1. Staff described the Forebay as sustainable but identified gaps in the draft plan. General Manager Curtis Weeks said groundwater levels are generally stable, the subbasin is not in overdraft, and the five indicators presented—groundwater levels, storage, quality, land subsidence and depletion of interconnected surface water—showed no undesirable results over the past five years. He said the draft Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) needs Forebay-specific cost information, a clearer description of the Sustainable Management Criteria Technical Advisory Committee (SMC TAC) process, and consistent language describing the subbasin as sustainable rather than merely not in overdraft.
2. The board directed staff to submit written comments by November 18. The comments will seek itemized Forebay costs, explain how SMC TAC evaluations inform the boards’ management decisions, and clarify which proposed projects are Forebay priorities rather than projects for other parts of the valley. Staff will also address concerns about stream-channel improvements, overland-flow recharge and steelhead flows. Separately, a board member asked what options and ramifications the board would face if it declined to approve the update. Weeks raised possible probation but said he would verify the consequences. Public commenter Thomas Virsik disputed that rejection would place the agency in immediate jeopardy, arguing that a periodic evaluation is required in January but adoption of a new GSP is not. The direction to staff was given by consensus, without a formal vote.
Already have an account? Sign In
