TWD Budget Repays Private Backers By Taxing Landowners

"Formation Cost Reimbursement"

Dear Water Defender:

We’ve uncovered information that calls into question whether the purpose of the recent TWD election was properly described to voters as required by law.

The Notice of Public Hearing that accompanied the ballot stated that the purpose of the $6.45/acre assessment was for TWD "...to cover its fixed costs... general and administrative expenses (e.g. staffing & office expenses)”.  

When we read the TWD Engineers Report, however, we discovered a disturbing omission in the listing of what the assessment fee will pay for. Under the heading of General and Administrative Expenses, in addition to office expenses, etc., there is this:

"Formation Cost Reimbursement: ...covers the equitable reimbursement of costs incurred during the establishment of TWD, which includes legal, engineering, and administrative expenses essential for forming the District. By reimbursing these costs, the District ensures that all landowners who benefit from TWD's services contribute fairly to its foundational investments. “

The so-called "assessment" the TWD board put before the voters was, as a matter of law, a TAX.  Being taxed to pay Formation Cost Reimbursement raises questions that those required to pay for the reimbursement have a right to know:

    * How does "cost reimbursement" sync with "fixed costs" such as "staffing and office expenses”?    
    * What is the total amount of the reimbursement? Does repayment include interest?
    * Who put up the original money and what did that money pay for?
    * Why did the TWD Board not inform landowners within the District of this cost reimbursement before the election? 
    * Why should TWD-area landowners pay a reimbursement for expenditures that they knew nothing about and were not party to making?

In June 2017, the AGUBC (Agricultural Groundwater Users of Butte County) was selected by the Board of Supervisors to establish the TWD. Membership in AGUBC, a private ag-industry association, is by invitation only, and costly – the initial membership fee was $2,500.  Also, their meetings have been closed to the public, and no public record has been kept of what has occurred at those meetings.

From their origins behind closed doors, the TWD emerged as a quasi-governmental entity designed to exclude the entire City of Chico and its voters from any say in its management or activities.

And now, after a second undemocratic, acreage-based election, approved by a minority of landowners, all TWD-area landowners will be compelled to repay expenses incurred by the founders of TWD, even though these expenses were not known to them and they had no say in how that money was spent. 

None of those earlier costs have ever been explained or accounted for publicly, nor were they mentioned in the election materials or on the ballot. 

This fight is not over!

The Groundwater for Butte Team

From the Engineers Report:

General and Administrative Expenses (pg. 23) – lays out inclusion of Formation Cost Reimbursement in the budget:

Notice of Public Hearing (pg. 95) i.e. the election announcement – makes no mention of Formation Cost Reimbursement:

Report on TWD Election Results of Jan. 15, 2025

If each property-owning voter had one vote, TWD would have lost.

As you have probably heard, the Tuscan Water District won its latest landowner-weighted election in January. It will now levy property taxes of $6.45 per acre on landowners within its footprint.

Those funds will only be enough to keep an office open and defend against lawsuits. Additional funding for infrastructure projects will have to come separately, such as from already flowing State of California grants.

In other words, TWD is collecting taxes from the very people who may challenge it legally, to cover the costs of fending them off in court. 

Groundwater for Butte has always regarded TWD as the illegitimate child of private ag interests in league with the State of California Department of Water Resources. That agency drew up plans decades ago to eventually section off our public groundwater basin as just another storage bank in the state’s vast water-distribution plumbing.

Based on our post-election analysis, if each property-owning voter had been given one vote, TWD would not have won this election.

Here is a quick breakdown of the numbers:

–Only 2/5 of the ballots sent out were returned. 2061 ballots went out, 831 were submitted.

–More than 50% of the returned ballots were “no” votes. 422 voted no, 404 voted yes, 5 were disqualified. 

–If we combine the votes of big landowning families into one vote each, quite a few more votes disappear from the “yes” column.

–Weighted for land ownership, the “yes” vote was 7 times the “no” vote.

404 owners of 53,059 acres got their way over422 owners of 7,504 acres.*

The process was perfectly designed from the start to achieve exactly this result: A quasi-private entity, responsive principally to large ag interests, is now positioned to manage the Tuscan Aquifer for obscure private and State agendas at potentially disastrous expense to the public interest. 

However, we at Groundwater for Butte are proud to have stuck with our efforts because it’s quite clear the community is beginning to wake up to what has been going on.

Many thanks to those of you who donated to help us sound the alarm about this latest questionable election, and to those of you who helped by sending mailers, canvassing, posted road signs, and getting the word out. We hope you’ll continue to stay tuned and watch how the groundwater situation develops from here.

A new Groundwater for Butte Steering Committee is gearing up to launch a new website, keep tabs on TWD and the various other entities determining groundwater management, and protect our community from further backroom shenanigans going forward.

G4B will continue to be a force in our community to defend our local groundwater.

–The Groundwater for Butte team

*Election results: Jan 15, 2025

Total acres within the boundaries of the TWD: 96,170 (according to the election packet put out by the TWD Board).

Results based on their process (the official certified figures):
YES votes: 34,222,913
NO votes:     4,839,853 

The above figures were calculated by the number of acres in a parcel multiplied by 645, which is based on the $6.45 tax assessment without the decimal point. We couldn’t figure out why they did it this way either, but have to assume it was meant to make it look like TWD won by even more than it did. To calculate the number of acres per ballot (ballot = parcel), we divided their YES and NO numbers by 645. Thus:

Results by number of acres:

YES votes:  34,222,913 / 645 = 53,059 acres    

NO votes:      4,839,853 / 645 = 7,504 acres

Petitioners vs. Protesters:  Further illustration of an undemocratic process

Petitioners are those who actively sought the TWD’s establishment, while Protesters are those who returned the initial “protest” ballots from Butte County LAFCo, rejecting TWD.

Number of acres held by petitioners and by protestors:
Petitioners: 49,622 acres from 663 parcels, average parcel size 74.84 acres

Protesters:    2,170 acres from 189 parcels, average parcel size 11.48 acres 

Based on the above numbers, we can also deduce that over 2/3 of non-Protest landowners voted NO, while only 16% of non-Petition landowners voted YES.

Approximate NO votes from landowners who were not protestors (based on number of protestors):     7,504 – 2,170 = 5,334

Approximate YES votes from landowners who were not petitioners (based on number of petitioners): 53,059 – 49,622 = 3,437

Voting Instructions for TWD Funding Election

BALLOTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY JANUARY 15.

1) For it to arrive on time, you must mail your ballot by Saturday, January 11. If it's too late to mail in your ballot (or if you prefer) you may hand-deliver your ballot at the TWD Public Hearing, January 15, 9 am.  Location: Chico State University Farm, Rm 104, 311 Nicholas C.Schouten Lane (off Hegan Lane) in Chico.

2) If you have lost or damaged your ballot or did not receive one, contact MK Elections at 209 259-6740, and request a ballot by the deadline January 8. Or you can get a new ballot at the Public Hearing on January 15, 9:00 am, the day ballots are due - location above. For new owners - see below.

3) New property owners who did not receive a ballot should call the TWD info line, 530-487-0139, and leave a message with this information:
a. Provide your name, address, phone number.
b. Request that MK Elections void the ballot of the previous owner.
c. Request that MK Elections issue a new ballot in their name.
d. This may also be done on January 15 at the public hearing,
where ballots will be available.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

We oppose the formation of the Tuscan Water District and demand that Butte County officials step up to their responsibilities under State law. The groundwater belongs to the public and must be managed transparently by publicly elected authorities - not privatized as a "water bank."

Vote NO on Tuscan Water District Property Tax

We Don't Need Another Layer of Taxing Government.

Groundwater for Butte (G4B) urges all landowners within the proposed Tuscan Water District (TWD) to vote “NO: do not approve the special benefit assessment” on their vote-by-mail ballots, due January 15, 2025.

Please help us sustain our get-out-the-no-vote campaign! Many have already donated to help us cover postage and printing to alert property owners. Please do your part for the future of our community by donating any amount, however small, to our effort at this link.

If you have any time to visit your neighbors and discuss it with them, or wish to join us in our door-to-door outreach effort, please email us at groundwaterforbutte.gmail.com.

Canvassing is a hugely rewarding exercise in community building. We are meeting people of all kinds who are confused or angry about what is going on. After hearing our concerns and sharing their own, most people we have spoken to end up leaning toward voting no, or deciding they will definitely do not want to pay for the TWD. 

WHY OPPOSE FUNDING THE TUSCAN WATER DISTRICT?

The TWD's undemocratic structure prioritizes the largest six landowners, and excludes urban areas like Chico and Durham from decision-making, despite their shared reliance on the Vina Subbasin. The TWD adds unnecessary bureaucracy and an additional tax to the assessment already being imposed by the Vina GSA. For farmers already struggling with reduced nut prices, a second tax burden could be financially devastating. The TWD also threatens small farms with shallow wells, homeowners with domestic wells, and groundwater-dependent ecosystems. Vote NO and oppose the Tuscan Water District to protect our groundwater!

The Tuscan Water District was formed several years ago by a group of private landowners in meetings closed to the public. The TWD boundaries were drawn to create an entirely agricultural district, an area covering less than half of the Vina Subbasin. TWD boundaries exclude the more densely populated Chico and Durham, which also overlie the Vina Subbasin and draw from the same water. 

California law allows the Tuscan Water District’s voting system to be based on the dollar value of the land rather than the democratic principle of “one-person/one-vote,” which means that decision-making power rests in landowners with the highest-valued land, while negating the voting powers and voices of the thousands of smaller farms and homeowners within the proposed TWD.

Due to this rigged voting system, in December 2023, the TWD was established by 4% of the district’s landowners, who possess 43% of the total land value. However, a separate vote is now required to approve funding. On November 29, TWD landowners received a vote-by-mail ballot to vote Yes or No to assess themselves a yearly fee based on the acreage of their land. The last day to submit ballots is January 15.

Groundwater for Butte is urging TWD landowners to vote NO, based on the above concerns and several others:

Legal opinions question the validity of this election because it violates Prop.13 and the California Constitution by imposing a new tax without approval from 2/3’s of eligible voters.

TWD is considered to be the “implementation arm” for the entire Vina Subbasin, yet the area within the TWD boundaries covers less than half of the officially designated Vina Subbasin (see attached map). The City of Chico draws from the same aquifer and occupies more than half of the land area over the Vina Subbasin. Despite having a vastly larger population than landowners within the proposed TWD, Chico residents have no decision-making power over the water they depend on. 

Proponents of the Tuscan Water District claim that TWD will guarantee “local control” of our groundwater. Yet, the wealthiest farm in the TWD, valued at $35+million, is based in Salt Lake City, Utah and the fourth largest farm, valued at $10 million, is based in Concord, CA. The top six landowners make up less than 0.3% of the TWD voting population but account for 11.7% of the assessed land value in the district. With votes weighted by land value, the average vote of these six landowners is 39 times more influential than the average vote of the other 2,011 voters in the proposed district. Thus, most local farmers including generational family farms will not have a fair say regarding their groundwater.    

The TWD’s stated purpose,” to develop, construct, and operate facilities to purchase, import, move, recharge and transfer water,” would give the Board of the TWD authority for an unprecedented drawdown of groundwater levels, up to 200% beyond historic lows. Such a drawdown will have severe negative impacts on the shallower wells of small farms and domestic wells, and the shallow roots of trees and other species dependent on a healthy water table, thus introducing the very real danger that wells will go dry and groundwater dependent ecosystems, including Bidwell Park, Bidwell-Sacramento River State Park and the Sacramento Valley’s signature Valley Oak, will die for lack of accessible groundwater. 

TWD adds an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. The Vina Groundwater Sustainability Agency and Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation are already in a position to manage groundwater sustainably. TWD property owners are already paying new assessments for the Vina GSA. With approval of this vote, TWD landowners will be required to pay two fees for using the same water—a double tax. 

The Solution:

We don’t need another layer of government. Wouldn’t it be simpler, less costly, and more democratic to have one water district for all of Butte County? We need a county-wide water district that serves equally all who draw on the same water, managed for the public by a public entity: Butte County. 

Groundwater for Butte’s message to TWD landowners is, “Vote NO on Tuscan Water District.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

We oppose the formation of the Tuscan Water District and demand that Butte County officials step up to their responsibilities under State law. The groundwater belongs to the public and must be managed transparently by publicly elected authorities - not privatized as a "water bank."

Join us to fight the Tuscan Water District's funding election!

GROUNDWATER FOR BUTTE'S CAMPAIGN IS GEARING UP.

The next election for TWD is coming right up! Last December, landowners within the boundaries of the TWD approved formation of the district, with their vote based on the assessed value of the land. Now they must approve the funding to pay for the TWD. Ballots are set to arrive in mailboxes by the end of November with January 15 the final day to submit ballots.

Groundwater for Butte will do what is feasible to stop this water grab. We plan to reach out to TWD landowners to get out the NO vote, and once again we are calling on you to help with donations or as volunteers.

HOW YOU CAN HELP:

Please consider making a donation (soon if possible!) to pay printing and postage for mailers to TWD landowners explaining why their NO vote is so important. Please donate here, or send a check to Groundwater for Butte, PO Box 2342, Chico CA 95927.

We are seeking volunteers to make direct contact with TWD landowners, to help them understand what is at stake, and the importance of voting NO; canvassing to start around mid-November to December 1. Contact us at groundwaterforbutte@gmail.com

Spread the word to your networks– via Facebook, Instagram, email, and letters to the editor.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO OPPOSE THE TWD?

Land Value Based Voting Deprives Small Farms of Power Over Their Water
Although small farms and small-parcel homeowners within the TWD number in the thousands, their voting weight is negligible.  The voting structure is based on the dollar value of acres owned, leaving smaller farmers with virtually no say.  Due to the assessed-land value, five or ten of the largest farms, some corporate out-of-state, will dominate TWD decision-making from the start.

City of Chico Residents are Excluded
A non-transparent group drew the boundaries to exclude the entire City of Chico, even though Chicoans are dependent on and use the same water. Only property owners within the TWD may vote, even though future decisions will affect all who draw water from the Lower Tuscan Aquifer, including all of Chico.

Risks of Many More Shallow Wells Failing and Native Trees Failing
The TWD’s stated purpose, to develop, construct, and operate facilities to purchase, import, move, recharge and transfer water would give the Board of the TWD cover for an unprecedented drawdown of groundwater levels, up to 200% beyond historical lows, beneath the reach of Valley Oak root systems. Such a drawdown would have severe negative impacts on the shallow roots and ecosystem of the area.  Many of the same Butte County landowners will be assessed to pay for the District in this election.

GROUNDWATER FOR BUTTE’S CAMPAIGN:

In spite of stiff odds to stop the TWD, Groundwater for Butte is launching a campaign to stop TWD in the up-coming funding election. There are several factors in our favor:

• Although TWD proponents won the election to form the district, the majority of landowners, and even many petitioners, chose not to vote. We think our last campaign influenced many of those decisions. For this election we will reach out to non-voters, and urge them to vote NO.
• During the last campaign, we expanded our base of support among TWD landowners, many of whom are ready to spread the word to their friends and neighbors who own land in the TWD, further expanding our base. 
• This election violates Prop. 13 by imposing a new tax without 2/3 approval. 
• With nut prices depressed, many growers are going to think twice about accepting yet another sure-to-increase tax burden on top of the Vina Groundwater Sustainability Agency’s recent assessment.

Check our website to learn more about why TWD is a bad idea for all who depend on the Lower Tuscan Aquifer, and why it is in all of our best interests to stop it however possible.  

In the next few weeks we intend to blanket the community and the local cyberspace with our message. We will keep you posted as the campaign progresses.

Thanks for helping assure the long-term health of the groundwater we all depend on!

Emily Alma, Campaign Coordinator
Vote NO on Funding the Tuscan Water District
(530) 864-0714
www.groundwaterforbutte.org

Summer 2024 Update

Another TWD Election is Coming

There will be another Tuscan Water District election, mostly likely in February 2025.

Like last December's election, voting power will be based on the value of land owned, which in our opinion renders it unfair and undemocratic from the get-go. 

IT ALWAYS LOOKS SO RESPECTABLE

Because the California constitution requires a 2/3 majority to approve the kind of new tax assessment Tuscan Water District is requesting, the path toward victory this time is somewhat narrower.

It remains a possibility that the ag community itself will balk at raising its own fixed costs.

Nut prices are depressed and the orchard economy is already under a lot of strain. From the beginning of the TWD saga, we have argued that it represents big ag interests preying upon the vulnerability and panic of smaller family growers. The new water district, with cooperation from a County government dominated by ag-industry interests, is promising them that expensive and scientifically dubious recharge infrastructure will protect them from eventual State of California metering of wells in order to slow the decline of the aquifer.

Our group is well positioned to make the case publicly, once again, that TWD cannot keep those promises, and that behind closed doors it is actually a water grab on behalf of those farms with the most extensive water rights.

Will the residents and smaller growers dependent on at-risk shallower wells heed the warning? All we can do is make the case, once again. And we will.

Public Meetings

This summer our crew is keeping tabs on the public-facing aspects of local water politics by attending meetings of the Tuscan Water District, the Vina Groundwater Sustainability Agency, the Butte County Water Commission, and (as relevant) the Butte County Board of Supervisors. 

The Vina Groundwater Sustainability Agency's 2022 Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP), already approved by the State, states quite openly that the water table will be allowed to drop to unprecedented lows, and 20% of monitoring wells allowed to fail, before the County must take any action to reverse the damage.

Even in its approval document of the Vina GSP, the State Department of Water Resources issued this caveat:

"The GSA does not access how the proposed minimum thresholds for the chronic lowering of groundwater levels may impact other sustainability indicators (e.g., groundwater storage, depletion of interconnected surface water, etc.). Considering the GSA is choosing to manage the Subbasin below historic lows (italics are ours - ed.), understanding this relationship will be important during plan implementation."

You don't say! We'd love to understand why the Vina GSP is "choosing to manage the Subbasin below historic lows." Perhaps nothing is being said about this elephant in the room at every water-related meeting because AquAlliance sued the Vina GSA (and other agencies) over this and the case is making its way through court.

One thing we have observed is that the key players determining Butte County's water future are mostly a handful of the same faces, same consultants, through the years. Unlike us, they are paid to be there. They smile at us when we show up. They express the warmest welcomes even though we were on TV last fall accusing them of selling out democracy and the public's vital interest in the aquifer.

We play along. We collect the agendas. We compare notes. We believe most of the people we're observing really mean well. But the devil is always in the details.

Butte County Recharge Action Plan

Butte County has adopted a set of policies and ideas to encourage and enhance groundwater recharge in wet years. G4B has asked to be present at the Butte County Department of Water Resources and Conservation meetings this summer where projects will be prioritized for funding.

As things stand, those choices are due to be made with input heavily weighted toward the private industry association that has driven and funded the Tuscan Water District’s establishment, and from the same consulting firm that put together the Vina GSP.

G4B generally supports locally-managed, low-cost strategies to help nature recharge the aquifer during wet years. But we find the Recharge Action Plan rather long on hopes and short on details. The science is also shaky on whether artificial recharge is even worth attempting. Underground flows are only vaguely understood, and water recharged in Butte County’s foothills tends to seep southwestward to the proliferating deep wells of Glenn and Colusa Counties.

As money begins to flow into these experimental recharge projects, consultants, construction interests, and political actors in league with them will all want us to believe they are solving the problem. If it turns out that the “recharge” projects Butte County focuses on are mostly just a gravy train powered by wishful thinking, we’ll  be the ones to say so.

But for now, we're hoping to help steer the process toward less expensive ideas that do not require higher property taxes or concentrated private power over the aquifer.

THIS IS ONE OF THE CITIZENS

HOPING YOU'LL GET INVOLVED

Do you have time to help us keep local officials honest?

We would welcome more citizen watchdog helpers. Going forward, a community brain trust of seasoned water defenders will be essential. It should be clear to all by now that in an era of virtually unrestricted political campaign donations by business interests, the public interest can only be safeguarded by an engaged citizenry.

Up until now, local compliance with the State of California's 2014 Groundwater Management Act process' has been oriented toward organized business interests, with domestic well owners, creek and valley-oak ecosystems, and the long-term viability of the aquifer secondary. 

Contact us at info@groundwaterforbutte.org to volunteer.

Donate here to our fund for media buys and public education leading up to the election.

Please consider doing your own part to ensure that our leaders know they will be held accountable, now and 10 years from now, for the actions they take regarding our groundwater.

_________________________________________

We oppose the formation of the Tuscan Water District and demand that Butte County officials step up to their responsibilities under State law. The groundwater belongs to the public and must be managed transparently by publicly elected authorities - not privatized as a "water bank."  

TWD Election Analysis

A Vote Based On $ Went 79% For Those With The $. 

On Dec. 5, 2023, Tuscan Water District won a majority of votes in an election that violated every Constitutional legal norm some lesser property owners can think of by allotting one vote per dollar of land owned.

Here are the numbers from the County's election certification document: 

TWD petitioners accounted for about $300 million out of the over $700 million in assessed property value within the District map. Predictably enough, $309 million worth of assessed land value voted yes.

So even one accepts appropriating votes based upon wealth, TWD was passed with the approval of less than half the assessed value of property within the district.

This is the breakdown by ballots cast:

One could argue that even if the ballots had been based on one person-one vote, TWD would have won. However, no-shows were the biggest share of registered voters by a wide margin when counted as individuals rather than collections of parcels.

Groundwater For Butte requested the most detailed spreadsheet on the vote that the County Recorder was legally able to provide us, and crunched the data:

Non-Voters Carried the Day.

Of the ballots mailed out, fewer than half were returned. Each ballot represented not an individual owner or company representative, but an APN number: