RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - The next steps for the draft Integrated Water Master Plan were discussed at the Rancho Murieta Community Services District (CSD) Board meeting on Feb. 19, but with an unexpected twist.

During the discussion on the draft, Director John Merchant stated that two of the three subdivision developers acknowledged there isn’t enough water for future development. While representatives from the Residences and Rancho North subdivisions did not dispute his claim at the meeting, their primary spokespersons later provided clarification when contacted by the River Valley Times.

Merchant’s comments also signaled a further easing of tensions between developers and Save Our Lakes & Open Spaces (SOLOS) over water issues. Merchant also serves as vice president of SOLOS, a community action group formed in 2015 to protect open spaces behind the reservoirs from development. In recent years, the group has shifted its primary focus to advocating for a sustainable and reliable water supply for the community.

The first public signs of a thaw emerged earlier this year after Merchant met with the Rancho North developers on Jan. 9. They informed him that they had abandoned plans to develop 136 lots behind the reservoirs.

“I believe this action spells compromise,” Merchant wrote in a social media post the following day. “I hope we have opened up a line of communication to the developers that will expand as we work through the process.” 

In other discussion, at the February board meeting, three directors rejected Director Randy Jenco’s request to finalize the Integrated Water Master Plan.  The three emphasized the need to hear from a consulting group scheduled to present at the March 11 Improvements Committee meeting. Merchant and Jenco are the two board members who serve on that committee.

Board President Steve Booth also directed Board Secretary Amelia Wilder to compile a list of questions about the Integrated Water Master Plan raised by residents at three town hall meetings or sent directly to the district to ascertain if they were adequately answered. The item will be on the agenda at the March 19 board meeting.

The board discussed additional issues at the board meeting, including the rejection of a government claim by General Manager Mimi Morris, currently on paid leave, and security concerns. See the separate story in this issue.

Merchant’s upbeat remarks about developers at the February board meeting contrasted with his previous warnings about the threats development posed to the community’s water supply.

When Merchant resigned from the board in October of 2022, he was significantly at odds with the late John Sullivan, who represented Rancho Murieta Properties. Merchant told the board he was resigning to pursue water issues. He has been vice president of Save Our Lakes & Open Spaces since its formation in 2015.

In July, Merchant spearheaded a petition drive demanding that the board impose a moratorium on future development. The petition garnered 2,025 signatures.  

At the October board meeting, Greg Dyer, CEO of Rancho Murieta Properties, spoke against the petition advocating for a development moratorium. He asserted that the district is contractually obligated to provide water to the Rancho North subdivision, as Rancho Murieta Properties had invested over $5.7 million in upgrading the community’s water treatment plants under a 2014 Financing and Services Agreement. He cautioned that imposing a moratorium could lead to legal action.

On Nov. 21, Save Our Lakes & Open Spaces hosted a public town hall to discuss the draft Integrated Water Master Plan. Their analysis concluded that eliminating the demand from future development would be the easiest and most cost-effective method of conserving water.

In December, Merchant returned to the CSD board after running unopposed for a vacancy. SOLOS President Cheryl McElhany presented the moratorium petition at the board’s January meeting, which took it under advisement.

On Jan. 10, Merchant shared an ebullient social media post detailing a meeting with the Rancho North developers a day earlier. During this meeting, Rancho Murieta Properties discussed amendments to their Sacramento County application, including removing 39 acres adjacent to the Rancho Murieta Community Services District building and excluding 136 lots behind the reservoirs. Merchant highlighted that these changes ensure “much of our treasured open space walking and biking trails will be here to enjoy.”

For more details, see the story entitled “Development Behind Reservoirs Ruled Out”

During the Feb. 19 board discussion about the Integrated Water Master Plan, Merchant referred to his earlier meeting with developers. He said he initially learned about the Rancho North’s lot reduction in a meeting with Bob Keil, the developer of the 198-lot Residences subdivision. Keil then facilitated a meeting between Merchant and Dyer on Jan. 9.

Merchant told the board he welcomed the news about the development’s reduced size. “I have worked on it longer than anyone in the community,” he said. “To me, it was a wonderful first step in solving the problem.”

Merchant said they also discussed the future water supply.

During his initial meeting with Keil, Merchant asked, “Do you agree with me that we don’t have enough water to support this development at this point in time?” 

According to Merchant, Keil responded affirmatively. Merchant then inquired about Dyer’s likely stance on the issue, to which Keil suggested Dyer would agree. Skeptical, Merchant posed the same question to Dyer, who also concurred.

 Merchant expressed relief at the February meeting about the consensus, stating “It saved us a year or more of fighting with each other over what the numbers (in the Integrated Water Master Plan) really said.” 

When the River Valley Times contacted Keil after the February board meeting, Keil said that both he and Dyer concurred that “the water study demonstrates we would need additional water to provide for the full buildout of Rancho Murieta.” 

Keil further emphasized, “To put a finer point on it, we (he and Dyer) also agreed that CSD is contractually obligated to provide that water through the Financing and Services Agreement.” 

When asked if this consensus about the draft Integrated Water Master Plan signified a truce in the ongoing water disputes, Keil characterized it as putting everyone on the same page about the need to augment the community’s water supply.

When the River Valley Times contacted Dyer, he recalled a brief discussion about water during the Jan. 9 meeting but said they ran out of time. He didn’t remember Merchant’s water supply questions. “If asked the question, I would have responded that the answer depends on the required water supply assessment that is part of the county development approval process,” Dyer said.

The River Valley Times attempted to contact Merchant for additional comment but did not receive a response.

Integrated Water Master Plan Discussion 

At the Jan. 15 board meeting, Operations Manager Eric Houston recommended against finalizing the draft Integrated Water Management Plan, citing its lack of a clear path forward. He proposed that the district instead develop an Urban Water Management Plan, which the state mandates for urban water suppliers serving over 3,000 connections. As of February 2025, the district had 2,917 water connections, approaching the threshold and subjecting it to new regulatory requirements.

Houston asked Water Systems Consulting, which developed the urban water plan and a Vision Report for the City of Folsom, to propose a similar strategy for the district. The consulting firm is scheduled to present its scope of work at the March 11 Improvements Committee meeting.

During the February board meeting, Director Jenco initiated a discussion about finalizing the draft Integrated Water Master Plan during Operations Manager Eric Houston’s report. While the board couldn’t take formal action, Jenco suggested providing direction to staff.

That led to a 30-minute debate. Here are some of the highlights.

Jenco said the proposed urban plan was another way of saying the Integrated Water Master Plan should be abandoned. His key point was that the board should use the current information to immediately begin solving the water supply problem today instead of waiting another 18 months for a new report to confirm the known challenges. Jenco identified potential solutions such as drilling new wells and recharging groundwater.  

Merchant excoriated the draft water plan developed by Maddaus Engineering of California and Adkins Engineering of Oregon, which was presented to the district in October. “I’ll be damned if I’m going to give anybody the satisfaction of approving a report that doesn’t say anything,” he said. 

Despite his strong criticism,  Merchant acknowledged that he had ceased disputing the study’s data despite some discrepancies. He believed the existing data sufficiently demonstrated that the community lacks adequate water to support future development. 

Merchant said the priority should be developing a plan to support and use Clementia Reservoir as an emergency water supply in extreme drought, although it couldn’t meet the entire demand from the existing homes and the already entitled lots on the Riverview and Residences subdivisions. He also noted that a California law will require an emergency supply in 2027.  

Merchant emphasized that the primary focus should be developing a plan to utilize Clementia Reservoir as an emergency water supply during extreme drought conditions, even though it couldn’t fully meet the demands of existing homes and already entitled lots in the Riverview and Residences subdivisions. Merchant also said California law requires water suppliers to have one backup water source by 2027.

Director Linda Butler said the district should take the time to get the plan right. Director Tim Maybee didn’t comment. 

President Steve Booth said he could see an alternative to starting over, although the plan should be modified to reflect less future development. He suggested accepting the Integrated Water Master Plan for its calculations about available water and projected needs. “We would recognize its shortcomings and say,’ They didn’t give us a plan, but let’s move forward and develop with WCI or another consultant or a group of stakeholders in the community,’“ he said. 

Booth suggested that the Improvements Committee consider his alternative at the next meeting.

Keil said that Booth had stolen his thunder. “I think we should take the report we have right now, amend the buildout numbers, and remove the conclusion,” he said. “Then hire someone else to come up with the conclusions, and we are on our way.”

Audience member Tom Shewchuk again advanced his idea for forming an advisory committee to develop a water plan. The committee would include representatives from CSD, the Rancho Murieta Country Club, the Rancho Murieta Association, community members, and developers.

President Steve Booth acknowledged the importance of engaging all stakeholders in future public forums. However, he expressed concern about adding responsibilities to the operations manager, who already has a significant workload. “That’s why I support having a consultant to work on that piece,” Booth said.

Audience member Jim Farrell supported Booth’s approach to addressing the study. Although Farrell doesn’t believe the Integrated Water Master Plan should be finalized, he acknowledged its value:  “Having done a lot of strategic planning, I’m telling you that the data is worth a lot.” 

Farrell emphasized that before finalizing any plans, the board should honor its commitment to address community questions about the Integrated Water Master Plan. He specifically emphasized responding to issues raised by Merchant and longtime community activist Janis Eckard. 

Booth took Farrell’s comment about the community’s questions to heart and asked the district secretary to compile a list of questions, along with how they were answered or not, for consideration at the next board meeting. 

Farrell supported Shewchuk’s proposal to form an ad hoc committee but questioned its timing, noting that the board currently lacks focus. “I think you should have one voice coming out of the CSD, and you are not there yet.”

 Farrell emphasized the importance of the board achieving internal consensus before engaging in broader collaborative efforts.