Mountain Counties association gears up for action

Mountain Counties Water Resources Association, or Mountain Counties, as it is commonly called, has come full circle since it was formed in the 1950s.

At that time, California initiated its State Water Plan that led to the creation of the dams, reservoirs and other water infrastructure operated by the state Department of Water Resources. It is called the State Water Project and the dams, reservoirs and other water infrastructure operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation are called the Central Valley Project.

The water districts, agencies, associations and water-related businesses that made up the membership of Mountain Counties in the 1950s worked with the Department of Water Resources to identify water needs and plan for water development in the Mountain Counties area.

In 1979 the association was reorganized to protect the water rights of the "counties of origin" and the ability of the counties to develop their water resources. For several years this was done on an informal basis, with individual member groups representing their interests with state and federal agencies and coordinating through the association.

When the state Legislature passed the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act in 2009, creating the Delta Stewardship Council as an independent agency, Mountain Counties members cast keen eyes on its proceedings.

The Legislature had declared that the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed and California’s water infrastructure are in crisis and existing Delta policies are not sustainable. Resolving the crisis required fundamental reorganization of the state’s management of Delta watershed resources.

The Delta Stewardship Council had its first meeting in April 2010, and immediately went to work to meet its deadline to create a Delta Plan by Jan. 1, 2012. The Delta Plan has two co-equal goals:

1. Providing a more reliable water supply for California; and 2. protecting, restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.

Mountain Counties has consistently been willing to work with all agencies of the state to achieve water dependability throughout California. Mountain Counties members have not been willing to share in the costs of ecosystem restoration in the Delta, maintaining they did not contribute to the current conditions.

Facts about Mountain Counties

There are 15 counties in the association: Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Madera, Mariposa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sierra, Tuolumne, Yuba and portions of Butte, Fresno and Lassen.

There are 59 members, including 21 water purveyors, the counties of Sierra, Placer and Calaveras, and the city of Folsom.

Bill George, from El Dorado Irrigation District, is president. Barbara Balen, Tuolumne Utility District, is secretary-treasurer. The directors are Lowell Jarvis, Placer Water Agency; Norm Krizl, Georgetown Divide Public Utility District; and Don Stump, Calaveras County Water District.

The board meets10:30 a.m. on the first Tuesday of the month at the El Dorado County Water Agency offices in Shingle Springs.

When the Delta Reform Act was passed in 2009, Mountain Counties members determined that their interests in the Delta Plan could best be represented by speaking with one voice. They took four major actions.

1. The board formed a legislative committee.

2. Mountain Counties adopted a set of policy principles to guide their efforts, stating, “The threat to water rights, as well as the potential for fees, regulatory and environmental costs as a result of currently proposed state legislation, prompts MCWRA to adopt a framework of water resources policy principles.”

3. Mountain Counties coordinated with the Association of California Water Agencies and other organizations to develop the Ag-Urban Alternative as one of the alternative plans that is being analyzed in the Delta Plan Environment Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement.

4. They discussed hiring a lobbyist to represent them at the state level, but opted instead to place that responsibility in the office of executive director. “We wanted our face to be seen,” said Mountain Counties President George.

The board selected John Kingsbury as their new executive director. He started in March.

Executive Director John Kingsbury

Kingsbury had the right combination of familiarity with Mountain Counties’ issues and the people involved.

He grew up in nearby Fair Oaks. With a love for the great outdoors, he spent a lot of time in El Dorado County hunting, fishing, camping and hiking. He moved to the county in 1979 and now lives in Placerville. His son, Colton, recently graduated from El Dorado High School and is attending Folsom Lake College's El Dorado Center.

Kingsbury first worked in the business services side of the medical field before switching to the water business. He has been in the water business for 22 years. He started at EID, where he worked for 12 years as customer services manager.

For the next 10 years he commuted to Auburn, where he was director of customer services. In that role, he worked with statewide and regional organizations that monitor and influence regulatory and legislative matters of critical interest to the water purveyors.

Kingsbury appears before Delta Stewardship Council

On Aug. 26, Kingsbury appeared before the Delta Stewardship Council at its regular monthly meeting, representing Mountain Counties.

He highlighted a few of Mountain Counties' top concerns with the Delta Plan.

1. The phrase “covered actions” is vague in the Fifth Draft, he told the council.

“We may understand and interpret it as it is today, but we need to look down the road 10 years, 20 years. How are those folks going to interpret it?” He suggested including some examples in the plan for the future.

With respect to water rights, he said, “There are a couple of recommendations that we need some clarification on, or they need to be stricken from the plan.”

2. Citing the report,, Kingsbury said it “states the council could recommend that the State (Water Resources Control) Board cease issuing water rights permits if the state board has not completed flow reports for the Delta by 2013. This leads to uncertainty for those who plan to file a permit on a water right,” he said.

3. Another section "says those who are requesting a new point of diversion, place of use, or purpose of use that results in a new or increased use of water from the Delta watershed should demonstrate that the project proponents have evaluated and implemented all other feasible supply alternatives. And I’m concerned about what does ‘feasible’ mean. Again, there’s uncertainty, and this could effectively stop a senior water rights holder in an area-of-origin in their tracks.”

4. Referring to a section on "the Public Goods Charge," Kingsbury said, “We recognize the state’s broke and we need money, but we’re opposed to a statewide Public Goods Charge. It should be this beneficiaries-pay concept.”

CHAIRMAN PHIL ISENBERG: “But you wish to define yourself as not a beneficiary, subject to the Public Goods Charge. Right?”

KINGSBURY:  “That’s true.”

ISENBERG: “OK.”

5. Kingsbury continued, noting another section "says that on June 2, 2014, to adopt and implement flow objectives for the Delta that are necessary to achieve the co-equal goals. Please keep in mind what happens to the flows of the upstream tributaries that are the spawning and rearing grounds for the salmon and steelhead. How about the cold-water pools held for timely releases for the spawn? What happens to the communities that depend on the water for tourism, recreation and the economy? And how about hydropower generation? Will this flow regime, aimed at improving the Delta, create another crisis?”

He elaborated: “The state has assured a future for the area-of-origin as the water rights were filed in the 1920s on behalf of the areas of origin by the state, and these rural areas need this assurance, and we need that in the plan and for our long-term viability. There are significant redirected impacts in the plan that may very well cripple many of our smaller water purveyors with a future of uncertainty, water moratoriums and economic and financial hardship.”

COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY FIORINI: “John raises a question that I’ve been mulling over, and that has to do with, what is the State Water Board’s process for determining water quality flow objectives? Is that different than a water quality flow requirement for each tributary? Is there a distinctly separate process for determining Delta flows in contrast to those that are used to determine tributary flows? Because the policy to me is a little unclear. And I think a brief explanation now would be very much appreciated, but ultimately I think we need to understand this in detail at some later time.”

Following some discussion, Chief Counsel Chris Stevens said, “We’ll see if we can arrange with somebody from the State Board to come and give a clear and concise answer.”

The full meeting is available on video and audio at the Delta Stewardship Council Website, deltacouncil.ca.gov.

Water education

Kingsbury said, “If the watershed doesn’t survive, the Delta will not survive.” To help people understand what that means, Kingsbury has undertaken a role in water education for Mountain Counties’ members and for the general public. Mountain Counties has a Website with links to more information on water issues, mountaincountieswater.com.

He has coordinated with the Association of California Water Agencies to organize two joint membership meetings featuring panels of experts on “The Future of the Sierra Nevada Watershed.” The first was held in Folsom on June 10, the second on Sept. 9 in Placerville. He plans to have more.

“I’m passionate about what I do,” he said. “I’ve invested my life up here.”