water from surface water sources. For reference, an economic study was conducted for the Pure Water Soquel Project and it concluded that without this purified recycled water project, Soquel Creek Water District customers would have to pay significantly more for water and need to ration water, and that the project had a positive impact on the community of almost one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000). [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 135
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure. AGREE _X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): While water storage opportunities may traditionally be thought of as above ground tanks and reservoirs, the groundwater basin in our local region (Santa Cruz Mid- County Groundwater Basin) has storage capacity to provide a drought resilient fresh water supply that can protect against further seawater contamination and seawater intrusion. Currently, the State of California has declared the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Basin 3-001) as critically overdrafted and has mandated the local groundwater agency (Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency) to bring the basin back into sustainability by 2040. This basin provides 100% of the water needs to the majority of mid-SC County’s residents and it is extremely important that this freshwater be protected and preserved. Along with the City of Santa Cruz’s shortfalls with their surface water supplies being greatly impacted with drought conditions, we agree there is an urgent need to create solutions for drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure, including the Pure Water Soquel Project. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F3:
Interdistrict water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Water purveyors in the North and Mid County regions have collaborated, discussed, and developed potential sharing concepts over the years. While there aren’t any concrete plans and we would always like to move faster – there are ideas, concepts, and joint studies that have been considered to provide benefits to the entire community. Two recent examples: • The water transfer pilot project between the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District is still in the testing mode to evaluate water quality blending and other potential issues. • The Pure Water Soquel Project is currently being built, which was sized so that the conveyance pipeline can handle double the capacity that Soquel Creek Water District is projected to need in the event that the water treatment facilities are ever expanded in the future (also for double capacity). As analyzed in the previously certified EIR for the project, expansion of this project is not reasonably foreseeable at this time, but proper environmental review will be done if and when the District decides to expand use of the Project . There are currently no formal plans or agreements in place for others to expand or use the available future capacity. As part of a recent Department of Water Resources (DWR) grant for critically overdrafted groundwater basins, the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency grant, the City of Santa Cruz, and Soquel Creek Water District will be evaluating various water-sharing scenarios to address groundwater sustainability and drought resiliency needs. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 137
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE X DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Our understanding is the City of Santa Cruz efforts to create a groundwater reserve are still being explored and tested. Thus, it may not be technically accurate to classify those efforts as "well-understood” and thus not sure if it is an “achievable first step”. We hope their efforts will achieve the desired results and the District is committed to continuing efforts with the City as partners on their aquifer storage recovery testing, the pilot water transfer project, and evaluating the potential for incorporating the expansion portion of the Pure Water Soquel project into their water supply portfolio as well as those of other entities, if desired. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F5:
The City of Santa Cruz’s completion of the water rights revision project is a critical element of enabling district collaboration in support of county-level drought resilience. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The City of Santa Cruz’s water rights project is an important component to expansion of surface water opportunities and their drought resilience. While it may be helpful for drought resiliency for other agencies - it is not as critical of an element for other agencies that use groundwater and are incorporating recycled water into their portfolios. For example, the Soquel Creek Water District/City of Santa Cruz collaboration related to the Pure Water Soquel purified recycled water project is being constructed regardless of the City’s water rights revisions. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 139
F6:
Limited interdistrict water transfers have been achieved and serve as proof of concept. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE X DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The Cooperative Water Transfer Pilot Project agreement between the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District was created in 2015 with the hope of transferring about 300 acre-feet per year to Soquel Creek Water District with various testing to be conducted. Unfortunately, since that time water has been transferred only four (4) times since 2015, with the average of about 34 acre-feet year. The City also conducted a modeling study showing there is not enough surface water to reliably solve both the City's need for a drought supply and reliably meet Soquel Creek Water District’s need for water to create and maintain a seawater intrusion barrier in its service area. Besides the limited and irregular surface water quantities available for transfer, water-quality and other concerns/considerations are needed to be evaluated further as part of both agencies’ due diligence and ‘proof of concept’ for its customers. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F7:
Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Our understanding is that the PV Water and the City of Watsonville use almost all their wastewater resources; however, they should be contacted to verify their situation. We agree with the statement regarding the wastewater resources for the City of Santa Cruz.
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that water agencies in Santa Cruz County typically communicate well and frequently on a wide range of matters. One example of such collaboration is the formation of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) as a joint powers agency by and among the District, the Scotts Valley Water District, and the County. SMGWA meets regularly and collaborates with the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, Mt. Hermon association and private well owners to provide for sustainable management of the Santa Margarita groundwater basin as required by California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The groundwater sustainability plan recently adopted by SMGWA sets forth a number of potential projects that, if implemented, would involve extensive collaboration, including with the City and the Soquel Creek Water District, on a wide range of projects. Separately, the District appreciates many offers of support and cooperation made by neighboring water entities in connection with the CZU wildfire and other previous disasters. We partially disagree with the finding because we would not characterize such inter- agency collaboration as being “limited and narrow in scope.” Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 124 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that water agency communications to the public often emphasize conservation and sustainability. Legal mandates drive many such communications. For example, California statutes and regulations require water purveyors to adopt and implement water shortage contingency plans (WSCPs). WSCPs establish the actions to be taken by water agencies in response to drought and other impacts on local water supplies. Such actions may include community outreach and education about the importance of conserving water. Similarly, “sustainability” has been a frequent topic of communications by the District and outreach by Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency since the historic passage in 2014 of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The District also communicates with its residents about the District’s efforts to achieve drought resilience through, among other things, conjunctive use. We partially disagree with the finding because we have not observed downplaying of the need to achieve drought resilience, which is inextricably linked with water shortage contingency planning and sustainability planning. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 125
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that individual water supply agencies, particularly relatively small ones such as the District, do not have the resources or mission to take the lead in developing County-centric infrastructure. The District actively collaborates with the County’s Water Resources Division and neighboring water agencies and likely would participate in regional or County-wide infrastructure projects to the extent they provide benefits for the District and its residents. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 126 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), of which the District is a founding member, cannot focus its resources on County-wide strategies. SMGWA could participate in regional or County-wide projects to the extent such projects benefit the Santa Margarita groundwater basin and are consistent with SMGWA’s mission under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Several of the proposed management actions in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan submitted in January 2022 by SMGWA involve regional collaborations that address drought resilience -- in particular the proposed projects to use the Lompico aquifer for drought storage for the City of Santa Cruz and to use treated wastewater from Pure Water Soquel to augment groundwater supplies in Scotts Valley Water District. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 127
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): -- Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 128 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The District is a founding member agency of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency (SMGWA). SMGWA already has broad authority under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the Joint Powers Act, and its governing documents. Such authority includes the ability to collaborate on drought resiliency projects to the extent such projects benefit the Santa Margarita groundwater basin and are consistent with SMGWA’s purpose and jurisdiction as a groundwater sustainability agency. Under SGMA, the purpose of a groundwater sustainability agency such as SMGWA is to sustainably manage its groundwater basin to prevent certain undesirable conditions such as chronic lowering of groundwater levels, degraded water quality, decline in base flows to creeks from groundwater (necessary for fisheries, etc.), and deterioration of groundwater-dependent ecosystems. Avoiding these undesirable conditions may, at times, be inconsistent with providing water to areas outside the basin and therefore be at cross-purposes with considerations of regional drought resiliency. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 129
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Through the District’s participation in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), the District already has made significant contributions toward prioritizing a list of potential projects set forth in SMGWA’s recently adopted groundwater sustainability plan. The list includes inter-agency and regional projects that would have drought resiliency benefits. Additionally, the District has its own prioritized list of urgently needed infrastructure improvements. Some of these projects, such as the Fall Creek Fish Ladder, are part of the District’s ambitious Capital Improvement Plan. Some projects are being pursued in connection with the District’s proposed Conjunctive Use Plan, which, upon its adoption, would allow the District to operate its water systems more efficiently and put its Loch Lomond allotment to use, with benefits for water supply resiliency and fisheries. Other projects, such as the Five Mile Pipeline reconstruction and several potential water system consolidations, are part of the District’s ongoing recovery from the CZU wildfire emergency and effort to assist our neighbors who were badly impacted by the wildfire. The District is deeply committed to such projects and collaborating with its neighbors and other partners such as state and federal funding sources to achieve them. In light of the already extraordinary demands placed on District resources by these projects and other mission-critical priorities, the District is not in a position to invest in a County-wide integrated drought-resilience action plan. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 130 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 131 Santa Cruz Grand Jury Required response to Grand Jury report is due on August 22, 2022 Emma Western Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 1:40 PM To: "grandjury@scgrandjury.org" Cc: Ron Duncan Hello, Attached is Soquel Creek Water District’s response to the Grand Jury report, titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn. Please acknowledge receipt of this email. Thank you! Emma Western (she/her) | Executive Assistant/Board Clerk Soquel Creek Water District | 5180 Soquel Dr., Soquel CA 95073 | www.soquelcreekwater.org direct 831-475-8501 x126 | main 831-475-8500 P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. SqCWD Response to Grand Jury Report.pdf 265K 132 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury The 2021–2022 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Requires the Board of Directors, Soquel Creek Water District to Respond by August 22, 2022 to the Findings and Recommendations listed below which were assigned to them in the report titled Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c). Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report. Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 133 Instructions for Respondents Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations. Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05: 1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. AGREE with the Finding, or b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why. 2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information: a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable. 3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated August 16, 2022. 4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R3:
Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses: We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated August 16, 2022.
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
Measure G’s ballot language made the tax appear to be a special tax: the language emphasized multiple services that Measure G could be used for, which overshadowed the final clause, “and other general county services.”
F2:
County staff did not have compelling reasons to include several provisions contained in its consultant’s proposed Measure G ballot language—specifically the annual audit, citizens oversight, and 12-year expiration date—which also made Measure G appear to be a special tax.
F3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors approved the Measure G ballot language at its August 7, 2018, meeting without seeking clarification as to how the provisions for an “annual audit” and “independent citizens oversight” would operate. Impartial Analysis
F4:
The impartial analysis did not plainly state that the Measure G funds would be general revenue that could be used for any legal government purpose.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should clearly state whether the County Government’s use of the funds will be restricted to certain uses (special revenue), or is available for any legal purpose (general revenue). (F4)
F5:
The impartial analysis did not inform voters that the County Board of Supervisors had adopted a resolution setting budget priorities for the use of Measure G revenue that was quite narrow compared to the broad range of proposed uses stated in the ballot.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
If the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors has formally established budget priorities for an upcoming revenue measure, the County Counsel’s impartial analysis should state this fact and note that the Board’s budget priorities are subject to change. (F5)
F6:
The impartial analysis failed to explain how the “annual audit” or the “independent citizens oversight'' would be carried out. Citizens Oversight
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The County Counsel’s impartial analysis of a revenue measure should explain how all aspects of the ballot measure will operate, including provisions for an annual audit or independent citizens oversight. (F6)
F7:
The Measure G Financial Summary, which is included in the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22, can be expanded with detail showing Measure G revenues and expenditures to support the Measure G independent citizens oversight provisions.
Related Recommendations (2)
R6:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require that the County Administrative Office use its financial and budget tracking tools to provide more detail on the planned and actual use of Measure G funds than is shown in the Measure G Financial Summary of the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22. (F7)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 210 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that water agencies in Santa Cruz County typically communicate well and frequently on a wide range of matters. One example of such collaboration is the formation of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA) as a joint powers agency by and among the District, the Scotts Valley Water District, and the County. SMGWA meets regularly and collaborates with the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, Mt. Hermon association and private well owners to provide for sustainable management of the Santa Margarita groundwater basin as required by California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The groundwater sustainability plan recently adopted by SMGWA sets forth a number of potential projects that, if implemented, would involve extensive collaboration, including with the City and the Soquel Creek Water District, on a wide range of projects. Separately, the District appreciates many offers of support and cooperation made by neighboring water entities in connection with the CZU wildfire and other previous disasters. We partially disagree with the finding because we would not characterize such inter- agency collaboration as being “limited and narrow in scope.” Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 180 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 210 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience. __ AGREE X PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that water agency communications to the public often emphasize conservation and sustainability. Legal mandates drive many such communications. For example, California statutes and regulations require water purveyors to adopt and implement water shortage contingency plans (WSCPs). WSCPs establish the actions to be taken by water agencies in response to drought and other impacts on local water supplies. Such actions may include community outreach and education about the importance of conserving water. Similarly, “sustainability” has been a frequent topic of communications by the District and outreach by Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency since the historic passage in 2014 of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The District also communicates with its residents about the District’s efforts to achieve drought resilience through, among other things, conjunctive use. We partially disagree with the finding because we have not observed downplaying of the need to achieve drought resilience, which is inextricably linked with water shortage contingency planning and sustainability planning. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 181
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) Commendation C1. The Grand Jury commends the County Administrative Office staff for its work in presenting the challenges of—and possible solutions to—the County’s persistent structural deficit. Words Matter—Did Measure G Mislead Voters? published June 20, 2022 210 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Required Response Respond Within/ Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond By Santa Cruz County F1, F2, F3, F7, F8, 90 Days
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that individual water supply agencies, particularly relatively small ones such as the District, do not have the resources or mission to take the lead in developing County-centric infrastructure. The District actively collaborates with the County’s Water Resources Division and neighboring water agencies and likely would participate in regional or County-wide infrastructure projects to the extent they provide benefits for the District and its residents. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 182 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Through the District’s participation in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), the District already has made significant contributions toward prioritizing a list of potential projects set forth in SMGWA’s recently adopted groundwater sustainability plan. The list includes inter-agency and regional projects that would have drought resiliency benefits. Additionally, the District has its own prioritized list of urgently needed infrastructure improvements. Some of these projects, such as the Fall Creek Fish Ladder, are part of the District’s ambitious Capital Improvement Plan. Some projects are being pursued in connection with the District’s proposed Conjunctive Use Plan, which, upon its adoption, would allow the District to operate its water systems more efficiently and put its Loch Lomond allotment to use, with benefits for water supply resiliency and fisheries. Other projects, such as the Five Mile Pipeline reconstruction and several potential water system consolidations, are part of the District’s ongoing recovery from the CZU wildfire emergency and effort to assist our neighbors who were badly impacted by the wildfire. The District is deeply committed to such projects and collaborating with its neighbors and other partners such as state and federal funding sources to achieve them. In light of the already extraordinary demands placed on District resources by these projects and other mission-critical priorities, the District is not in a position to invest in a County-wide integrated drought-resilience action plan. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 186 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 187 Santa Cruz Grand Jury LAFCO Response Letter dated 8-4-22 Joe Serrano Aug 4, 2022, 10:49:38 AM to syda.cogliati@santacruzcourt.org, grandjury@scgrandjury.org Good Morning Honorable Judge Cogliati, As requested, attached is a letter from LAFCO responding to the Grand Jury’s request to address three findings and one recommendation found in the report titled “On Achieving Drought Resilience.” Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Let me know if you have any questions. -Joe Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Cruz County 701 Ocean Street, Room 318-D, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Email: joe@santacruzlafco.org Phone: (831) 454-2055 8-4-22 LAFCO Response Letter.pdf 228 KB 188 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission 701 Ocean Street # 318D Santa Cruz CA 95060 Phone: (831) 454-2055 Email: info@santacruzlafco.org Website: www.santacruzlafco.org August 4, 2022 The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Santa Cruz Courthouse 701 Ocean Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Subject: LAFCO Response to the Grand Jury’s “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn –Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” Report Dear Honorable Judge Cogliati: Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s report titled “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience.” This report reviewed the water supply and long-term planning of the water agencies in Santa Cruz County and requested that the Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) provide comments. LAFCO’s statutory authority is derived from the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code section 56000, et seq.). Among LAFCO’s purposes are: Discouraging urban sprawl, preserving open space and prime agricultural lands, efficiently providing government services, and encouraging the orderly formation and development of local agencies based upon local conditions and circumstances (Government Code Section 56301). The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act identifies factors that must be considered, and determinations that must be made, as part of LAFCO’s review of boundary changes and service reviews. These provisions of law are the legislative basis for LAFCO’s locally adopted Policies and Procedures Relating to Spheres of Influence and Changes of Organization. These policies establish guidelines for the Commission and staff. The adopted policies are available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/about/policies-procedures/. In order to fulfill the request to provide comments on the Grand Jury’s report, LAFCO’s comments will be based on the direction found in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act and the Commission’s adopted policies. 1. Finding (F10): The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: LAFCO recently completed a Countywide Water Service & Sphere Review involving the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. Only one of the nine water agencies was determined to be in severely understaffed, financially distressed, and lacking necessary resources. LAFCO believes that the remaining active water agencies are financially sound and equipped to operate an efficient special district. LAFCO encourages the water agencies to continue exploring opportunities to collaborate. Strategic partnerships among the water agencies and the County may help develop county-centric drought-resilience planning at a holistic level rather than standalone efforts. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 189 2. Finding (F11): The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought- resilience strategy. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SMGA) was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on September 16, 2014, and went into effect on January 1, 2015. Since then, three groundwater management agencies were formed in Santa Cruz County, as listed below. The three groundwater agencies include representatives from several local water agencies. It is LAFCO’s understanding that the listed agencies have developed long-term plans under their respective groundwater agencies. Such collaboration indicates that the water agencies are capable of developing countywide plans beyond their standalone boundaries. Groundwater Associated Agency Basin Agencies Basins Members Management Plan Pajaro Valley Water Latest Plan Corralitos Pajaro Valley Management adopted in Groundwater Basin Agency November 20211 County of Santa Santa Cruz Mid- Cruz; CWD; Latest Plan Santa Cruz County SqCWD; adopted in Mid-County Groundwater Basin and the City of November 20192 Santa Cruz County; San Latest Plan Santa Santa Margarita Lorenzo Valley and adopted in Margarita Groundwater Basin Scotts Valley Water November 20213 Districts 3. Finding (F12): There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. AGREE: It is LAFCO’s understanding that there is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. However, the law does not restrict the County and the water agencies to develop a countywide plan under a Memorandum of Understanding, Joint Powers Agreement, and/or other methodology. This may be an opportunity for the affected agencies to explore this countywide planning effort. 4. Recommendation (R1): By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought-resilience project planning and execution. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED: LAFCO has not purview over the groundwater management agencies, and therefore, cannot implement or require the groundwater management agencies to include a drought-resilience project planning and execution. However, it is LAFCO’s understanding that the County is currently working on a 1 PVWMA BMP - https://www.pvwater.org/images/about-pvwma/assets/SGM/GSU22_20211229_MainBody-web.pdf 2 SCMCGA BMP - https://www.midcountygroundwater.org/sites/default/files/uploads/MGA_GSP_2019.pdf 3 SMGA BMP - https://www.smgwa.org/media/GroundwaterSustainabilityPlan/SMGB_GSP_Final_2021-11-11.pdf 190 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury drought-related report that will fulfill the requirements under Senate Bill 552 (SB 552). This bill was passed and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021 for the purpose of State and local governments sharing the responsibility in preparing and acting in the case of a water shortage event. These new requirements are expected to improve the ability of Californians to manage future droughts and help prevent catastrophic impacts on drinking water for communities vulnerable to impacts of climate change. The bill outlines the new requirements for small water suppliers, county governments, Department of Water Resources, and the State Water Board to implement more proactive drought planning and be better prepared for future water shortage events or dry years. Each county, in accordance with SB 552, is required to have a standing drought task force to facilitate drought and water shortage preparedness for state small water systems (serving 5 to 14 connections), domestic wells, and other privately supplied homes within the county’s jurisdiction. Each county must also develop a plan demonstrating the potential drought and water shortage risk and proposed interim and long-term solutions for state small water systems and domestic wells within the county. Both of these requirements may be implemented as part of other existing committees and/or planning processes4. I want to thank you once again for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s recent water report. LAFCO also recently developed a water report that analyzes the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. This countywide report is now available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/reviews/. I encourage the Grand Jury to review this report and continue collaborating with LAFCO on these important issues. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I can be reached by email (joe@santacruzlafco.org) or by phone (831-454-2055). Sincerely, Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer 4 SB 552 Information: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/SB- 552#:~:text=SB%20552%20requires%20small%20water,to%20drought%20resilient%20standards%2C%20if [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 191 Words Matter Did Measure G Mislead Voters? “The problem [with ballot proposals] is that local officials are so vested in the outcome that they are frequently incapable of providing voters the impartial descriptions they deserve.” —Daniel Borenstein, The Mercury News
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): We agree that the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), of which the District is a founding member, cannot focus its resources on County-wide strategies. SMGWA could participate in regional or County-wide projects to the extent such projects benefit the Santa Margarita groundwater basin and are consistent with SMGWA’s mission under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Several of the proposed management actions in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan submitted in January 2022 by SMGWA involve regional collaborations that address drought resilience -- in particular the proposed projects to use the Lompico aquifer for drought storage for the City of Santa Cruz and to use treated wastewater from Pure Water Soquel to augment groundwater supplies in Scotts Valley Water District. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 183
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Through the District’s participation in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), the District already has made significant contributions toward prioritizing a list of potential projects set forth in SMGWA’s recently adopted groundwater sustainability plan. The list includes inter-agency and regional projects that would have drought resiliency benefits. Additionally, the District has its own prioritized list of urgently needed infrastructure improvements. Some of these projects, such as the Fall Creek Fish Ladder, are part of the District’s ambitious Capital Improvement Plan. Some projects are being pursued in connection with the District’s proposed Conjunctive Use Plan, which, upon its adoption, would allow the District to operate its water systems more efficiently and put its Loch Lomond allotment to use, with benefits for water supply resiliency and fisheries. Other projects, such as the Five Mile Pipeline reconstruction and several potential water system consolidations, are part of the District’s ongoing recovery from the CZU wildfire emergency and effort to assist our neighbors who were badly impacted by the wildfire. The District is deeply committed to such projects and collaborating with its neighbors and other partners such as state and federal funding sources to achieve them. In light of the already extraordinary demands placed on District resources by these projects and other mission-critical priorities, the District is not in a position to invest in a County-wide integrated drought-resilience action plan. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 186 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 187 Santa Cruz Grand Jury LAFCO Response Letter dated 8-4-22 Joe Serrano Aug 4, 2022, 10:49:38 AM to syda.cogliati@santacruzcourt.org, grandjury@scgrandjury.org Good Morning Honorable Judge Cogliati, As requested, attached is a letter from LAFCO responding to the Grand Jury’s request to address three findings and one recommendation found in the report titled “On Achieving Drought Resilience.” Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Let me know if you have any questions. -Joe Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Cruz County 701 Ocean Street, Room 318-D, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Email: joe@santacruzlafco.org Phone: (831) 454-2055 8-4-22 LAFCO Response Letter.pdf 228 KB 188 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission 701 Ocean Street # 318D Santa Cruz CA 95060 Phone: (831) 454-2055 Email: info@santacruzlafco.org Website: www.santacruzlafco.org August 4, 2022 The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Santa Cruz Courthouse 701 Ocean Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Subject: LAFCO Response to the Grand Jury’s “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn –Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” Report Dear Honorable Judge Cogliati: Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s report titled “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience.” This report reviewed the water supply and long-term planning of the water agencies in Santa Cruz County and requested that the Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) provide comments. LAFCO’s statutory authority is derived from the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code section 56000, et seq.). Among LAFCO’s purposes are: Discouraging urban sprawl, preserving open space and prime agricultural lands, efficiently providing government services, and encouraging the orderly formation and development of local agencies based upon local conditions and circumstances (Government Code Section 56301). The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act identifies factors that must be considered, and determinations that must be made, as part of LAFCO’s review of boundary changes and service reviews. These provisions of law are the legislative basis for LAFCO’s locally adopted Policies and Procedures Relating to Spheres of Influence and Changes of Organization. These policies establish guidelines for the Commission and staff. The adopted policies are available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/about/policies-procedures/. In order to fulfill the request to provide comments on the Grand Jury’s report, LAFCO’s comments will be based on the direction found in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act and the Commission’s adopted policies. 1. Finding (F10): The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: LAFCO recently completed a Countywide Water Service & Sphere Review involving the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. Only one of the nine water agencies was determined to be in severely understaffed, financially distressed, and lacking necessary resources. LAFCO believes that the remaining active water agencies are financially sound and equipped to operate an efficient special district. LAFCO encourages the water agencies to continue exploring opportunities to collaborate. Strategic partnerships among the water agencies and the County may help develop county-centric drought-resilience planning at a holistic level rather than standalone efforts. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 189 2. Finding (F11): The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought- resilience strategy. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SMGA) was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on September 16, 2014, and went into effect on January 1, 2015. Since then, three groundwater management agencies were formed in Santa Cruz County, as listed below. The three groundwater agencies include representatives from several local water agencies. It is LAFCO’s understanding that the listed agencies have developed long-term plans under their respective groundwater agencies. Such collaboration indicates that the water agencies are capable of developing countywide plans beyond their standalone boundaries. Groundwater Associated Agency Basin Agencies Basins Members Management Plan Pajaro Valley Water Latest Plan Corralitos Pajaro Valley Management adopted in Groundwater Basin Agency November 20211 County of Santa Santa Cruz Mid- Cruz; CWD; Latest Plan Santa Cruz County SqCWD; adopted in Mid-County Groundwater Basin and the City of November 20192 Santa Cruz County; San Latest Plan Santa Santa Margarita Lorenzo Valley and adopted in Margarita Groundwater Basin Scotts Valley Water November 20213 Districts 3. Finding (F12): There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. AGREE: It is LAFCO’s understanding that there is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. However, the law does not restrict the County and the water agencies to develop a countywide plan under a Memorandum of Understanding, Joint Powers Agreement, and/or other methodology. This may be an opportunity for the affected agencies to explore this countywide planning effort. 4. Recommendation (R1): By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought-resilience project planning and execution. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED: LAFCO has not purview over the groundwater management agencies, and therefore, cannot implement or require the groundwater management agencies to include a drought-resilience project planning and execution. However, it is LAFCO’s understanding that the County is currently working on a 1 PVWMA BMP - https://www.pvwater.org/images/about-pvwma/assets/SGM/GSU22_20211229_MainBody-web.pdf 2 SCMCGA BMP - https://www.midcountygroundwater.org/sites/default/files/uploads/MGA_GSP_2019.pdf 3 SMGA BMP - https://www.smgwa.org/media/GroundwaterSustainabilityPlan/SMGB_GSP_Final_2021-11-11.pdf 190 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury drought-related report that will fulfill the requirements under Senate Bill 552 (SB 552). This bill was passed and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021 for the purpose of State and local governments sharing the responsibility in preparing and acting in the case of a water shortage event. These new requirements are expected to improve the ability of Californians to manage future droughts and help prevent catastrophic impacts on drinking water for communities vulnerable to impacts of climate change. The bill outlines the new requirements for small water suppliers, county governments, Department of Water Resources, and the State Water Board to implement more proactive drought planning and be better prepared for future water shortage events or dry years. Each county, in accordance with SB 552, is required to have a standing drought task force to facilitate drought and water shortage preparedness for state small water systems (serving 5 to 14 connections), domestic wells, and other privately supplied homes within the county’s jurisdiction. Each county must also develop a plan demonstrating the potential drought and water shortage risk and proposed interim and long-term solutions for state small water systems and domestic wells within the county. Both of these requirements may be implemented as part of other existing committees and/or planning processes4. I want to thank you once again for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s recent water report. LAFCO also recently developed a water report that analyzes the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. This countywide report is now available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/reviews/. I encourage the Grand Jury to review this report and continue collaborating with LAFCO on these important issues. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I can be reached by email (joe@santacruzlafco.org) or by phone (831-454-2055). Sincerely, Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer 4 SB 552 Information: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/SB- 552#:~:text=SB%20552%20requires%20small%20water,to%20drought%20resilient%20standards%2C%20if [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 191 Words Matter Did Measure G Mislead Voters? “The problem [with ballot proposals] is that local officials are so vested in the outcome that they are frequently incapable of providing voters the impartial descriptions they deserve.” —Daniel Borenstein, The Mercury News
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. X AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): -- Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 184 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: Through the District’s participation in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA), the District already has made significant contributions toward prioritizing a list of potential projects set forth in SMGWA’s recently adopted groundwater sustainability plan. The list includes inter-agency and regional projects that would have drought resiliency benefits. Additionally, the District has its own prioritized list of urgently needed infrastructure improvements. Some of these projects, such as the Fall Creek Fish Ladder, are part of the District’s ambitious Capital Improvement Plan. Some projects are being pursued in connection with the District’s proposed Conjunctive Use Plan, which, upon its adoption, would allow the District to operate its water systems more efficiently and put its Loch Lomond allotment to use, with benefits for water supply resiliency and fisheries. Other projects, such as the Five Mile Pipeline reconstruction and several potential water system consolidations, are part of the District’s ongoing recovery from the CZU wildfire emergency and effort to assist our neighbors who were badly impacted by the wildfire. The District is deeply committed to such projects and collaborating with its neighbors and other partners such as state and federal funding sources to achieve them. In light of the already extraordinary demands placed on District resources by these projects and other mission-critical priorities, the District is not in a position to invest in a County-wide integrated drought-resilience action plan. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 186 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury [This page intentionally left blank.] [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 187 Santa Cruz Grand Jury LAFCO Response Letter dated 8-4-22 Joe Serrano Aug 4, 2022, 10:49:38 AM to syda.cogliati@santacruzcourt.org, grandjury@scgrandjury.org Good Morning Honorable Judge Cogliati, As requested, attached is a letter from LAFCO responding to the Grand Jury’s request to address three findings and one recommendation found in the report titled “On Achieving Drought Resilience.” Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Let me know if you have any questions. -Joe Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Cruz County 701 Ocean Street, Room 318-D, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Email: joe@santacruzlafco.org Phone: (831) 454-2055 8-4-22 LAFCO Response Letter.pdf 228 KB 188 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission 701 Ocean Street # 318D Santa Cruz CA 95060 Phone: (831) 454-2055 Email: info@santacruzlafco.org Website: www.santacruzlafco.org August 4, 2022 The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Santa Cruz Courthouse 701 Ocean Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Subject: LAFCO Response to the Grand Jury’s “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn –Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience” Report Dear Honorable Judge Cogliati: Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s report titled “Our Water Account Is Overdrawn – Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience.” This report reviewed the water supply and long-term planning of the water agencies in Santa Cruz County and requested that the Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) provide comments. LAFCO’s statutory authority is derived from the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code section 56000, et seq.). Among LAFCO’s purposes are: Discouraging urban sprawl, preserving open space and prime agricultural lands, efficiently providing government services, and encouraging the orderly formation and development of local agencies based upon local conditions and circumstances (Government Code Section 56301). The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act identifies factors that must be considered, and determinations that must be made, as part of LAFCO’s review of boundary changes and service reviews. These provisions of law are the legislative basis for LAFCO’s locally adopted Policies and Procedures Relating to Spheres of Influence and Changes of Organization. These policies establish guidelines for the Commission and staff. The adopted policies are available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/about/policies-procedures/. In order to fulfill the request to provide comments on the Grand Jury’s report, LAFCO’s comments will be based on the direction found in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act and the Commission’s adopted policies. 1. Finding (F10): The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: LAFCO recently completed a Countywide Water Service & Sphere Review involving the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. Only one of the nine water agencies was determined to be in severely understaffed, financially distressed, and lacking necessary resources. LAFCO believes that the remaining active water agencies are financially sound and equipped to operate an efficient special district. LAFCO encourages the water agencies to continue exploring opportunities to collaborate. Strategic partnerships among the water agencies and the County may help develop county-centric drought-resilience planning at a holistic level rather than standalone efforts. [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 189 2. Finding (F11): The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought- resilience strategy. PARTIALLY DISAGREE: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SMGA) was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on September 16, 2014, and went into effect on January 1, 2015. Since then, three groundwater management agencies were formed in Santa Cruz County, as listed below. The three groundwater agencies include representatives from several local water agencies. It is LAFCO’s understanding that the listed agencies have developed long-term plans under their respective groundwater agencies. Such collaboration indicates that the water agencies are capable of developing countywide plans beyond their standalone boundaries. Groundwater Associated Agency Basin Agencies Basins Members Management Plan Pajaro Valley Water Latest Plan Corralitos Pajaro Valley Management adopted in Groundwater Basin Agency November 20211 County of Santa Santa Cruz Mid- Cruz; CWD; Latest Plan Santa Cruz County SqCWD; adopted in Mid-County Groundwater Basin and the City of November 20192 Santa Cruz County; San Latest Plan Santa Santa Margarita Lorenzo Valley and adopted in Margarita Groundwater Basin Scotts Valley Water November 20213 Districts 3. Finding (F12): There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. AGREE: It is LAFCO’s understanding that there is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure. However, the law does not restrict the County and the water agencies to develop a countywide plan under a Memorandum of Understanding, Joint Powers Agreement, and/or other methodology. This may be an opportunity for the affected agencies to explore this countywide planning effort. 4. Recommendation (R1): By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought-resilience project planning and execution. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED: LAFCO has not purview over the groundwater management agencies, and therefore, cannot implement or require the groundwater management agencies to include a drought-resilience project planning and execution. However, it is LAFCO’s understanding that the County is currently working on a 1 PVWMA BMP - https://www.pvwater.org/images/about-pvwma/assets/SGM/GSU22_20211229_MainBody-web.pdf 2 SCMCGA BMP - https://www.midcountygroundwater.org/sites/default/files/uploads/MGA_GSP_2019.pdf 3 SMGA BMP - https://www.smgwa.org/media/GroundwaterSustainabilityPlan/SMGB_GSP_Final_2021-11-11.pdf 190 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury drought-related report that will fulfill the requirements under Senate Bill 552 (SB 552). This bill was passed and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021 for the purpose of State and local governments sharing the responsibility in preparing and acting in the case of a water shortage event. These new requirements are expected to improve the ability of Californians to manage future droughts and help prevent catastrophic impacts on drinking water for communities vulnerable to impacts of climate change. The bill outlines the new requirements for small water suppliers, county governments, Department of Water Resources, and the State Water Board to implement more proactive drought planning and be better prepared for future water shortage events or dry years. Each county, in accordance with SB 552, is required to have a standing drought task force to facilitate drought and water shortage preparedness for state small water systems (serving 5 to 14 connections), domestic wells, and other privately supplied homes within the county’s jurisdiction. Each county must also develop a plan demonstrating the potential drought and water shortage risk and proposed interim and long-term solutions for state small water systems and domestic wells within the county. Both of these requirements may be implemented as part of other existing committees and/or planning processes4. I want to thank you once again for this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury’s recent water report. LAFCO also recently developed a water report that analyzes the nine water agencies in Santa Cruz County. This countywide report is now available on LAFCO’s website: https://santacruzlafco.org/reviews/. I encourage the Grand Jury to review this report and continue collaborating with LAFCO on these important issues. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I can be reached by email (joe@santacruzlafco.org) or by phone (831-454-2055). Sincerely, Joe A. Serrano Executive Officer 4 SB 552 Information: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/SB- 552#:~:text=SB%20552%20requires%20small%20water,to%20drought%20resilient%20standards%2C%20if [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 191 Words Matter Did Measure G Mislead Voters? “The problem [with ballot proposals] is that local officials are so vested in the outcome that they are frequently incapable of providing voters the impartial descriptions they deserve.” —Daniel Borenstein, The Mercury News
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
By December 31, 2022, the Boards of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency should extend their charters to include and proactively deliver drought- resilience project planning and execution. __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) X WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The District is a founding member agency of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency (SMGWA). SMGWA already has broad authority under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the Joint Powers Act, and its governing documents. Such authority includes the ability to collaborate on drought resiliency projects to the extent such projects benefit the Santa Margarita groundwater basin and are consistent with SMGWA’s purpose and jurisdiction as a groundwater sustainability agency. Under SGMA, the purpose of a groundwater sustainability agency such as SMGWA is to sustainably manage its groundwater basin to prevent certain undesirable conditions such as chronic lowering of groundwater levels, degraded water quality, decline in base flows to creeks from groundwater (necessary for fisheries, etc.), and deterioration of groundwater-dependent ecosystems. Avoiding these undesirable conditions may, at times, be inconsistent with providing water to areas outside the basin and therefore be at cross-purposes with considerations of regional drought resiliency. Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published on May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 185
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
If extended drought conditions lead the City of Santa Cruz to execute Stage 5 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, it will have extreme economic impacts on all residents throughout the County.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F2:
There is an urgent need to create a county-wide drought-resilient water storage and delivery infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
F3:
Interdistrict water-sharing plans spanning North County and Mid-County that could benefit all residents have existed since 2015 and deserve to be accelerated. Elements of a Solution
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
F4:
Establishing a strategic groundwater reserve, as described in documents from the City of Santa Cruz, is a well-understood and achievable first step.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
F5:
Santa Cruz County considered the Conflict Attorneys’ use of the County’s Watsonville office space, as committed in its response to the Grand Jury’s 2018–2019 report Santa Cruz County’s Public Defense Contracts—How Complex Contracts Misled County Leaders, but has deferred action to the next round of contract renewal. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE x DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The new Public Defender’s Office has fully taken over the Watsonville office space, and the conflict contract was renegotiated with the contracted law firm responsible for providing their own office space.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) x HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) __ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The new Public Defender’s Office has fully taken over the Watsonville office space, and the conflict contract was renegotiated with the contracted law firm responsible for providing their own office space. [Return ttoo TTaabbllee ooff CCoonntteennttss]] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 25 Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
F6:
The County’s failure to address the Conflict Attorneys’ use of free office space means the value of this benefit may not be apparent to the Auditor and reported to appropriate tax officials, and there is no binding obligation on how the Conflict Attorneys may use this space. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE x DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The new Public Defender’s Office has fully taken over the Watsonville office space, and the conflict contract was renegotiated with the contracted law firm responsible for providing their own office space. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (3)
R1:
The CAO should enter into a written agreement with private attorneys using County office space outlining the basic understanding of the attorneys’ use of this space. (F5, F6) x HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) __ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The new Public Defender’s Office has fully taken over the Watsonville office space, and the conflict contract was renegotiated with the contracted law firm responsible for providing their own office space. [Return ttoo TTaabbllee ooff CCoonntteennttss]] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 25 Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Beyond Conservation: Achieving Drought Resilience
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F7:
Existing City of Watsonville and City of Santa Cruz wastewater resources are only partially utilized to address passive well resting and saltwater intrusion issues. Agency Capabilities
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F8:
Each agency described in this report communicates well with neighboring agencies, but collaboration is limited and narrow in scope.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F9:
Agency communications to the public emphasize conservation and sustainability while downplaying agency planning to achieve drought resilience.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
F10:
The individual water supply districts lack funding, resources, and charters to develop county-centric drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
F11:
The Groundwater Sustainability Management agencies lack the charters, staff, and resources to plan or execute a county-wide drought-resilience strategy.
F12:
There is no county-level agency chartered to plan, propose, or build regional district-spanning drought-resilience infrastructure.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated drought-resilience action plan that includes essential infrastructure improvements, estimated costs and schedule to complete improvements that will deliver drought resilience to the Mid-County Groundwater Basin, the City of Santa Cruz, and the Santa Margarita Basin by December 31, 2029. Agencies to respond are the San Lorenzo Water District, the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Santa Margarita Groundwater Management Agency, and the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency. (F1–F6, F8–F10, F12) Our Water Account Is Overdrawn Published May 24, 2022 [Return to Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 47
R3:
By December 31, 2022, local water districts should jointly publish an integrated recycled wastewater action plan that specifies the infrastructure improvements, expected costs, and construction schedule that will fully utilize existing wastewater sources by December 31, 2026. Responding agencies are the Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, the Soquel Creek Water District, the Central Water District, the Mid-County Groundwater Management Agency, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, and the City of Watsonville Water Division. (F1, F6–F9, F12)
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R4:
When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati Syda.Cogliati@santacruzcourt.org and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury grandjury@scgrandjury.org. If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to grandjury@scgrandjury.org. [Return ttoo TTaabbllee ooff CCoonntteennttss]] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 23
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
The plain language of Measure S required use of Measure S funds for the modernization, upgrade, and repair of the existing local library branches—not community centers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The County’s ballot language for a revenue measure should clearly state whether the County Government’s use of the funds will be restricted to certain uses (special revenue), or is available for any legal purpose (general revenue). (F1) _X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) __ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The County’s ballot language adheres to all requirements of State law, including Elections Code 13119(b) and (c), as further informed by California Constitution Article XIIIC and Government Code section 53721, which define general and special taxes. When the County proposes a special revenue measure, the ballot language clearly states how those funds will be used and reflects that expenditures are limited to those purposes. When the County proposes a general revenue measure, it outlines a wide variety of matters that the monies can be spent on, including “general government services”, so that the electorate understands that the money is not restricted to any specific use and may be spent on items as prioritized by the Board of Supervisors. It is and will remain appropriate to give the public insight into the County’s general priorities, through language approved by the Board of Supervisors. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
F2:
The Santa Cruz Public Libraries website states that Measure S funds would be used to address the “most urgent needs” identified in the Facilities Master Plan, which stated no new library branches were needed and focused only on the needs of the existing ten library branches—likely misleading voters.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5)
F3:
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors approved the Measure G ballot language at its August 7, 2018, meeting without seeking clarification as to how the provisions for an “annual audit” and “independent citizens oversight” would operate. _X_ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Although this finding requires no response, it is important to note that the language approved by the Board is common for similar measures, and there was no need for the Board to seek clarification. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5)
F4:
Following the dissolution of redevelopment agencies in California, County Parks was left without a ready source of capital funds needed to fulfill the vision of the Live Oak Community Center as the heart of Live Oak, and Measure S filled the void.
F5:
The Annex is an expansion of the Live Oak Community Center and not an expansion of the Live Oak Branch Library.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of prior commitments of ballot funds, such as the County Board of Supervisors’ commitment of Measure S funds to Live Oak. (F2, F3, F5)
R5:
If the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors has formally established budget priorities for an upcoming revenue measure, the County Counsel’s impartial analysis should state this fact and note that the Board’s budget priorities are subject to change. (F5) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The contents of the County Counsel’s impartial analysis are governed by Elections Code section 9160, which require an analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure. It is not the County Counsel’s role to go beyond this. The impartial analysis is limited to 500 words in length and is not meant to encapsulate or predict all possibilities and outcomes associated with a tax measure. It is also not meant to put a “thumb on the scale” by going further than necessary to “show the effect of the measure on the existing law” and describe “the operation of the measure.” As previously noted and as routinely explained to the voters in materials describing general tax measures, general tax revenues are unrestricted and may be spent as the Board deems appropriate, with public input, and regardless of whether the Board has or has not previously stated priorities for use of those funds. Information beyond the quoted statutory requirements is better suited for the other documents that accompany a ballot measure, such as the arguments for and against the measure, the resolution calling for the election, and any associated documents establishing priorities (which are, by definition, not requirements and therefore subject to change depending on future circumstances). If there are objections to the contents of any election materials, including the impartial analysis, there is a statutory process set forth in Elections Code section 9190 for challenging those items in court prior to the election, and the court has the ability to order changes to materials that it finds by clear and convincing evidence are false or misleading. This statutory process is the legislatively designated process for controlling the content of ballot materials. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 233
F6:
The County’s decision to use Measure S funds for the Live Oak Library Annex in the Live Oak Community Center will impact the Santa Cruz Public Libraries operating budget. How a Community Center Became a “Library” published June 22, 2022 248 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
In the case of any future ballot measures, the SantaCruz Public Libraries should inform voters of the impact of facility expansion on its future operating budgets. (F6)
F7:
The Measure G Financial Summary, which is included in the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22, can be expanded with detail showing Measure G revenues and expenditures to support the Measure G independent citizens oversight provisions. __ AGREE _X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE __ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): Theoretically, it would be possible to provide such expanded detail, but no other General Fund revenues are subject to such treatment and the County questions the utility of providing that level of detail for General Fund monies. Once again, Measure G is not a special tax; it is a general tax, the revenues of which are mixed with all General Fund monies and spent on County services as prioritized by the Board of Supervisors. The Board prioritizes its spending of General Fund monies on an on- going and continually shifting basis as different needs, including emergencies, arise. All of the Board’s work in spending money is conducted in public, after receiving public input. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 229
Related Recommendations (2)
R6:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should require that the County Administrative Office use its financial and budget tracking tools to provide more detail on the planned and actual use of Measure G funds than is shown in the Measure G Financial Summary of the County’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2021–22. (F7) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: The County incorporates by reference its response to Finding No. 7. General Fund monies are not designed to be tracked as suggested here and the County does not intend to implement this recommendation given the limited utility in doing so. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: As previously noted, Measure G is a general tax. The language of the measure does not include any provision to establish an agency, commission or committee. The County does not believe it is appropriate to establish such a committee to oversee the use of General Fund monies – the Board of Supervisors is responsible for this, and it does not make sense to have an advisory commission related to a portion of monies that are mixed with other monies, all of which are subject to the Board’s and the County’s shifting priorities. The Board of Supervisors is elected to prioritize and execute spending of General Fund monies and the public has ample opportunities to express to their duly elected representatives what their desires are for funding County-wide initiatives and services. It would not be useful to invest government time and resources into a new layer of bureaucracy that is duplicative and unnecessary. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 235 How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds
F8:
The County Government’s current reliance on over 50 percent of Measure G revenue to support ongoing and recurring expenses for the County’s provision of essential services means the Measure G 12-year expiration date may present a serious risk to the County’s future fiscal health. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): This finding is confusing and internally inconsistent, as it appears to assert that the County is actually worsening its financial position by obtaining permission from the voters to adopt a tax measure that will continue to fund essential public services, on the grounds that the measure is time-bound. It seems to assert that unless a tax is implemented with no termination date, the County is placing its future fiscal health in “serious risk” and that the County would be in a better financial position if no tax had been adopted at all. Interpreted as written, this finding indicates a significant lack of understanding about basic principles of government finance, election procedures, and the County’s implied contract with the electorate to be prudent in the amount of money it is asking for and the amount of money it is spending. It is important to note that the County is structurally underfunded. The majority of its residents live in unincorporated areas requiring city-like services such as parks and planning, while the County is also mandated to provide countywide services such as social services, public health and elections. Additionally, the County receives a much lower per-capita property tax revenue to provide these services compared to its peers as noted in the report. The approval of Measure G has strengthened the County’s fiscal position and allowed the County to invest in projects, programs and services desired by the public including the creation of the Office of Response, Recovery and Resilience, the Housing for Health Division, improved parks maintenance and capital projects, such as LEO’s Haven at Chanticleer Park and Simpkins Family Swim Center renovations, affordable housing development, and homelessness and mental health services, while also providing flexibility to respond to the unprecedented disasters of the COVID-19 pandemic and the CZU wildfires. By providing a small supplement to the County’s General Fund, Measure G has fostered many positive investments in the community. It was appropriate to place a time limit on this tax such that its impacts and burdens may be reanalyzed at a time in the future when the County’s financial outlook may not require the County to continue to collect it. It is unfortunate that this effort to demonstrate fiscal prudency appears to be misunderstood. Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: As previously noted, Measure G is a general tax. The language of the measure does not include any provision to establish an agency, commission or committee. The County does not believe it is appropriate to establish such a committee to oversee the use of General Fund monies – the Board of Supervisors is responsible for this, and it does not make sense to have an advisory commission related to a portion of monies that are mixed with other monies, all of which are subject to the Board’s and the County’s shifting priorities. The Board of Supervisors is elected to prioritize and execute spending of General Fund monies and the public has ample opportunities to express to their duly elected representatives what their desires are for funding County-wide initiatives and services. It would not be useful to invest government time and resources into a new layer of bureaucracy that is duplicative and unnecessary. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 235 How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds
F9:
Other California cities and counties have demonstrated that Santa Cruz County can honor its promise for citizens oversight of Measure G expenditures. __ AGREE __ PARTIALLY DISAGREE _X_ DISAGREE Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree): The premise of this finding is fundamentally flawed, in that argumentatively asserts that the County is not “honoring” a promise for citizen’s oversight of Measure G expenditures. As previously noted, members of the public have regular oversight of General Fund expenditures through their ability to determine how General Fund monies are being spent and their ability to provide public input to the Board of Supervisors when the Board creates and approves budgets and approves expenditures. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 231
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By January 1, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizens oversight committee to oversee, review, and advise the Board on a more detailed Measure G report, showing Measure G revenues and expenditures as described in Finding 7 on a periodic basis (semiannually or quarterly). (F7, F8, F9) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – __ summarize what will be done and the timeframe REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe __ (not to exceed six months) _X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe: As previously noted, Measure G is a general tax. The language of the measure does not include any provision to establish an agency, commission or committee. The County does not believe it is appropriate to establish such a committee to oversee the use of General Fund monies – the Board of Supervisors is responsible for this, and it does not make sense to have an advisory commission related to a portion of monies that are mixed with other monies, all of which are subject to the Board’s and the County’s shifting priorities. The Board of Supervisors is elected to prioritize and execute spending of General Fund monies and the public has ample opportunities to express to their duly elected representatives what their desires are for funding County-wide initiatives and services. It would not be useful to invest government time and resources into a new layer of bureaucracy that is duplicative and unnecessary. [Returnto Table of Contents] 2021–2022 Consolidated Final Report with Responses 235 How a Community Center Became a “Library” The Transformational Power of Measure S Funds