Well Ordinance Update
On this page:
- Documents in PDF Format
- Technical and Policy Working Groups
- Meetings
- Past Meetings and Documents
- Frequently Asked Questions
Important Notice!
Permit Sonoma has suspended issuing non-emergency well permits in compliance with a Sonoma County Superior Court order. The order, which was served to the County on December 17, 2024, stems from the lawsuit Russian Riverkeeper, and California Coastkeeper vs. County of Sonoma. It requires the County to “suspend all non-emergency water well permitting” based on concerns that the County has not complied with the Public Trust Doctrine. Check back regularly for updates.
In April 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved amendments to the County's Well Ordinance brought forward by Permit Sonoma. Updated regulations went into effect on May 18, 2023.
The amendments create a new regulatory process that considers potential adverse impacts on public trust resources, such as habitat for Coho salmon, when approving well permits. The amended ordinance also includes requirements for water conservation measures for all new wells and requirements for well meter installation and water use reporting of new non-residential wells. Additional technical changes to inspection noticing, emergency wells, and review of well permits near contaminated sites were also approved.
Primary Ordinance Changes and Additions:
- Sec 25B-13 – Water Conservation Requirements for all new water wells.
- Sec 25B-12 – Metering and Monitoring Requirements, excluding low water use residential wells.
- Sec 25b-4(d) and (e) – Discretionary Public Trust Review for certain water wells within the Public Trust Review Area. At-cost deposit for discretionary review of $5,568.
- Sec 25b-5(d) – Emergency wells must submit a permit application and receive a well permit prior to drilling. Emergency wells will receive expedited review upon request.
- Sec 25b-6(h) – Replacement wells require the destruction of the old well within 180 days of installation of the new well.
- Sec 25b-5(f)(4) – Inspection lead time. It is required to provide Permit Sonoma notice the day prior to well seal installation.
- Sec 25b-6(g) – Wells within setbacks of Contaminated Sites. No referral or approval by the Water Board. Permit Sonoma should review and approve hydrogeologic reports prepared by a registered geologist or hydrogeologist.
Well Amendment Process:
On October 4, 2022, the Board of Supervisors adopted a temporary moratorium on well permits. It directed Permit Sonoma to convene a working group to discuss policy options for consideration of impacts on public trust resources. Two groups were formed and provided a joint recommendations report to Permit Sonoma in March 2023. These recommendations were considered, and an amended well ordinance was brought to the Board of Supervisors and approved on April 4, 2023. A second hearing was held, and final approval was granted on April 18, 2023.
- April 4, 2023 – Board of Supervisors Hearing
- April 18, 2023 – Board of Supervisors Hearing
- Well Ordinance Update – Online Viewer
Documents from April 18, 2023 in PDF format:
- Well Ordinance Summary
- PowerPoint Presentation
- Public Comments - April 5-17, 2023
- Public Comments - April 4, 2023
- Public Comments - March 3 - April 3, 2023
- Public Comments - October 5, 2022 - March 22, 2023
- Attachment A - Board Resolution
- Attachment B - Ordinance without Exhibit A
- Attachment C - Exhibit A to Ordinance Stricken
- Attachment D - Ordinance with Exhibit A Clean
- Attachment E - Urgency Ordinance Extending Temporary Moratorium
- Attachment G - Director Working Group Final Report
- Attachment H - Public Trust Review Area Delineation Report
- Attachment I - List of Technical References
Technical and Policy Working Groups
Prior to the Board of Supervisors' approval, Technical and Policy Working Groups were convened by Permit Sonoma. The Working Groups were tasked with making well-reasoned policy recommendations and met regularly from November 2022 to March 2023.
Policy Working Group
The Policy Working Group considered policy options and made recommendations representing diverse stakeholder interests of Sonoma County:
Name |
Groups Represented |
Mike Martini, Co-Chair |
Ag and Development Interests |
Rue Furch, Co-Chair |
Sonoma County Water Coalition |
Brock Dolman |
Occidental Arts and Ecology Center |
Monty Schmitt |
Nature Conservancy |
Charlie Schneider |
CalTrout |
Ben Campanile |
Well Driller |
Sandi Potter |
Petaluma Groundwater Sustainability Agency Administrator |
Mike Sangiacomo |
Vineyard Manager |
Rob Cantu |
North Coast Builders Exchange |
Carol Lexa |
North Bay Association of Realtors |
Dayna Ghirardelli |
Sonoma County Farm Bureau |
Carolyn Wasem |
North Bay Water District |
Technical Working Group
The Technical Working Group developed and assessed policy recommendations using scientifically accepted theories, methods, and practices:
Name |
Groups Represented |
Jay Jasperse |
Water Resources Consultant Retired - Sonoma County Water Agency |
Sam Boland-Brien |
California State Water Resources Control Board |
Jessica Maxfield |
California Department of Fish and Wildlife |
Rick Rogers |
National Marine Fisheries Service |
Andy Casarez |
Office of the Sonoma County Agricultural Commissioner |
Marcus Trotta |
Sonoma County Groundwater Sustainability Agencies |
Matt Petersen |
Well Driller |
Laurel Marcus |
Agricultural Practices |
Brad Petersen |
Vineyard Manager |
Melissa Rohde |
Environmental Consultant |
Bruce Abelli Amen |
Environmental Consultant |
Ken Johnson |
Environmental and geotechnical Consultant |
Meetings
The Technical Working Group and the Policy Working Group met independently and jointly via Zoom. Links to meeting materials are provided below:
Date | Meeting | Meeting Number and Information |
11/17/22 | Joint Working Groups | |
11/30/22 | Policy Working Group | |
12/01/22 | Technical Working Group |
Meeting 1 |
12/14/22 | Policy Working Group | |
12/15/22 | Technical Working Group | |
01/05/23 | Technical Working Group |
Meeting 3 |
01/11/23 | Policy Working Group | |
01/12/23 | Technical Working Group |
Meeting 4 |
01/25/23 | Policy Working Group | |
02/01/23 | Joint Working Groups | |
02/08/23 | Policy Working Group | |
02/09/23 | Technical Working Group | |
02/22/23 | Policy Working Group | |
02/23/23 | Technical Working Group |
Meeting 6 |
03/02/23 | Joint Working Groups |
The County of Sonoma requires property owners to obtain a permit to drill, deepen or abandon groundwater wells. Under the existing well ordinance (Sonoma County Code Chapter 25B), Permit Sonoma must issue permits for well projects that meet county construction requirements for structural integrity and water quality.
Frequently Asked Questions on the 2023 Well Ordinance Update
How does this action relate to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act aimed at protecting groundwater?
In 2014, the state Legislature took action to stop unsustainable groundwater usage. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act required local agencies in 94 of California’s 515 groundwater basins to create plans to bring their areas into balanced levels of groundwater pumping and recharge by the year 2042. Sonoma County has three groundwater sustainability agencies that developed groundwater sustainability plans for the Santa Rosa Plain, Petaluma Valley and Sonoma Valley.
The County of Sonoma will collaborate with groundwater sustainability agencies as these agencies implement their groundwater sustainability plans.
What is the public trust doctrine, and what is the county’s legal responsibility to protect these resources?
The Board of Supervisors, on April 18, 2023, gave final approval to a proposal to amend the County’s existing Well Ordinance to incorporate a Public Trust Analysis. The changes to the Well Ordinance require basic water conservation measures for all new wells and more stringent water conservation measures and review for wells using greater than two (2) acre-feet of water per year if located in the area referred to as the Public Trust Review Area.
The review area is where public trust resources are sensitive to reduced streamflow due to groundwater pumping. Streamflow is a term that refers to the measure of the rate of water carried in rivers and streams. In reviewing well permits within the Public Trust Review Area, water conservation plans and limits on vineyard and orchard irrigation would apply. In addition, new wells that are increasing the total groundwater use of the site beyond two (2) acre-feet per year could only be issued if there is a written finding by county staff that the permit would not have an adverse impact on public trust resources in rivers and streams.
What actions is the county taking to comply with the law?
The Board of Supervisors on April 18 is scheduled to review and give final approval to a proposal to amend the county’s existing well ordinance to incorporate a public trust analysis. The changes to the well ordinance would require basic water conservation measures for all new wells and more stringent water conservation measures and review for wells using greater than 2 acre-feet of water per year if located in the area referred to as the Public Trust Review Area. The review area is where public trust resources are sensitive to reduced streamflow due to groundwater pumping. Streamflow is a term that refers to the measure of the rate of water carried in rivers and streams. In reviewing well permits within the Public Trust Review Area, water conservation plans and limits on vineyard and orchard irrigation would apply. In addition, new wells that are increasing the total groundwater use of the site beyond 2 acre-feet per year could only be issued if there is a written finding by county staff that the permit would not have an adverse impact on public trust resources in rivers and streams.
How would the ordinance define an “adverse impact” on public trust resources?
The definition may vary depending on flow and habitat conditions of that stream. But in general, it would be defined as a significant reduction to instream flows that support salmonids.
Streamflow is a term that refers to the measure of the rate of water carried in rivers and streams. Should Coho-bearing streams see cumulative reductions in streamflows of 10 percent, and Steelhead-bearing streams see reductions of 20 percent, that would meet a preliminary threshold for an adverse effect.
An alternative standard could be adopted by the Board of Supervisors after public hearing, public comment and written findings.
Are there any mitigation measures that applicants could take to obtain a permit for a new or deeper well?
There are a number of feasible mitigation measures, including water conservation, enhanced groundwater recharge, reductions in surface water diversions, flow augmentation, forbearance of groundwater pumping and enforceable offsets of existing groundwater uses.
Will the county require well users to install water meters?
No meters will be required on any existing wells. No meters will be required on new wells that extract less than 2 acre-feet per year for residential purposes. Installation of water meters will be required on most new wells that serve parcels with non-residential and mixed-use purposes. For wells where a meter is required, meter readings must be recorded monthly and reported to the county once a year.
To determine which applications would require meter installation, Permit Sonoma would evaluate the land uses on a parcel using methods applied by local groundwater sustainability agencies in their rate and fee studies. Employing these methods, most residential properties are projected to extract less than 2 acre-feet annually, a figure used with the state’s drought executive order and by groundwater sustainability agencies. If the parcel is used for residential occupancy with the normal accessory structures (ADU, guest house, pool house, art studio, garden, etc.), no meter would be required. Parcels with mixed uses (domestic and commercial agriculture or domestic and commercial) will be subject to metering.
Will this make it harder to get a well permit?
Basic water conservation requirements including a leak and water conservation self-audit, and limits on existing lawns to less than 2,500 square feet, will apply to all permits for private wells. In the Public Trust Review Area of the county, additional review and documentation may apply if the well is for a higher-water-use site. Some permit applications may need to be denied to protect public trust resources, while others may be required to take mitigation measures to offset their impact.
Why does the county have to regulate wells? How do they impact the Russian River and its tributaries?
The National Marine Fisheries Service and other resource agencies have found pumping groundwater can lower water levels in underground aquifers. This, in turn, can significantly lower summer streamflows in nearby creeks. Many of these creeks are inhabited by endangered Coho salmon, which can become trapped in small pools and die when streamflows subside over summer.
How many wells are currently located in Sonoma County?
Sonoma County has roughly 40,000 water wells, the most per capita of any county in California. Approximately 23,000 parcels in Sonoma County rely on groundwater from a private well for their primary water supply.
How many well permits are issued annually in Sonoma County?
Permit Sonoma, also known as the Permit and Resource Management Department, received an average of 283 water well permit applications annually between 2017 and 2021.
How many well permits might be subject to a discretionary public trust evaluation?
It is estimated the number of water well permits potentially subject to the proposed public trust evaluation is between 5 and 15 per year.
What is the status of the Coastkeeper lawsuit with the County of Sonoma?
The California Coastkeeper Alliance filed a first lawsuit against the County of Sonoma in July 2021 to force the County to comply with the public trust doctrine when issuing well permits. The litigation settled following the Board of Supervisors Hearing on October 4, 2022, resulting in a temporary moratorium on well permitting and the County’s commencement of the public process to amend the well ordinance.
The California Coastkeeper Alliance and the Russian Riverkeeper filed a second lawsuit against the County of Sonoma in May 2023 that contends that (1) the amended well ordinance does not meet obligations under the public trust doctrine and that (2) the Ordinance adoption was not CEQA exempt. Litigation is ongoing.