March 12, 2024 City Council meeting Item 13.B Sonoma Water Transmission System Budget Dear Mayor Sparks, Vice Mayor Ford and Councilmembers Lemus, Rivers and Harvey, There isn’t much opportunity to comment on water management in Cotati, so I would like to reflect on both the incredible value of the Cotati Water delivery systems as well as the county, and state level initiatives for better management of water resources in our Mediterranean Climate.
Two questions a) does it support Cotati’s potential participation in Groundwater Banking.? b) what is the effect of the proposed 23%/$2.25M reduction on “Biological Opinion Compliance, Water Supply Planning, Water Conservation” (PdfPg 177 & 180)
Background and questions in context : Cotati’s water is excellent, and the supply according to Sonoma Waters Urban Water Management Plan 2020 (SW-URWMP) is robust. Sonoma Water lists Cotati as having a right to 1520AFY through 2045. For Cotati’s last year the delivery was 481AFY reflecting something like 63% of total water use as the 2022Water Quality report identifies 37% of drinking water came from Cotati’s wells. The continued reduction of local usage is improving year by year – the water supplied per resident is estimated at 100G per day.
As a comparison, Cotati’s surface area is over 1000Acres, and this year we’ve had over two feet of rain, and using easy estimates, suggests over 2000AF of rain fell on Cotati – likely three times the amount delivered as potable water. From the “2022 Water Quality Report”, the trend is for “conjunctive use of water, and exploring ways to utilize alternative water sources, such as rainwater, greywater, and reclaimed water. “ (of course reclaimed water appears to be boiler-plate language and not in Cotati’s realistic future as the reclaimed water is sent to the Geysers for improving energy extraction) The SW-UWMP identifies a benefit in banding together for conjunctive use. Question (a) for the Sonoma Water budget, does it support Cotati’s potential participation in Groundwater Banking.? (Sect 5.2.3.2) Would promoting rainwater collection (and local use) and greywater (wet gardening zone) be effective demand reduction strategies in Cotati? Could this be ongoing methods of encouraging wise water use/education and encouraging knowledge of the hydrologic cycle. ? Unfortunately, the recently created rain-water gardens either side of Jagla St connecting with Valparaiso Ave, appear to be failing. The Raingarden Signs are nice – however the rain water enters the storm drains subsurface, & particularly for the catchment basin adjacent to Old Redwood Hwy barely has any effect on NPDES requirement to reduce pollutants, let alone potential water infiltration for surrounding vegetation.
For the FY24-25 budget (Question b) what is the effect of the proposed 23%/$2.25M reduction on “Biological Opinion Compliance, Water Supply Planning, Water Conservation” (Pdf Pg 177)?. My understanding is the scope is increasing as Sonoma Water is taking on all the monitoring of UCSB Sea Grant performed for 20year, and there is a new Dry Creek Biological Opinion pending. The description on the Biological Opinion (PdfPg180) doesn’t indicate the scope of reductions.
Sincerely Neil Hancock, Cotati Resident
Sonoma Water Urban Water Management Pan 2020 https://www.sonomawater.org/uwmp Cotati UWMP 2010 cotaticity.org/DocumentCenter/View/455/Urban-Water-Master-Plan-2010-PDF Cotati Water Quality Reports https://www.cotaticity.org/Archive.aspx?AMID=58