August 6, 2025 (Updated August 9th, 2025)

Ridgecrest California

Councilman Scott Hayman gave a report on the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority Wednesday Night

Highlights:

• Councilman Hayman evaded any discussion of the Phase One decision by Superior Court Judge Willam D. Claster.
• City Manager Ron Strand didn’t say a word regarding the Phase One decision by Judge Claster.
• The Facebook post by City Manager Ron Strand and the City of Ridgecrest may have been deleted (Waiting for confirmation). UPDATE: The Post has not been deleted and will be used against the City of Ridgecrest in a court of Law. The date of the Post is July 31st, 2025
• Mike Sinnott and Mike Neel both made public comments after the IWVGA report. Mr. Neel is calling for a recall petition on both Councilman Hayman and Councilman Blades.
• Mike Sinnott is calling for City Manager Ron Strand to retire or be replaced as City Manager.
• The Navy’s Federal Reserve Water Right does not extend to civilians living off-base.
• The Indian Wells Valley Water District is faced with the collection from its customers of $41,329,503 in illegal “replenishment-free water” as a result of Judge Claster’s decision.
• When asked whether STANTEC, INC. was involved in the AVEK pipeline project, Councilman Hayman would make “no comment”

See below for more information including Ron Strand’s Facebook post. The meeting video below is timestamped to begin at 19:00 and Councilman Scott Hayman’s report on the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority:

: Begin Public Comment

On July 28th, 2025, Judge William Claster of the Superior Court of the State of California issued a Proposed Statement of Decision in Phase One of the IWV’s basin adjudication process.

Phase One was the necessary and proper adjudication of the Navy’s Federal Reserve Water Right.

Key Determinations by Judge Claster in a Proposed Statement of Decision in Phase ONE of the Adjudication lawsuit

1. There is no authority supporting the proposition that federal reserve water rights extend to non-reservation property.
2. Accordingly, water that does not serve the primary purpose of the reservation is not part of a federal reserved water right.
3. The Supreme Court has emphasized that the implied-reservation-of-water rights doctrine reserves “only that amount of water necessary to fulfill purpose of the reservation, no more.”
4. The City of Ridgecrest’s arguments that future growth and more civilian employees were deemed to be both speculative and unconvincing by the judge. Indeed, Navy official testified that no plans existed for future housing on the base nor were there any substantial increases in the number of personnel or missions planned in the future.

Because the City of Ridgecrest was unable to convince Judge William D. Claster that the Navy’s federal reserve water right extended to civilians living off the base, and because the GSP granted any excess of the Navy’s actual use of water beyond their needs to the Indian Wells Valley Water District, the “credit” applied in the form of the GA’s replenishment fee must now be recalculated or reversed.

City Manager Ron Strand issued a statement on Facebook threatening to appeal the Judge’s decision.

He also said “In 2024, the Water District pumped 74% of its total use in replenishment-free unused water. This exemption saved the Water District—and its ratepayers—millions of dollars annually.“

If Ron Strands figures are correct, that means there’s another $41,329,503 that wasn’t paid as a result of the illegal “free water” provided by Groundwater Authority in the GSP. This was a very big mistake. Please read the “PEGGY BREEDEN” Post below and watch the video for background and context on the creation of the clearly flawed GSP that was approved by DWR:

It means that the customers of the water district owe another $41,329,503 on top of the $14,521,177 that’s already been paid by WD customers to be sent to the Groundwater Authority. Good luck with that Groundwater Authority.

$14,521,177 = .26

$41,329,503 = .74

$55,850,680 = 100% Replenishment Fee Total without illegal credit given to WD by the GA. GA/GSP is at fault.

• If AB 1413 and AB 1466 are passed and signed by Governor Newsom, the Agriculture lobby, the Real Estate Lobby, The Business lobby and the Oil and Gas Lobby will all line up very quickly to sue the State of California.
• SGMA undermines private property rights, and regardless of the law’s intent, it distributes water rights in such a way that there are most certainly winners and losers.
• The issue of sustainability demands common-sense resource management that isn’t held hostage by radical environmentalists or politicians with ulterior motives.

SGMA is proving to be an abject failure right here in the Indian Wells Valley with an infeasible pipeline called AVEK which may cost up to $400 million dollars. And SGMA certainly has picked winners and losers. Unfortunately for all of you in the Indian Wells Valley, you are the losers, including the residents of Ridgecrest and the customers of the Indian Wells Valley Water District.

Support Your Indian Wells Valley Water District.

AVEK is not a solution for sustainability.

Demand accountability from the Groundwater Authority and the City of Ridgecrest.

As for the San Joaquin Valley, remember: Exporting fruit and nuts to China is exporting water to the CCP!

When asked about Stantec’s involvement in the AVEK pipeline project, Councilman Hayman said “No comment”!

: End Public Comment

Ron Strand’s statements and misrepresentations (via Facebook) are in BOLD

For years, the Indian Wells Valley Water District (Water District) relied on 4,390 AFY of replenishment-free water transferred from the Navy’s unused water right to serve its off-base civilian workforce.

The Navy had no such thing as “unused (federally reserved) water rights”.  It wasn’t THE GA’s right to give “replenishment fee- free water” from the Navy that the Navy didn’t own. The Navy wasn’t serving anyone and if they were, it wasn’t their off-base civilian workforce they were serving, it was the water district’s customers. The water district serves 11,000 households. How many of them are civilian-DOD households is unknown.

Comprehensive Adjudication was a necessary legal action taken by the Water District. Why? Because the Navy needed to have their FRWR determined by the Judge. The basin must be adjudicated. That’s how SGMA is supposed to work. It’s that simple.

In 2024, the Water District pumped 74% of its total use in replenishment-free unused water. This exemption saved the Water District—and its ratepayers—millions of dollars annually.

It didn’t save the the Water District anything. I will remind Mr. Strand that the Water District is collecting the Replenishment fee on behalf of the Groundwater Authority. I believe that the continued bad-mouthing coming from the City gives the Water District every reason to turn over the billing of the GA’s replenishment fee to the GA. Let them do their own billing and collections. Either that, or the Water District should be holding any further payments of the Replenishment Fees by their customers in an escrow account until the GA furnishes:

1. Audited financial statements for 2022, 2023 and 2024.
2. A full accounting of their use of the replenishment fees paid as per Proposition 218.
3. A legal determination that they have complied with Proposition 218.

If Ron Strands figures are correct, that means there’s another $41,329,503 that wasn’t paid as a result of the illegal “replenishment-free water” provided by the Navy.

$14,521,177 = .26

$41,329,503 = .74

$55,850,680 = 100% Replenishment Fee Total without illegal credit given to WD by the GA. GA/GSP is at fault.

Now, with the court’s preliminary ruling in favor of a sharply-reduced Federal Reserve Right for the Navy, that replenishment-free water supply is at risk.

This is a completely false statement. The Navy had no Federal Reserve Right until it was adjudicated in a comprehensive adjudication lawsuit. That was the only way it could be established, and the Navy always knew this and anticipated the adjudication. It was necessary.

Unless overturned, the Water District could be forced to purchase water, that it once pumped for free, from local big agricultural interests —forcing Ridgecrest residents and businesses to pay significantly higher water rates. 

Another false and misleading statement by Mr. Strand. First, this decision will not be overturned or challenged by the GA. That would not be in the best interests of the Navy or the residents of the Indian Wells Valley. And from a legal standpoint, there’s no arguments that Mr. Strand or the GA can make for an appeal. The Navy will not support an appeal.

Closing comment: The IWVGA and the City have now reached a fork in the road. Do you want to shove a $400 milllion pipeline down the IWV’s throat just because the City believes it needs to GROW? I think it’s pretty clear that the Navy is telling you that they won’t be growing the workforce on the base, now or in the future. Any notions of growth are both speculative and contrary the reality of Ridgecrest as a company town in a remote location of the Mojave Desert.

You don’t need a pipeline or an imported water project to be sustainable under SGMA. Fix first what you have, and you’ll prosper along the way.

The full statement from Mr. Strand is below:

Navy’s Water Right Reduced – Ridgecrest at Risk

by City Manager Ron Strand (Via City of Ridgecrest Facebook page)

This week, a courtroom in distant Orange County issued one of the most consequential rulings for the Indian Wells Valley in decades. On July 29, 2025, the court preliminarily determined that the Navy’s Federal Reserve Right to groundwater is 2,008 acre-feet per year (AFY)—far less than the 6,783 AFY the Navy claimed it needed for its future mission. 

This ruling threatens the very foundation of water affordability in Ridgecrest and the ability for our community to grow and prosper.

For years, the Indian Wells Valley Water District (Water District) relied on 4,390 AFY of replenishment-free water transferred from the Navy’s unused water right to serve its off-base civilian workforce. In 2024, the Water District pumped 74% of its total use in replenishment-free unused water. This exemption saved the Water District—and its ratepayers—millions of dollars annually.  

Now, with the court’s preliminary ruling in favor of a sharply-reduced Federal Reserve Right for the Navy, that replenishment-free water supply is at risk. Unless overturned, the Water District could be forced to purchase water, that it once pumped for free, from local big agricultural interests —forcing Ridgecrest residents and businesses to pay significantly higher water rates. 

This situation arose because the Water District chose to file a comprehensive adjudication when it could have simply filed a lawsuit directly against the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority in challenge of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan. A more narrow legal challenge would have allowed the Water District to contest the plan, without opening the door to a full adjudication trial—a process that ultimately placed the Navy’s Federal Reserve Right under legal scrutiny.

What’s worse is that the Water District has so far failed to publicly support the Navy in this legal fight—even though it stood to lose the most. It is now time for the Water District to reverse course and argue against this preliminary decision and support an appeal if it becomes final —for the benefit of its ratepayers and our community’s largest employer – the NAVY.

Publisher’s Note: Ron Strand can’t retire soon enough. If he doesn’t, replace him as soon as possible and give him a watch.