Agency wants more control over waterways, but cities argue
regulations already in place
As development pushes housing tracts, industrial parks and
recreational facilities ever further into the Santa Clara Valley,
water district officials say that a 19-year-old ordinance designed
to protect 700 miles of streams against human intrusion is not
working.
Agency wants more control over waterways, but cities argue regulations already in place
As development pushes housing tracts, industrial parks and recreational facilities ever further into the Santa Clara Valley, water district officials say that a 19-year-old ordinance designed to protect 700 miles of streams against human intrusion is not working.
Development is putting more pressure on streams, while provisions of the Water Resources Protection Ordinance are routinely ignored, said Mike Di Marco, a spokesman for the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
While revisions to the ordinance, under study for 18 months, would give the district more leverage over what happens near waterways, county and city officials and private parties strenuously oppose the measure as usurpation of sovereignty or the infringement of property rights.
Specifically, what rankles them most is the district’s intention to increase from 50 to 150 feet the distance along the sides of a stream in which the water district controls manmade activities.
Under the new ordinance, the construction of a fence or ball field — or even the introduction of a non-natives species of plants — would require a water district permit or an affidavit from the district saying the project is exempt.
Local entities question the legality of what the water district wants to do, according to Jim Ashcraft, director of public works for the City of Morgan Hill.
“What they want to regulate is already regulated by local-agency permitting through the (state) Regional Water Quality Control Board,” Ashcraft said.
It was a sentiment echoed by Gilroy officials.
“There’s an obvious concern to the city. It’s a question of where the district’s jurisdiction ends and where the jurisdiction of cities begins,” said Rick Smelser, Gilroy city engineer.
Amendments to the Water Resources Protection Ordinance aren’t popular, Di Marco said, but the water district is losing the battle to protect waterways from chemicals, sediment, debris, erosion from stream banks or the intrusion of non-native plant species that often overrun streambeds if left unchecked.
“A lot of things have changed in 20 years. There is more concern about the quality of our surface water and ground water and its effects – from fish and wildlife agencies as well as water authorities,” said Beau Goldie, assistant operations officer in the district’s watershed management division. “Twenty years ago, we simply removed sediment as part of our stream maintenance program. Now we have to test for pollutants as part of our work.”
Indeed there is concern from state water authorities right down the line to water users.
The water district’s revision of its ordinance fits in with the new state rules that require new development or redevelopment to capture and treat runoff before it goes into storm drains. In effect for a number of years in other parts of the county, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination permit will be required of Morgan Hill and Gilroy in March.
Some groups already are preparing for tougher discharge requirements.
In an effort to stay a step of ahead of regulations imposed from above, the farm bureaus in Santa Clara and San Benito counties are creating an early-detection program to help cattlemen, farmers, vintners, mushroom growers and nursery operators monitor their own operations. The goal is to detect pollutants that could be entering streams that find their way to Monterey Bay.
On a broader basis, a three-year-old volunteer program to prevent erosion from coastal county farms is underway. The Agricultural Water Quality Alliance of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and agricultural concerns in Santa Clara, San Benito, Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Mateo and San Luis Obispo counties are involved.
The water district has three goals – flood control, water management and the promotion of smart growth, Di Marco said.
“Our message is that if you build near a creek you have to consider the creek. This is not a land grab. It’s not an effort to take anyone’s property. If we don’t get the revised ordinance soon, we’ll lose the opportunity because development is going to continue,” Di Marco said.
“We have a hard time prosecuting violators. If it’s a gross violation, we go to the district attorney to plead a case. But while they have a good environmental unit, they’re overworked,” Di Marco said.
In the face of wide concern about the revised ordinance, the water district has taken up local entities on a proposal for a jointly arrived at solution for protecting waterways. It is expected that a plan will be ready for approval next summer.
Meanwhile, water district directors plan to keep their own ordinance revision on track for approval on Dec. 17. It wouldn’t go into effect, however, unless the joint effort falls through.
The first meeting of entities involved in the collaborative effort is tentatively scheduled for Dec. 11. Participating will be representatives from the county, the cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hill, San Jose, Santa Clara and Milpitas, members of the environmental community, the Homebuilders Association of Northern California, the Santa Clara County Chamber of Commerce and the San Francisco office of the state Regional Water Quality Control Board.
