Hold a public hearing to consider, introduce by title only, waive further reading of, and adopt an urgency ordinance entitled: "An Urgency Ordinance of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors Amending the Temporary Moratorium on the Approval of New Agricultural Water Well Permits in the Yolo Subbasin Groundwater Management Agency's Focus Areas (Ordinance No. 1577) to Add an Additional Exemption for Certain Replacement Wells;" and determine adoption of the urgency ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15060(c)(2), 15061(b)(3), and 15307 and 15308 (Class 7 and 8). (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Fieseler/Meneghetti) (Est. Staff Presentation: 5 min)

On August 26, 2025, the Board of Supervisors adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 1576 imposing a temporary 45-day moratorium on the approval or issuance of well permits for new agricultural, non-exempt wells located within the Yolo Sustainable Groundwater Agency’s (YSGA) designated Focus Areas of the Yolo Subbasin (see Focus Area map, Att. B).

On October 7, 2025, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 1577 (Att. D), an urgency ordinance extending the temporary moratorium for up to an additional 10 months and 15 days (through August 25, 2026) to, among other things, allow time to better understand the impacts of land use changes, particularly the hardening of groundwater demands with increased conversion of land in the Focus Areas (see Att. B) to perennial crops, on the sustainability of groundwater supplies. Urgency Ordinance No. 1577 further narrowed the scope of the moratorium to wells located within the Focus Areas.

Ordinance No. 1577 exempts certain wells from the moratorium, meaning well permits may be issued during the moratorium for wells falling within the following categories, provided they meet the additional well ordinance requirements.  The wells exempt from Ordinance No. 1577's moratorium are domestic wells producing less than two acre-feet per year, public supply system wells, monitoring wells, and minor alterations of production wells.  There is no exemption for replacement wells in Ordinance No. 1577.

At the public hearing considering the extension of the moratorium and adoption of Ordinance No. 1577, concerns were raised regarding the ability of landowners and farmers to timely replace existing wells that may fail or need replacement while the moratorium is in effect, which could in turn result in public safety, health and welfare concerns. Although the moratorium contains a hardship exemption, the delay with such a process for replacement wells may leave property without a well to irrigate existing crops.  Such replacement wells may be necessary to sustain existing agricultural operations and would not impose an increase on existing groundwater demands if the existing well is of similar pumping capacity and the permit contains a condition prohibiting the applicant/owner from converting agricultural lands to perennial crops while the moratorium is in effect. 

The proposed Urgency Ordinance (Att. A) amends Section 3.4 of Urgency Ordinance No. 1577 to add an additional exemption for certain replacement wells in the Focus Areas from the moratorium so that such replacement wells may be issued a permit while the moratorium is in effect, provided the replacement wells otherwise satisfy the applicable well ordinance requirements.  To be considered a replacement well for purposes of the moratorium exemption, the well will need to meet all of the following requirements:

Replacement wells in these Focus Areas meeting the foregoing criteria, however, would still be subject to the well permit requirements already in place for new agricultural/irrigation wells per Urgency Ordinance No. 1569 and its predecessors (Urgency Ordinance No. 1578 and Ordinance No. 1579), including verification review required by the applicable GSA, well separation distance requirements, and submittal of well completion and well pumping capacity reports.

The proposed ordinance with the replacement well exemption is provided in Attachment A. Staff circulated a prior version of the replacement well exemption to interested stakeholders and specific proposed edits were received that are provided in Attachments E, F, and G for reference.  The comments and requested edits ranged from some requesting the deletion of the crop conversion prohibition entirely (Att. E), others requiring more strict limitations to qualify for a replacement well and requiring additional documentation related to recent use of the well (Att. F), and others that were concerned with limiting the location of the replacement well to the same parcel or requiring the same pump size/pump horsepower as the well being replaced because the current pump may have been at a lower capacity to try and allow a failing well to last longer (e.g., casing collapsing) than generally used in the past few years (Att. G).  Staff also had further discussions with these parties and others and consulted with Luhdorff & Scalmanini Consulting Engineers (LSCE) regarding the proposed revisions since LSCE has assisted the County in developing the well separation distances, as well as guidance regarding the relationship between well casing diameters and pump capacities to assist Staff in reviewing well permit applications and applying the well separation distance requirements.

Based upon the various feedback and discussions with LSCE, staff further revised the proposed replacement well exemption to allow for some flexibility necessary due to the unique circumstances that may apply to failing wells and the unknowns that may encountered with drilling a new well, while still requiring the replacement well to have the same casing size and substantially similar pumping capacity and depth to the existing well that is being replaced. Having the same casing size is of particular importance because the casing size limits the maximum size of the pump that can be installed in the well. The limitation on crop conversions is also important in ensuring the replacement well will not significantly increase groundwater consumption.  The Farm Bureau has expressed particular concern with the crop conversion limitations, but the replacement well exemption has been revised some to clarify that farmers may make changes to crops within the same classification or category of crop (e.g., dry-farmed, annual, or perennial), with a more narrow prohibition only as to conversions that would increase groundwater demands, such as converting dry-farmed land to annual crops or row crops to perennial crops.  The replacement well exemption does not prohibit a farmer from converting to a lower-demand crop category (e.g., replacing a perennial crop with an annual row crop). 

The proposed replacement well exemption (Att. A) attempts to properly balance the interests of minimizing disruptions to current agricultural operations and allowing for issuance of replacement well permits via a more streamlined process than having to go through Urgency Ordinance No. 1577's hardship exemption, while ensuring there is a pause in permitting new agricultural wells that would result in greater demands on groundwater resources. This will allow the County, YSGA, and stakeholders to achieve the objectives of the moratorium to study and consider the potential well permit and crop conversion regulations related to the concerns stemming from hardening of groundwater demands with the increase in groundwater demands, particularly with the increase in perennial crops. Applicants seeking well permits for proposed wells that do not meet the criteria for the replacement well exemption will still have the option to pursue the hardship exemption process set forth in Urgency Ordinance No. 1577.