RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - As is typical at Rancho Murieta Community Services District board meetings, directors spent considerable time discussing water issues at their March 18 meeting.

The first agenda item was a report from the Water Vision Working Group, including an explanation of why free water being offered to the district by a rancher is not feasible. The second was a proposed resolution for a comprehensive well agreement, which drew immediate blowback and was ultimately withdrawn.

Director Randy Jenco chairs the board’s Water Vision Working Group, which was initially tasked with assisting Water Systems Consulting with a well-siting study. The group’s role later expanded to include helping with permitting required to make Lake Clementia a potable water source and exploring the commissioning of an Urban Water Management Plan, which will be required once the district reaches 3,000 water connections.

Other members include Interim Operations Manager Travis Bohannon; Rancho Murieta Association General Manager Rod Hart; resident Tom Shewchuk, representing the community; and Rancho Murieta Properties Project Manager Jeff Pearson, representing the developers.

Jenco reported that the working group met with NVT Global, which includes hydrologist Patrick Dunn, who completed a comprehensive well study for the district in 2014. The consultants are proposing additional groundwater exploration using geophysical survey methods and have identified a potential site near the Clementia Dam that could be less expensive to connect to existing pumps and lines than other locations.

Jenco said NVT will make a presentation at the next Improvements Committee meeting, which he chairs. The committee will also review the WSC draft test-drilling specifications.

Otherwise, the group’s progress has largely stalled. 

“A lot of what we’re doing has hit a standstill because we’re really at the point where we need some good legal advice, and so the board is in the process of interviewing, and possibly choosing, an attorney to advise us on all of the water matters,” Jenco said.

As part of his report, Jenco asked Bohannon to explain what he had learned about the “free water” that Sloughhouse rancher Jay Schneider offered to the district during the Water Shortage Emergency public hearing in February.

Bohannon explained that Schneider’s offer would allow the district to continue pumping from the river below the 70 cfs (cubic feet per second) cutoff to top off its reservoirs, then later replace that volume downstream using the rancher’s well.

Bohannon said the proposal was not a viable option. The district’s water permit explicitly prohibits diverting water when river flow is below 70 cfs (cubic feet per second), and that requirement is tied to fish protection and downstream users and is not optional.

Operationally, the district’s smallest pump still moves about 2,500 gallons per minute, and staff have no data on what would happen to downstream users if pumping falls below 70 cfs. Because of these legal and operational risks, Bohannon said his recommendation to the board was not to pursue Schneider’s offer as a secondary water supply or regulatory workaround.

Shewchuk also made an additional comment, noting that the working group owes the board a written summary each month, not just a verbal update. He offered to work with Jenco to ensure those written summaries are produced.

Later in the meeting, the board discussed a resolution for a comprehensive agreement for a well that President John Merchant placed on the agenda without prior input from the directors or the working group.

Merchant said his resolution was intended to require clarification of ownership, easements and cost-sharing for any new wells before drilling. He said he wants to know “who owns this property once there’s a well on it” and, if the wells only partially meet the district’s needs, “Who gets it? How do they get it? When do they get it? Who pays for it? Who owns it?” before the district commits to spending potentially tens of millions of dollars.

Jenco immediately pushed back, saying Merchant was raising a “straw dog” because no spending can occur without a board vote. He also warned that if the board insists on resolving all legal and cost-allocation questions before any test wells or technical work, “You’re going to be sitting here five years from now, in the same position that you’re at now.”

Shewchuk objected to what he called “a surprise resolution” on the agenda, noting that it had not been discussed in a chartered working group and then in the Improvements Committee. 

“That’s just not the way a district should run, in my opinion,” he said.

Shewchuk urged Merchant to let the working group do its job. 

“Just don’t put us in handcuffs before we get started,” he said.

Pearson expressed frustration that the resolution appeared while the group was already working on the same issues. He emphasized the group’s constructive mindset, saying they are trying to think “how we can” rather than “why we can’t.”

District Counsel Patrick Enright reinforced that, in any case, even a test well on private property must still come before the Improvements Committee and then the full board for a formal entry agreement, so no drilling or spending can occur without explicit board approval.

Director Tim Maybee pointed out flaws in the resolution, criticizing it for embedding opinions and undefined targets rather than establishing clear policy. He also noted it was the second time in two months that Merchant had placed a major resolution on the agenda without broader input from the board. In February, Merchant placed a resolution to declare a water shortage emergency on the agenda for a public hearing without direction from the other board members.

By the end of the discussion, Merchant agreed to withdraw his resolution on the well agreement.