Wright Decision and SAFE Water Ordinance

By Bill Rosen

Paper explains the importance of the legal decision and ordinance for GWD

The Goleta Water District is unique in the area because it is subject to the provisions of judgment in a lawsuit Wright v. Goleta Water District and the SAFE Water Supply Ordinance.

Wright Judgment: Martha Wright commenced a lawsuit in 1973 to determine who had rights to draw water from the North-Central Water Basin. The Central Water Basis is the principal underground water supply source for the District. The judgment defines the rights that the parties have to store and extract water. The judgment requires annual reports to the courts and the courts have retained authority to supervise the management of the North-Central Water Basin. The judgment defines the rights of the County, City of Santa Barbara and school districts to the water.

Under Wright, private property owners transferred their right to draw water from the North-Central Basin in exchange for the District's obligation to provide water to those property owners. Under certain conditions, the private property owners may reclaim their transferred water rights.

The judgment is a complicated regulatory document but provides the guidance for the management of the North-Central Water Basin.

SAFE WATER ORDINANCE: The SAFE Water Supply Ordinance is a unique enactment intended to create a drought buffer to assure that water will be available in drought conditions and to restrict the availability of water for new or additional uses. SAFE was adopted in 1991 by a vote of the residents of the District. It was amended in 1994 to permit the purchase of 2500 acre feet of state water in addition to the original allotment of 4500 acre feet of state water. SAFE may only be amended or repealed by a vote of the people.

SAFE provides a different kind of regulation. During the early 1990s, there was drought, a moratorium on issuance of new meters, and other regulatory measures undertaken by the District.

DFROUGHT BUFFER. SAFE is intended to ensure a minimum water supply level in the Central Water Basin as a drought buffer for use in emergencies. The law fixes the 1972 water level in the aquifer as the base for the drought buffer. The manner in which the 1972 water level is determined has been controversial. Although there is evidence of the level in certain wells, the controversy involves how many wells are used as the basis of measurement, the impact of the variances in the level on a daily, monthly and annual basis, the lack of definitive hydrological studies to support any determination, and a general lack of agreement with respect to the basis on which the District operates the Central Basin.

Until the Central Basin is at 100% of the 1972 water level, the law requires the District, after providing service to existing customers, to make an annual contribution of at least 2000 acre feet to the drought buffer. The law prohibits use of the drought buffer as a supplemental water supply or for new or additional demands for water within the District. The law provides that the water above the 1972 level may be used to reduce the cost of water service to existing customers. Pumping the drought buffer is permitted to service existing customers only if a drought has reduced the District's annual deliveries of Cachuma water.

NEW AND ADDITIONAL USES. The law "forbids" providing new or additional potable water service connections to any property not previously served by the District until the following conditions are satisfied:
1. The District receives 100% of its annual Cachuma Project allocation;
2. The District has met all of its Wright Judgment obligations;
3. Water rationing has been eliminated; and
4. The District has met its obligation to make its annual storage contribution to the drought buffer.

If the District has satisfied these conditions, then it may allocate up to 1% of its potable water supply to new or additional services. If new services are added, the District is obligated to increase the size of its annual contribution to the drought buffer in an amount equal to 2/3 of the amount of water released for new or additional uses. The law notes that the increase in size of the annual contribution is intended I ensure that safe water supplies in times of drought are not endangered by additional demands of new or additional services.

The SAFE water ordinance is a unique enactment intended to restrict the availability of water for new or additional uses. By its nature development is restrained. SAFE may only be amended or repealed by a vote of the people.

In the past, the current Board accumulated the annual 1% allocation for new and additional uses from year to year to the extent that it was not fully expended in one year. This permitted allocation in any single year of a larger allocation than the 1% limit. The Board under public pressure ended this practice. There is no authorization in the law for such annual accumulation and the intent of the law seems clear that such an interpretation would not be consistent with SAFE.

The SAFE Water Supply Ordinance is a significant protection against over allocation of water resources. The very fact that some development is permitted ensures that change will occur but in a way that will not over burden the District's resources. Given the scarce water supply, the possibility of drought conditions and the need for a safe and stable water supply, SAFE is an important protection for the residents of the District.