In 1972 farmers and other landowners sued the Goleta Water District for purportedly taking more than their share from the ground water basin beneath the Goleta Valley. Seventeen years later a court judgment resulted in setting a limit that the GWD could pump from its wells. It was this legal restriction that created the impetus for voters to approve Goleta’s participation in the State Water Project. However, voters were understandably concerned that this new source of water needed to be used to meet the needs of existing customers before new entitlements could be made to new customers. This led to the passage of the SAFE Water Ordinance in 1991 (with an amendment in 1994 that increased the amount of State Water), a contract between the voters and the GWD that was intended to ensure that future growth and water demand would not exceed reliable supplies. SAFE is a complicated ordinance that is apparently interpreted differently according to whom you ask. In essence, the SAFE Water Ordinance said that the GWD could not resume pumping water from the groundwater basin until it could be established that the groundwater basin had filled back up to its 1972 levels.
Based on a hydrological report from its consultant, the current majority on the GWD Board of Directors has taken the position that the groundwater basin has been replenished to 1972 levels, thus groundwater pumping can resume. Based on this interpretation, the GWD appears to have concluded that the provision of water is not an impediment to new growth in the Goleta Valley. However, the report from the consultant only says that the 1972 levels have “generally” been met. It is important to note that nowhere in the hydrologist’s report is it stated that the 1972 levels had been met 100%, which is the requirement in the SAFE Ordinance.
It might be prudent for the Directors of the Goleta Water District to look more closely at the intent of the voters who passed the SAFE Water Ordinance.
Previous Month
Posted on September 24 at 11:33 a.m.
In 1972 farmers and other landowners sued the Goleta Water District for purportedly taking more than their share from the ground water basin beneath the Goleta Valley. Seventeen years later a court judgment resulted in setting a limit that the GWD could pump from its wells. It was this legal restriction that created the impetus for voters to approve Goleta’s participation in the State Water Project. However, voters were understandably concerned that this new source of water needed to be used to meet the needs of existing customers before new entitlements could be made to new customers. This led to the passage of the SAFE Water Ordinance in 1991 (with an amendment in 1994 that increased the amount of State Water), a contract between the voters and the GWD that was intended to ensure that future growth and water demand would not exceed reliable supplies. SAFE is a complicated ordinance that is apparently interpreted differently according to whom you ask. In essence, the SAFE Water Ordinance said that the GWD could not resume pumping water from the groundwater basin until it could be established that the groundwater basin had filled back up to its 1972 levels.
Based on a hydrological report from its consultant, the current majority on the GWD Board of Directors has taken the position that the groundwater basin has been replenished to 1972 levels, thus groundwater pumping can resume. Based on this interpretation, the GWD appears to have concluded that the provision of water is not an impediment to new growth in the Goleta Valley. However, the report from the consultant only says that the 1972 levels have “generally” been met. It is important to note that nowhere in the hydrologist’s report is it stated that the 1972 levels had been met 100%, which is the requirement in the SAFE Ordinance.
It might be prudent for the Directors of the Goleta Water District to look more closely at the intent of the voters who passed the SAFE Water Ordinance.
On Goleta Water Board Showdown