One Step Forward, One Step Back
Metropolitan Water District Budget Vote Sends Mixed Message on the Agency’s Future DirectionApril 26, 2022
Colorado River with the water line visible. Photo by Wesley Tingey
If the past year has taught us anything, it is that Angelenos are facing several dire crises, not the least of which are the current, record-breaking megadrought that threatens our very water security and the economic insecurity our residents face due to the nearly unprecedented rise in our cost of living.
If we are to address these twin challenges, we must make long-overdue investments in drought-proof local water supplies, while tightening our belts on more speculative, expensive water import projects that are unlikely to see the light of day any time soon, if ever. Unfortunately, Metropolitan Water District’s (MWD) recent budget votes demonstrate the agency has only gotten half the message having adopted rate increases to spend more than $100M to fund ongoing planning for environmentally harmful megaprojects: Delta Conveyance and Sites Reservoir.
Photo from MWD.
On April 12th, the MWD board took two critical votes that sent a mixed message on the agency’s future. First, during a spirited budget discussion in committee, MWD Director Tracy Quinn proposed a novel budget option that lessened proposed rate increases from 8% (as proposed by staff) to 5%, while maintaining funding for critical demand management and conservation projects.
This proposal was adopted and approved unanimously by the full board the next day. This is certainly a step in the right direction, as demand management and conservation are critical for our short- and long-term water security. And while we appreciate the impact of even a 5% rate increase on struggling Angelenos, investment in local water supply solutions is essential for our water security and more cost-effective than dams and other 19th century approaches.
The Sacramento River.
However, MWD’s budget included $99M in previously approved funding for an environmental review of the Delta Conveyance – an environmentally-destructive, over $15B project in Northern California (though Southern California ratepayers will pay much of the bill) that has been in the planning stages for about 40 years.
A more distressing ‘step back’ was the allocation of $20M for the Sites Reservoir project that was also included in this budget. Unlike other expenditures, staff had included $20M in planning funds for Sites, which is closely related to Delta Conveyance, before the MWD board even voted for the project. This project has been vehemently opposed by a variety of stakeholders – from environmental organizations and fisheries to tribes – as it is slated to significantly harm the environment and salmon populations in the Sacramento River, and impact countless prehistoric tribal sites.
Extreme, catastrophic fires increase due to drought and a drier local environment.
Despite MWD being potentially on the hook for an estimated $1B of the $4B price tag if Sites is ever built, there were also deep concerns expressed by many MWD board members that we may not ever be able to access this water given our near-constant state of drought, decreasing Sierra Nevada snowpack, and long-term purview of what climate change will continue to bring upon California. And it was particularly concerning to hear Sites Reservoir touted by proponents as an “environmental project”, despite opposition from every environmental and environmental justice group that weighed in on the project.
These far-off megaprojects are very risky to fund, especially as climate change is reducing the availability of water from these distant sources, and considering the financial burdens Angelenos are feeling from all angles.
Though this is a discouraging outcome and seemingly wasteful allocation of ratepayer money, the real fight is still to come in the next couple years, when MWD will vote on the actual construction of Sites Reservoir and Delta Conveyance, not just for an environmental review and planning funds.
Overall, MWD had an opportunity to take a bold step and send a message that we are going to focus on local, climate-smart water supplies; unfortunately, they sent the same contradictory message that we can do it all. But massive investments in business-as-usual imported water (in anything-but business-as-usual times) will damage our environment, divert ratepayer funding away from drought-resilient local water supply projects that also create good-paying jobs in our communities, and further drive-up water rates unnecessarily, hurting our most vulnerable residents.
“It is unfortunate that MWD’s General Manager would have championed funding for Sites Reservoir, which runs counter to the OneWater approach he long championed at the City of LA. This sends the wrong message about Southern California’s water future.”
MWD has a Chance to ‘Get it Right’ at Upcoming Votes
April 26th will be another key MWD vote as the board (at their 12:30 pm special meeting) will decide, in accordance with the Governor’s Executive Order N-7-22 drought declaration, whether State Water Project dependent areas in Southern California must adopt local measures requiring 1-day per week watering or meet a water use target in accordance with the Department of Water Resource’s health and safety requirements.
With virtually every day bringing a new harrowing headline about our water crisis, from the Sierra’s record low snowpack this past winter to Lake Powell’s historic low levels, LA Waterkeeper supports the staff recommendation to take this critical step as we must act boldly and decisively on water conservation.
That’s why we urge everyone to call into MWD’s special board meeting TODAY, April 26th at 12:30pm. Help make a difference and support the drought emergency declaration and adoption of a conservation framework.
More Ways You Can Support Resilient Local Water Supplies
LA Waterkeeper supporters can also call into MWD’s OneWater Committee hearing immediately preceding the full board meeting at 10:30 am to voice support for more investment in conservation and efficiency programs, particularly those that will help low-income households well as climate-smart local water supplies. Call-in information here!
And just after the full board vote on the drought emergency, there will be a public workshop at the Water Planning and Stewardship Committee on the so-called ‘Voluntary Agreements’ (VAs) for the Bay-Delta region. These backroom-developed agreements are being proposed as an alternative to the State Water Board adopting scientifically sound regulations to protect the Bay-Delta environment in an open and transparent process. We join our environmental partners in opposing these VAs, as they were negotiated in inequitable, exclusionary spaces and could lead to shrunken Delta flows to unsustainable levels. Though we do recognize the value of compromise when needed, we are beyond skeptical of any negotiated agreement that did not include conservation or environmental justice groups, fisheries, tribal representation, or local Delta communities.
You can call into the 2:00 pm Water Planning and Stewardship Committee meeting and help us oppose the VA process for the Bay-Delta, and continue to advocate for a climate-smart, local water approach at MWD.
Future MWD Votes
MWD will be taking more critical votes in the coming months on their first-ever Climate Action Plan, and possibly on funding for VAs.
Make sure to track the MWD website as hearings sometimes do get delayed (even day of).
LA Waterkeeper will be sharing these upcoming opportunities and calling on YOU to take action, so stay tuned for more opportunities to engage, or signup for Action Alerts!