MEETING NOTES: Public demands greater transparency, desert groundwater board approves budget
Meeting: Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority
Date: October 14, 2026
Agenda and Packet: CLICK HERE
Settlement announced
The Inyokern Community Services District agreed to settle a legal dispute with the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority, Authority Legal Counsel Keith Lemieux announced following closed session.
Inyokern CSD agreed to pay the authority $62,968 and follow the authority’s requirements going forward.
Transparency questions
During public comment Jennifer Slayton questioned the authority board in regards to its lobbying group, Capital Core, asking if the group had pursued legislation without proper board action.
“Are we sure that all of the things that we have asked Capital Core to pursue have been done lawfully with an opportunity for the public to have input in open session or reported out of closed session, so that we can have a voice as we have a right to do?”
Slayton’s comments come after a report from the Kern County District Attorney that alleges Assembly Bills 1413 and 1466 were supported by members of Ridgecrest City Council without a vote being taken in open session, which could be a violation of California’s Ralph M. Brown Act governing open meetings.
AB 1466, authored by Gregg Hart (D-Santa Barbara), which passed, requires courts to treat small pumpers separately in larger adjudication actions and accept groundwater agency reports about those small pumpers.
AB 1413, authored by Diane Papan (D-San Mateo), which failed, would have required judges to use the “sustainable yield” figure produced by groundwater agencies.
Mike Sinnott questioned if Michael McKinney of Capital Core had helped write the bills, which he said could be in violation of the Brown Act.
In response, Authority Board Member David Saint-Amand, who is also a board member of the Indian Wells Valley Water District, said that the water district representative on the authority has been excluded from closed session matters on litigation, including the assembly bills in question. The Water District initiated the adjudication in the basin.
Saint-Amand stated that if the authority board violated the Brown Act the water district representative was not a part of it.
Judy Decker expressed disappointment that the authority had not prioritized buying water rights for the Indian Wells Valley.
Budget approved
April Keigwin, general manager for the authority, presented the authority’s annual budget in which the amount set for communications was $125,000 and an extra $25,000 for hearings and forums.
Many audience members, including Slayton, said that was too high.
She said friends with communications businesses were shocked at that amount. She also noted that Westbound Communications, of Orange County, was supposed to help improve the authority’s image. Instead, she said, most of the social media posts the company put out only served to aggravate the community.
Saint-Amand made a motion to cut all funding for Westbound.
However, Keigwin said, that would leave her to work on the new website alone.
Board members John Vallejo and Phillip Peters were also not content with the high Westbound budget but noted that they did not want to completely strike communications from the budget.
Keigwin suggested hiring Westbound on an as-needed basis and that when Westbound’s contract ends in December the authority could look for another agency. The board agreed.
Director Phillips asked if the authority needed a separate amount budget for administration of the groundwater sustainability plan considering many of the issues contained in the plan are being hashed out through a legal adjudication process.
He, instead, felt the authority should focus on buying water rights to supplement finite native sources.
”At some point we have to quit these duplicative efforts and focus on what the result is and that is getting water and getting it here, so I would like to see that prioritized,” said Peters.
Keigwin said the budget item doesn’t reflect any new work on the groundwater plan. It is in place in case the Department of Water Resources has further requirements and the authority needs to respond.
The board approved the budget with Saint-Amand voting “no.”
