Read the Report

2505 Alluvial Avenue Clovis, CA 93611-9166 Tel: (559) 326-1100 Fax: (559) 326-1090 www.ppeng.com Memorandum To: Tri-County Water Authority Landowner From: Joe Hopkins, PE Subject: Preface to March 2018 Proposition 218 Engineer’s Report Date: March 20, 2018 The enclosed Engineer’s Report was presented to the Tri-County Water Authority Board of Directors on March 13, 2018 for their adoption. The report presented two rate options to the Board; one with a 20% contingency factor and one without. The Board accepted the report with the 20% contingency factor. This option provides the Board with the authority to assess up to $7.53 per acre annually. However, recognizing that once the Groundwater Sustainability Plan was prepared the cost of operating the Agency would be substantially less, the Board opted to restrict their ability to assess landowners into the future. Therefore, they have limited the maximum assessment to the following schedule: 2018 2019 2020 and thereafter $6.50/Acre $6.50/Acre $4.00/Acre The above schedule is consistent with the ballots sent to landowners. Please consider the revised fee approach while reviewing this Engineer’s Report. G:\Tri-County Water Auth.-2737\273717001-Prop.218 Engineers Report\_DOCS\Reports\Second Election\tcwagsa-prop-218-report-Preface.docx Engineering Surveying Planning Environmental GIS Construction Services Hydrogeology Consulting Fresno Bakersfield Visalia Clovis Modesto Los Banos Chico Merced ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR THE TRI-COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY PROPOSITION 218 PROCEDURES FOR BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS MARCH 2018 Prepared for: Tri-County Water Authority GSA Prepared by: 3/20/2018 3/20/2018 Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Fresno, California TRI-COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY GSA PROP. 218 ENGINEER’S REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT SUMMARY ................................................................................................ RS-1 1. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT .................................................................................. 4 1.1. General .............................................................................................................. 4 1.2. Agency’s Authority to Levy Assessments ........................................................... 4 1.3. Proposition 218 Requirements ........................................................................... 4 1.4. Limitations of the Engineers Report & Revenue Objectives ............................... 5 2. AGENCY BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................. 5 2.1. SGMA Legislation .............................................................................................. 5 2.2. Location ............................................................................................................. 6 2.3. History ................................................................................................................ 6 2.4. Water Supply ...................................................................................................... 6 2.4.1. Surface Water .............................................................................................. 6 2.4.2. Groundwater ................................................................................................ 6 2.4.3. SGMA Compliance ...................................................................................... 7 3. AGENCY FINANCIAL INFORMATION ..................................................................... 9 3.1. Future Programs/Projects .................................................................................. 9 3.1.1. Formation and Proposition 218 Election Expenses ................................... 10 3.1.2. Annual Agency Operations ........................................................................ 10 3.1.3. GSP Development and Implementation ..................................................... 11 3.1.4. Proposed Budget ....................................................................................... 12 4. BENEFITS DETERMINATION ............................................................................... 13 4.1. General ............................................................................................................ 13 4.2. Determination of Benefits ................................................................................. 13 4.2.1. Benefit of the Agency’s Formation and Annual Operations ........................ 14 4.2.2. Benefits of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan Development and Implementation ....................................................................................................... 14 4.2.3. GSP Implementation .................................................................................. 16 4.2.4. No Agency/GSA Alternative ....................................................................... 16 5. PROPOSAL TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS ................................................................ 17 5.1. General ............................................................................................................ 17 5.2. Proposed Programs/Projects............................................................................ 17 5.2.1. Agency Start Up and Proposition 218 Election .......................................... 17 5.2.2. Agency On-Going Management ................................................................ 17 5.2.3. GSP Development and Implementation ..................................................... 18 5.2.4. Assessment Roll ........................................................................................ 18 5.3. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 18 6. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES ..................................................................... 19 7. REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 20 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1. Agency Location Map ................................................................................... 8 Figure 4-1. Assessable District Parcels. ........................................................................ 15 Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page ii G:\Tri-County Water Auth.-2737\273717001-Prop.218 Engineers Report\_DOCS\Reports\Second Election\Revised and Final\tcwagsa-prop-218-report-Revised.docx TRI-COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY GSA PROP. 218 ENGINEER’S REPORT LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1. Start Up and Proposition 218 Election Costs. .............................................. 10 Table 3-2. On-Going Management Costs. ..................................................................... 11 Table 3-3. GSP Development and Implementation Costs. ............................................ 11 Table 3-4. Proposed Budgets. ....................................................................................... 12 Table 4-1. Assessable Acres. ........................................................................................ 14 Table 5-1. Proposed Assessment Schedule-Start Up and Proposition 218 Election. .... 17 Table 5-2. Proposed Assessment Schedule-On-Going Management. .......................... 17 Table 5-3. Proposed Assessment Schedule-GSP Development and Implementation. 18 Table 5-4. Proposed 5-Year Assessment Schedule. ..................................................... 18 APPENDICES Appendix A - Proposed Assessment with Contingency Appendix B - Assessment Roll for TCWA GSA ACRONYMS AF........................................................................................................................ acre-feet Agency ........................... Tri-County Water Authority Groundwater Sustainability Agency Basin(s) ........ Tulare Lake/Tule Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin CASGEM .................................... California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Counties .................................................................................. Kings and Tulare Counties AWD ................................................................................................ Angiola Water District DWR ............................................................... California Department of Water Resources GSA ............................................................................ Groundwater Sustainability Agency GSP ................................................................................ Groundwater Sustainability Plan DCSWD .......................................................................... Deer Creek Storm Water District WILBUR .................................................................... Wilbur Reclamation District No. 825 SGMA ............................................................ Sustainable Groundwater Management Act SWRCB ................................................................. State Water Resources Control Board Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page iii G:\Tri-County Water Auth.-2737\273717001-Prop.218 Engineers Report\_DOCS\Reports\Second Election\Revised and Final\tcwagsa-prop-218-report-Revised.docx TRI-COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY GSA PROP. 218 ENGINEER’S REPORT REPORT SUMMARY The Tri-County Water Authority (“Agency”) is a Joint Powers Authority serving as a Groundwater Sustainability Agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014. The Agency recently formed with the primary purpose of compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”). As a Groundwater

Load more