The Water Efficiency Blogs

Facing another possible increase to our already exorbitant water rates, customers in California of the Carpinteria Valley Water District (CVWD) appear to have finally put their foot down. Using their right to oppose new taxes by petition as provided by Proposition 218, a group calling itself Carpinteria H2O put an ad in the Coastal View News, encouraging bill payers to hop on the bandwagon and put an end to water rates that they say are the highest in the nation. A monthly bill for 2,000 cubic feet (HCF)—a fairly conservative use estimate—costs approximately $142 in Carpinteria, in comparison with $109 in Montecito and $102 in Goleta, both nearby coastal cities in Santa Barbara County.

After the drought of the late 1980s, the district’s board of directors decided that, based upon projected growth and readings of the groundwater table at the time, they required an allotment of 2,700 acre-feet per year. That was the figure approved by voters in 1991, although the district eventually went with a slightly lower allotment of 2,000 acre-feet per year. Hamilton said the agreed-upon amount is still twice what the district needs. The amount of development projected by current growth trends is much less than was planned for in the early ’90s. Some current customers who lived in Carpinteria at the time, however, accuse the district of having waged a very aggressive public relations campaign that persuaded them to approve more state water than was necessary.

Whatever the reason for the decision to secure a larger allotment than they needed, the result has been an excess of state water that the district has been trying frantically to sell. A deal with Plains Exploration Company (PXP) to buy the water for residential use fell through last year when PXP struck a deal with the Environmental Defense Center and other environmental organizations. The oil company had plans to develop a large parcel near Lompoc, CA, intending to put most of the company’s land into a permanent conservation easement in exchange for expanded offshore production rights. The deal was shot down by the State Lands Commission earlier this year, with PXP not indicating whether it will reconsider its residential development plan. The resulting uncertainty has meant that PXP is no longer paying the district $300,000 per year to hold an option on a significant chunk of the district’s state water surplus.

Other capital improvement projects undertaken by the district over the past several years have also been necessary to meet federally-mandated drinking water standards. Projects, such as the covering of the Ortega Reservoir and construction of an underground storage tank, which blends Cachuma water with groundwater that does not meet federal standards by itself, have been contentious due to the fact that they cost millions of dollars. This three-million-gallon underground water storage tank is perhaps the most controversial capital improvement project to date. The district considered 14 potential sites as possible locations for the tank, but all of the landowners turned it down. Eventually, the district found a willing participant in Rancho Monte Allegre in the Carpinteria foothills, which had been slated for the development of high-end homes.

Rancho Monte Allegre’s then-owners were trying to divert the Santa Monica Creek to use the water for development, though the state later rejected this move. Something does not seem right in Rancho Monte Allegre, because it sold 10 acres of land to the CVWD. Perhaps they were under the assumption that the three-million-gallon tank at Rancho Monte Allegre would be used to support development? CVWD is adamant that the tank is necessary for meeting water quality standards, and that, due to the fact that Carpinteria is sitting on top of a lot of groundwater, they want to blend it with stored Cachuma water from the tank to make it drinkable. Also during fires, having the three million gallons of water available would be advantageous if something adversely affected the conduit from Cachuma.

What remains in this dispute is a very tight budget for the district and high water prices for its customers. With normal maintenance costs looming ahead, the outlook for the future of the CVWD appears to be bleak. What we appear to be doing is running a bunch of these old valves and mains to failure. That will inevitably be very disruptive and costly.