Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
the last meeting of the Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Sustainability Agency where 350 people showed up to make comments and hear the proposal of a "minimal fee" that they have decided to add to our property tax.
We founded a Rural Homeowners Alliance, because it seems no-one on this board is looking out for the small land owner. They are the only groundwater agency that has decided to implement a fee to minimal users in the county (those using less than 460 gal per day). and they are refusing to monitor the big ag and big development. They guessed at the usage and want to make sure the "little" user is subsidizing those industries that a growing rich on our water. We need it to drink, bathe, and grow food. They need it to produce wine and pot.
Next meeting Monday March 4 6-8P.M City Of Santa Rosa Utilities Field Office 35 Stony Point Road Santa Rosa. Get more info. on our facebook page Rural Homeowners Alliance...Come collect names for a petition.
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Isn't it wise to pay a little bit for the preservation of good clean water?
Aren't there costs to preserve the public good, such as water?
Isn't your stm (they) "want to make sure the 'little' user is subsidizing those industries that a growing rich on our water" inflammatory, alarmist, and without justification?
Who is the "Rural Homeowners Alliance"? It sounds pretty innocuous, but there's hardly anything on your Facebook page.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by natural home:
the last meeting of the Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Sustainability Agency where 350 people showed up to make comments and hear the proposal of a "minimal fee" that they have decided to add to our property tax.
We founded a Rural Homeowners Alliance, because it seems no-one on this board is looking out for the small land owner. They are the only groundwater agency that has decided to implement a fee to minimal users in the county (those using less than 460 gal per day). and they are refusing to monitor the big ag and big development. They guessed at the usage and want to make sure the "little" user is subsidizing those industries that a growing rich on our water. We need it to drink, bathe, and grow food. They need it to produce wine and pot.
Next meeting Monday March 4 6-8P.M City Of Santa Rosa Utilities Field Office 35 Stony Point Road Santa Rosa. Get more info. on
our facebook page Rural Homeowners Alliance...Come collect names for a petition.
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Well, as one of those evil pot farmers who use SOOO much water (actually- went to great lengths - drip, timing of day, mulching, etc to use amazingly little water) .... I can tell you we started getting metered by the NCRWQCB (the waterboard) several years ago. And that the requirements are becoming more strict in terms of reporting, monitoring, and sounding of the wells. And I can also tell you- they are coming for the wineries now too... There are requirements for plans to reduce water usage. And in general, having water delivered is no longer allowed in my industry (so if your well goes dry.... )
I'll also say- in our region I think it has been divided into 4? watersheds - each developing their own plans to protect our underground aquifers. They may be the only agency that has implemented a few "so far" ... but this WILL be the new normal.
We as humans have always taken water for granted. California among the worst ( Hetchy Hetchy dam or SoCals reliance on the Colorado river anyone ? ) . We are beginning to realize water - potable water, is a finite resource. And if we have no way of understanding how much water is *actually* being pumped from the aquifers, we will have no way to make a plan that will protect this precious resource for many generations to come...
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
....We as humans have always taken water for granted. California among the worst ( Hetchy Hetchy dam or SoCals reliance on the Colorado river anyone ? ) . ..
oh, not really. The west's politics have always been characterized by water-wars. That's kind of the point: residents may not worry about it, but businesses have known since they came to this area that their survival depends on their access to water. So that means they need to exert political control over its allocation. The residential users may be coming late to the party, which may indeed give leverage to those who've been on top of the issue for years. That's why I'm generally supportive of reform - those who've been influencing the way water is managed don't necessarily have anyone's interest but theirs in mind. Not that they may not turn out to be good corporate citizens, but in an era of increasing competition they're coming to the table with quite a head start.
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Pot (cannabis)=40 acres Well is monitored and reporting on use is mandatory!
Wine Grapes=60,000+ acres No well monitored, and no reporting required.
There really is no comparing water use between cannabis and wine grapes. Just a bunch of sound bites being thrown around hoping to get an emotional reaction.
Last year I used a little over 40,000 gallons of water to supply 400 cannabis plants, 400 linear feet of vegetables and 1,500 linear feet of flowers, and 700 ft of drought tolerant hedgerow. This is in a garden measuring approx. 22,000 sq. ft.
If 24 inches of rain fall on this garden that would be around 325,000 gallons of rain. Due to the manner in which I cultivate and with the aid of a water catching berm I am capturing a significant amount of this rain fall. By slowing the travel of water across your land you can gain much more water infiltration and thus a recharging of the aquifer.
Does anybody here know how much water you pull from your aquifer?People seem to think they have a 'right' to the aquifer sitting under their homes. If you have a right then I do to and I am not unpressed by all of the crying I hear just because you are being asked to, finally, be responsible and accountable for the water you pump out of the ground..
Anybody want to talk about water conservation or is this just a 'poor me' thread?
It really is time to stop blaming cannabis for all the things that bother you. It is dishonest and petty. Try looking a little deeper at the problem and don't scapegoat cannabis simple because you're too lazy to take the time to understand what you are taking about.
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
I want to apologize to all that are doing their best to minimize their water usage..including marijuana growers. I am very new to what has been going on behind closed doors. But I am discovering a lot. The fox's are in the hen house and the newly founded Rural Homeowners Alliance is merely the rooster crowing. We need to be all in this together...
Water is the gold right now..and Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Sustainability Agency wants to make sure that vineyards and developers don't have to pay for their water. (Tom Dutton is president) If you want to save our future for our grandchildren come help us gather names on a petition to stop minimus users from being charged until Industrial users ( including new housing developments are monitored)
My stand-point is that first build an equitable plan for industrial users that make huge profits..the point of vineyards that are not monitored is scary to me-and pot farming is new and good to know regulated. Before they go for the minimus user they need to have industries that profit pay there fair share..for example what would be a 100 acre vineyards gross per year..What if they dry farmed? That difference would be water weight.
What about charging 05% of that difference..per year. for the cost of the water used? And shouldn't there be a moratorium on new wells until this regulation is in place? Go to our facebook page and stay informed Rural-Homeowners-Alliance Cock-a -doodle-do!
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Actually, no wine grapes were irrigated before 1970. It's all about the profits.
"According to the Sonoma County Agriculture Crop Report online, water use has greatly increased corporate wine profits. Vines were not watered prior to 1970 when we had 12,597 acres of vineyards producing an average of 2.37 tons per acre and were paid and average of $255.70 per ton. By 1990 we had 33,164 acres planted and tons per acre were 3.80 with the average ton getting $1,004.30. Shoot forward to
2014 with 62,650 acres of wine grapes producing 4.39 tons per acre and prices rising to average $2,319 per ton. Pinot grapes get around $4,000 a ton. No wonder our coastal areas, which are prime pinot growing climates are under corporate threat."
The lure of corporate profits created the land rush and expensive housing for us along with many other problems. NapaVision 2050 held an economic forum and the counties that go with tourism are the first to crash in a bad economy and the last to return. With fires and flooding the tourism/wine industry have been talking a hit and now we have a well documented wine grape glut,
See the Bohemian article on dry farming in this county: https://winewaterwatch.org/2016/12/d...by-ari-levaux/
As far a cannabis cultivation, the County is supposed to be monitoring but we know it's sketchy at best. When the General Plan comes up this year, we need to demand that stricter standards for water scarce areas like most of West County need to be applied to non-food production. GoLocal claims we import 96% of our food. Support your local food farmers. We can't live without them. The County is still using 1950's water tables to give permits in the 21st cenutry. Corporate profits should not come at the expense of our community. Corporations have deep pockets, citizens not so much.
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
As a rural family who gets all our water from a well I am glad that the county has decided to monitor water use. Someone two doors down used so much water growing pot 2 summers ago that the woman who lived next door had her well go dry temporarily. I'm concerned about the winery/distillery that someone wants to build along Hwy 12 between Santa Rosa and Sebastopol, this would affect our water table. More consciousness about water use is a good thing. Also, the PD says the meeting Monday evening is at the Finley Center in Santa Rosa.
Fee by Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Agency
The fee for minimal users will be applied to all rural home owners in the Santa Rosa Basin. This will not go on any ballot for a vote. They have guessed usage to be 465 gal per day per homeowners well. There will be a flat fee applied. It will not matter if your neighbor uses 600 gal and you use 40 the fee will be the same. It won't matter if you conserve usage and your neighbor grows marijuana or the vineyard up the hill has 3 holding ponds,or water is being trucked to other parts of Ca. vineyards.you will pay .5 acre ft for residential compared to .6 acre ft. industrial.
How the plan goes is if PG&E added up all it's customers usage and then divided that by the number of customers...that is what you will be paying..And because it has not gone to a vote once they put this into effect..they can just add more money needed according to the projects that they are wanting to do.
Next meeting Wed. March 6th 6-8 Rohnert Park City Chambers , come and hear the presentation. Rural Homeowners Alliance are gathering names for a petition. We are looking into that this may be illegal
email me [email protected] and I will put you on our mailing and send you a pdf if you want to collect names in your neighborhood
Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
The Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Sustainability Agency created by Lynda Hopkins and Shirley Zane is having a very important meeting tomorrow to decide if they are going to vote on their proposed water plan. Which is basically a fee applied to every well owner without a vote. Come see the board in action. 1:P.M at 35 Stony Point across the street from the Finley Center. But don;t feel left out if you are within the city limits because in their plan all city water users will also see increases on their water bills to make sure that we let the good old boys(vin+yards,cannabis growers wineries and developers have as much free water so they can make their huge profits and the little guy gets left holding the bill We only need our water to live and grow crops. If you want to sign a petition email me [email protected] and I will send one out..maybe you can even canvas your neighbors!
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
See Susan's post below. She posted it on a new thread so you may not have been notified even though you have commented or gratituded a post on this thread. I'm just posting this so you are notified. :waccosun:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by natural home:
The Santa Rosa Plains Groundwater Sustainability Agency created by Lynda Hopkins and Shirley Zane is having a very important meeting tomorrow to decide if they are going to vote on their proposed water plan. Which is basically a fee applied to every well owner without a vote. Come see the board in action. 1:P.M at 35 Stony Point across the street from the Finley Center. But don;t feel left out if you are within the city limits because in their plan all city water users will also see increases on their water bills to make sure that we let the good old boys(vin+yards,cannabis growers wineries and developers have as much free water so they can make their huge profits and the little guy gets left holding the bill We only need our water to live and grow crops. If you want to sign a petition email me
[email protected] and I will send one out..maybe you can even canvas your neighbors!
Re: Is the Proposed Fee for our Rural Wells Legal?
Susan has a petition to challenge the proposed fee, which you can receive by contacting her. I believe that she also left some copies at the used bookstore in downtown Sebastopol on Highway 12 near the corner with Highway 116.
