Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to footer


Proposition 218 Election Passes, Keeps SGMA Implementation Local

The McMullin Area GSA Board successfully passed the Proposition 218 Election to adopt a $19/acre property-related fee in accordance with Water Code section 10730(c). Two valid protests were submitted to the GSA in opposition to the proposed fee that will be levied on landowners within the GSA. A majority protest was needed for the Election to fail.

The $19 per acre fee will fund GSA administration and activities related to planning and implementing local projects aimed at achieving State mandated sustainability. The nearest deadline is completion of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) by January 2020. Passing the election to fund this effort is a critical success for local implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The McMullin Area GSA Board is committed to retaining local control over SGMA implementation, where landowner dollars are utilized most efficiently and beneficially.

The fee will be collected by the County of Fresno from all parcel owners within the McMullin Area GSA boundaries, excluding parcels of 2 acres or less that are assumed to be de minimus extractors of groundwater under SGMA. Parcels of 2 acres or less were excluded from the Election after the official rate study revealed the cost associated with billing outweighs potential funds received.

You can use the following DWR tool to determine if your property lies within the boundaries of the McMullin Area GSA: DWR GSA Map Tool

Proposition 218 is a Constitutional Initiative approved by the voters of California in November 1996. It requires new or increased fees and assessments be approved by affected landowners.

Consultants Propose GSP Project Concepts for McMullin Area

At the May 2nd Board Meeting, technical consultants Provost & Pritchard presented a comprehensive list of potential Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) project concepts for mitigating groundwater overdraft in the Raisin City Water District and McMullin Area GSA. The consultants actively sought public participation and input on the proposed concepts to help prioritize those most favored.

A score granted based on specified criteria will prioritize projects from a technical perspective. The higher the score, the more favorable the project based on the following criteria:

  • Areas of Favorable Recharge (For example, areas of hard pan are likely to receive a lower score on this criteria)
  • Land Use
  • Annual Cost per Acre-Foot
  • Land Owners
  • Project Time to Implement
  • Water Supply/Water Rights
  • Yield
  • Environmental/Regulatory
  • Project Outside of GSA
  • Number of Cooperating Agencies

The consultants presented 37 potential project concepts within five broad project categories: Conjunctive Use (the combined use of surface water and groundwater), Surface Water, Land Management, Water Conservation, and Other. All projects discussed have the ability to mitigate groundwater overdraft, but selecting those to pursue is pending Board and public input on high and low priority measures.

Presented were a number of Conjunctive Use projects, including solutions such as intentional flood irrigation or groundwater recharge in dedicated basins and grower reservoirs. Surface Water projects range from developing surface water storage to more innovative solutions, for instance internal surface water trading amongst growers in the McMullin Area GSA. Land Management solutions include crop conversion to lower water use crops, or landowners selling land but retaining groundwater rights.

Public comment expressed desires for the pursuance of least-cost project options; inquiry surrounded the possibility of incentive programs for projects that would entail voluntary adjustments in landowner water-use practices, such as purposeful flood irrigation for recharge.

Using the scoring criteria in conjunction with landowner feedback, the consultants are working to identify creative solutions that lessen the burden of reaching mandated sustainability as they move toward developing a more detailed project roadmap.

Technical Consultant Outlines Monitoring Network Density and Methodologies for Groundwater Level Stabilization

At the April 5 Board meeting, McMullin Area Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) technical consultants Provost & Pritchard provided an update on Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) progress. The presentation included current breadth of the groundwater level monitoring network and necessary improvements in the network to reach required network density. The consultants also covered potential methodologies for reaching groundwater level stabilization, an element of GSP sustainable management criteria.

GSP development progress outlined below.


The purpose of the monitoring network discussed is specific to groundwater level measurement. The map below indicates with a blue dot actively monitored wells within the McMullin Area (outlined in red) that offer historical data on groundwater levels.

Although the map indicates a high density of groundwater level monitoring wells, to qualify for the monitoring network the well must be accompanied by a Well Completion Report. A Well Completion Report details construction information such as depth, perforations, and date established. A total of 9 wells currently qualify within the McMullin Area GSA, but 20-30 additional monitoring wells are needed to satisfy the necessary well density for the network. The map below indicates qualifying wells within the GSA.

Potential actions to fill the data gap includes one or more of the following: 1) Obtain additional Well Completion Reports for existing wells; 2) Video wells in absence of Well Completion Reports to obtain necessary construction information; 3) Establish new dedicated monitoring wells. Completion of the monitoring network density is projected for 2030.


As a part of its sustainable management criteria, SGMA requires groundwater levels stabilize between 2020 and 2040. Groundwater level stabilization success is measured by maintaining the “measurable objective”, a specified groundwater level established by the GSA and approved by DWR.

Measurable objective: average maintained groundwater level over the long-term. Must be met by 2040. Success metric of groundwater level stabilization

Minimum threshold: the lowest possible groundwater level allowed in the worst case scenario. Level cannot cause an “undesirable result” and thus cannot be an arbitrary number. Undesirable results are defined by the GSA and approved by DWR in line with DWR’s suggested Best Management Practices.

In the report, Provost & Pritchard outlined potential methodologies to establish the measurable objective and minimum threshold groundwater levels. The methodologies presented rely on three sustainable criteria variables: rate of groundwater decline, rate of mitigation, and operational flexibility. Each sustainable criteria variable can be determined a number of ways, and once determined are used in relationship with one another to establish a methodology for setting and reaching the measurable objective to achieve groundwater level stabilization.

Rate of groundwater decline is the rate at which groundwater levels have declined over a set period of time, and can be determined using one of three frameworks:

  1. Look at last 20 years, or
  2. Look at worst 20 years, or
  3. Look at hydrologic average period

Rate of mitigation is the rate at which improvements towards the measurable objective are made, and can be determined one of three ways:

  1. Constant (small, equal improvements each year), or
  2. Phased (slow at first with increased rate of progress over time), or
  3. Deferred mitigation (no progress until last 5 years; not recommended, unlikely to be accepted by DWR)

Operational Flexibility is the range of fluctuation in groundwater level allowed that still maintains the measurable objective average, taking into consideration dry versus wet years. The lowest range level of operational flexibility allowed is equal to the minimum threshold. The range of flexibility can be determined one of three ways:

  1. Recent drought
  2. Other smaller drought
  3. Conjunctive use operations

The graph below illustrates the sustainability criteria variables and their relationship to the measurable objective and minimum threshold.

Provost & Pritchard recommends determining groundwater decline from the framework of the last 20 years, establishing phased rate mitigation, and setting operational flexibility using the recent drought. This methodology considers the most favorable and realistic conditions for the McMullin Area GSA stakeholders without comprising compliance with DWR’s guidelines.

Fee Study Report Adopted by the Board, McMullin Area GSA moves forward with Proposition 218 Election

At the Special Board Meeting Wednesday, April 11th, McMullin Area GSA consultant Alison Lechowicz of Lechowicz + Tseng Municipal Consultants presented a Fee Study Report for adoption by the Board. Successful adoption of the Report signals approval to conduct a Proposition 218 Election as a means to secure McMullin Area GSA funding. Funding is needed to cover the costs associated with the GSA, including costs to administer the new agency, prepare and develop a Groundwater Sustainability Plan, and develop groundwater projects.

The Board approved hiring the rate consultant at the March 7th board meeting to conduct the Report as mandated by Proposition 218. The Fee Study ensures that calculated fees are based on the reasonable cost of providing service, in this case the GSA’s annual budget costs required to implement SGMA, and that fees proportionally recover costs from ratepayers. The five-year budget spanning fiscal years 2019-2023 was used to calculate the proportional per/acre fee, considered a property-related water service charge.

The proposed fee rate adopted by the Board of Directors is $19/acre. Absence of a majority protest in opposition to the fee signals landowner approval for the Board to adopt and levy $19/acre on said landowners within the boundaries of the McMullin Area GSA.

Failure to adopt the proposed fee will result in loss of local control over implementing SGMA, and powers to implement the law will fall back to the State Water Resources Control Board. Local implementation by the McMullin GSA is the least cost option that carries the most benefits for the community of landowners within its boundaries.

A public hearing will be held on June 6th, 2018 at 2:00 pm at the Kerman Community Center, 15101 W Kearney Blvd., Kerman, CA 93630.

For more information regarding the Proposition 218 Election, State Intervention, and to review resources, visit our Proposition 218 Groundwater Fee webpage.

McMullin Receives $214,000 Grant Funding

The McMullin Area Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) was part of a successful grant application that will bring $1.5 million into the Kings Subbasin for the development of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP). The McMullin Area GSA will receive $214,000 as their share of the grant award. The money will be used to offset some of the costs for the preparation of the McMullin Area GSP.

The grant was funded by Proposition 1 and awarded on a competitive basis. The full list of grant applications submitted is available on the Sustainable Groundwater Planning Grant Program webpage.The Department of Water Resources announced its recommended awards for grants on February 6 for groundwater sustainability projects that directly benefit severely disadvantaged communities and for local agency development of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs). DWR received 78 grant applications and is recommending that all receive awards, pending public comments and review of those comments.


Land Subsidence Reviewed for McMullin Area

Land subsidence is one of the six sustainability indicators that must be managed without causing undesirable results in a Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Technical Consultant Lynn Groundwater from Provost & Pritchard reviewed maps at the Ad Hoc Technical Committee meeting showing historic and current information on subsidence in the McMullin Area GSA territory.

Land subsidence occurs generally where the Corcoran Clay underlies the Valley, but recently land subsidence has been documented in some areas not underlain by the Corcoran clay.  The map below (click on map to enlarge) shows land subsidence from 1926 to 1970. This historical map shows subsidence as one foot in the middle of the McMullin territory and 4 feet in the upper left of McMullin’s boundary.

A more recent map from NASA shows the amount of land subsidence from May 2015 to May 2016 (click on map to enlarge). The green areas represent less subsidence. The yellow to orange areas are higher. The coloring within the McMullin Area indicates that subsidence varies across the territory. On the eastside of McMullin there has been minimal subsidence with it increasing as you go west. Overall there was less than 5 inches of subsidence from May 2015 to May 2016 in the McMullin Area GSA.

Ad Hoc Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Highlights

At the McMullin Area Groundwater Sustainability Agency’s Ad Hoc Technical Advisory Committee held on December 6, the participants heard a report from McMullin’s technical consultants, Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P). P&P provided an update on the development of the hydrogeologic conceptual model and the groundwater conditions and monitoring chapters of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP).

The GSP requires the identification of groundwater quality issues that may affect the supply and beneficial uses of groundwater, including a description and map of the location of known groundwater contamination sites and plumes. Water quality is one of the six undesirable results that must be addressed in the GSP. P&P staff members highlighted some of the groundwater quality issues that may be considered in the GSP, like the Raisin City oil fields.

Work is also being done on estimating the annual change in groundwater storage for the McMullin area over a 15-year period. The minimum threshold for reduction of groundwater storage shall be a total volume of groundwater that can be withdrawn from the basin without causing conditions that may lead to undesirable results.
Some of the elements being considered in the hydrogeologic conceptual model include understanding the structural trough of the Valley which governs the location of the sediments types. The McMullin Area service area is near the axis of the Valley on the eastside as shown in the visual below (click on map for larger image) that includes mostly San Joaquin River alluvial sediments and Dune Sands.

Using this information along with other factors, a picture of the McMullin Area’s groundwater conditions can start to emerge. One example is on the map below (click on image for larger view), where several elements are considered to determine the best locations for recharge. On this map, the dark green areas are the most desirable locations for recharge with the brown areas being the least desirable.

Technical Consultant Discusses Progress on Drafting Groundwater Sustainability Plan

The Board received a report on the progress of drafting three chapters for the McMullin Area’s Groundwater Sustainability Plan from their technical consultant, Provost & Pritchard. The Plan Area Chapter, which includes topics like a description of the geographic areas covered and other water and land use plans in the area, was submitted to McMullin Area’s Technical Advisory Committee for review.
The Groundwater Conditions Chapter is scheduled to be drafted by the end of November. This chapter will describe current and historical groundwater conditions in the McMullin Area including topics like groundwater elevation and depth, flows, storage variation, water quality and subsidence.
The Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model Chapter is scheduled to be drafted by the end of December. This chapter will characterize through a conceptual model the physical components and interaction of the surface water and groundwater systems in the area.

Board Receives Update on Groundwater Sustainability Plan

The Groundwater Sustainability Plan will cover a number of topics including the description of groundwater conditions, water budget, sustainable management criteria, monitoring, and projects. McMullin Area GSA’s technical consultant, Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group, is currently working on drafting the groundwater conditions and hydrogeologic conceptual model chapters. The groundwater conditions chapter will include topics like groundwater elevation and depth, flows, variation in storage, and water quality to name a few. The hydrogeologic conceptual model chapter will provide a visual and narrative description of groundwater conditions in the McMullin Area.

MAGSA Board Selects Attorney, Forms Adhoc Committees

At the August 2 McMullin Area GSA Board Meeting, the Board selected Ron Donlan from Ellison Schneider Harris & Donlan LLP out of Sacramento as General Counsel. Rob Donlan is a Partner in Ellison Schneider Harris & Donlan. Rob specializes in water and natural resources law, including all aspects of surface water and groundwater rights and management; state and federal Endangered Species Acts and fisheries laws; the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); water quality and wetlands regulation; and other areas of state and federal regulation involving use and management of water resources. Rob’s experience also includes public agency governance and administration, infrastructure and regulatory finance, desalination and recycled water use, and water supply for power and energy development.

To support the various administrative and technical functions of the McMullin Area GSA, several adhoc committees were formed with Board member appointments:

  • Technical Advisory Committee – Board Members Don Cameron and Jerry Rai
  • Financial Committee – Board Members Matt Abercrombie and Jeevan Singh
  • Outreach Committee – Board Members Matt Abercrombie and Jeevan Singh
  • Human Resources Committee – Board Members Jerry Rai and Jeevan Singh

In other business, the Board approved a contract to engage the firm Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P) through June 30, 2018 as the engineering firm to oversee, manage and coordinate the preparation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). P&P proposed scope of work is segregated into several phases including data collection, compilation and review; GSP development; and administrative support. The total estimated fee for the services is $234,000 with $42,500 for the data collection, compilation and review phase, $153,000 for the GSP development phase, and $38,000 for the administration phase.

Translate »