Water bill amended,
back on track
Assembly
Bill 2686 carried by Assembly Member Pedro Nava, D-Solvang, a bill that will
change the name, powers, and jurisdiction of the Santa Ynez River Water
Conservation District, Improvement District Number 1, has been amended to
remove a controversial reference to tribal governments.
The bill
has been gathering an unusual amount of public scrutiny since it first came to
the attention of the public at an early May meeting of the ID No. 1 board.
A long
simmering conflict between ID No. 1 and the Santa Barbara Local Agency
Formation Commission had all the ingredients of a costly lawsuit. LAFCO wanted
jurisdiction, in much the same way that other county governmental entities have
a governmental relationship with the county board.
Under
threat of a lawsuit, both LAFCO and ID No. 1 found a way through the proposed
legislation to define the relationship between the boards, and to further
refine and delineate the responsibilities and powers of the new water district.
Objections raised
Local
interested parties including Preservation of Los Olivos,
the Valley Alliance, and a number of individuals first became aware of the
pending legislation in May when the item appeared on the agenda of ID No. 1 as
“District Reorganization – AB 2686.”
Objections
immediately were raised over what detractors considered insufficient public
notice of the subject matter, the scope of the powers and authority of the new
water district, overlapping powers of the water district and Santa Ynez
Community Services District, which provides sewer service, and the status given
tribal governments.
A private
meeting was held on Aug. 4 at the invitation of Chris Dahlstrom,
General Manager of ID No. 1, involving those public interest groups and
individuals who were the most vocal in opposition to AB 2686. A general sense
of satisfaction was expressed by those who participated
that most of the objections having to do with sewer powers, replenishment
powers, and latent powers granted to the water district could not be effectively
exercised without the approval of LAFCO and a public hearing.
Bob
Field, one of the participants in the private meeting, provided a written
statement clarifying his position on a report of the outcome of the meeting.
Field said in his statement that he was “not satisfied.”
His
dissatisfaction, he said, is centered on the water district’s insistence that
its powers are not being expanded. “The fact that ID No. 1 authorities are
being expanded in this way is acknowledged in writing by multiple local attorneys,
the legislative analyst in the Assembly, and even by the bill’s sponsor, Pedro
Nava. Only ID No. 1 and their attorneys try to deny it,” said Field in his
statement.
Tribal government
issue
One
contentious issue that remained was the status given tribal governments in the
inclusion of the entity in the definition given to public agencies. P.O.L.O.
president Doug Herthel objected to including tribal
governments as “public agencies” because, he said, doing so would give
unwarranted legitimacy to the tribal entity and open the door to claims of
reserve water rights by the tribal government.
At a
local meeting of LAFCO on Aug. 7, the members of that board heard from these
groups and individuals on the understanding reached with ID No. 1 at the
private meeting that all participants agreed that an amendment to the bill to
remove the reference to tribal governments in the section that defined public
agencies would be sufficient to curtail further opposition by these groups.
Action was taken by LAFCO to send their recommendation to Nava to remove the
reference to tribal governments.
On Aug.
11, the bill was amended in Sacramento removing the reference to tribal
governments from the section on public agencies. The change did, however, cause
the appearance of the term “tribal government” in five new references in the
bill. The references apparently are there to allow the water district to
conduct business with the tribal government as it would with any other
customer.
At press time, the bill was on the floor of
the state Senate awaiting a final reading before a vote.