Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes

February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
ADVERTISEMENT

North San Joaquin Water considering new tax; will appeal state actions

By Ross Farrow
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 6:25 AM PST

A Lodi-area water district will appeal a state ruling that rescinded much of its water rights and is looking into a new tax to pay for equipment needed to produce a greater water supply for the area's groundwater basin.

Board members for the North San Joaquin Water Conservation District say they are looking into the idea for a tax because they will lose rights to Mokelumne River water unless they install equipment they cannot currently afford to purchase.

To acquire matching funds for state water grants that could upgrade its water system, district officials are exploring a new fee on property owners within the district, which includes central and eastern Lodi, plus rural areas east and north of Lodi.

The fee is being considered in the hope that the California Water Resources Control Board rescinds its recent action to remove North San Joaquin's right to most of its 20,000 acre-feet of Mokelumne water. The amount of the fee has not been determined.

The district has been entitled to 20,000 acre-feet during wet years, but North San Joaquin has had the ability to pump out only 3,200 acre-feet during any one year.

At a special meeting Tuesday morning at the Lodi Public Library, the North San Joaquin board agreed to formally appeal three actions taken by Water Resources on Nov. 30. They are:

• Removal of the right to 20,000 acre-feet from the Mokelumne River during wet years for allegedly taking too long to develop a project to use the water. The state is allowing the district to use the 3,200 acre-feet that North San Joaquin has been able to access from the river, plus another 1,000 acre-feet to be used in a pilot project funded by CALFED.

• A cease and desist order against pumping any water out of the river until a fish screen protecting salmon is installed on each side of the river.

• A $66,400 fine against the district for pumping water in 2003 through 2005 without fish screens.

According to Water Resources, pumping water without fish screens violated a condition imposed on North San Joaquin in its 1992 permit for the 20,000 acre-feet.

Karna Harrigfeld, attorney for the water district, will prepare legal information on a possible new fee on property owners, which the board may review in January. If a fee is contemplated, property owners will be notified, and a public hearing will be held.

Contact reporter Ross Farrow at rossf@lodinews.com.

What this means to you

Possible water development projects that will be considered if the North San Joaquin Water Conservation District imposes a new fee:
• Larger projects to allow Mokelumne River water to seep into the groundwater basin.
• A drainage and groundwater recharge project at Gill Creek.
• A program to help farmers finance a dual irrigation system using water from the river and wells.
Source: Ed Steffani, North San Joaquin Water Conservation District.



First published: Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Reader Feedback

Dave Reckoning wrote on Dec 21, 2006 10:11 AM:

" It is absolutely imperitive that County water districts make use of their existing water rights, or those rights will go away. This will not come without cost. Existing pumpers enjoy paying less than true cost by overdrafting the groundwater resources. In the long run, it is many times more economical to address these issues now, with existing rights, before the problem evolves into a crisis. "

oh wrote on Dec 20, 2006 11:36 PM:

" Yeah more Tax.Gee I'am so surprised! "

T & C wrote on Dec 20, 2006 8:05 PM:

" Sieglock's just another "good ole" Lodi boy" and will make sure that money goes to his high society players in Lodi to award those contracts to their local contractor friends at outlandish bids for improvements to the grape bowl. That's LUSD responsibility not city of Lodi. "

fish out of water wrote on Dec 20, 2006 3:36 PM:

" this county is soaked to their eyeballs in water problems. ask Seglock to put the 450,000 dollars. ( oh yea hes gone) fruit bowl moneys to the water problem this should make the other supervisors happy. foot ball my A$$ water first. idiots "

T & C wrote on Dec 20, 2006 8:11 AM:

" F & M Bank would be happy to process a loan for you! You knew you were pumping water without the fish screens and that it would get you sooner or later and now you're crying wolf. Why should your customers pay higher taxes to bail you out for your own ignorance? "

Comments on this story are now closed.