By Gigi Hanna and Thair Peterson

Ask a Metropolitan official about Southern California’s water forecast, and you’ll hear much ado about a “New Reality.”

Gone are the days when Southern California got the lion’s share of its water from Northern California or the Colorado River. Climate change, environmental concerns and other factors are limiting how much water the Southland imports. The result is water agencies that were formed to construct aqueducts (such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California) are now de-emphasizing their need for imported water and instead looking for water locally–via methods once considered too edgy or too costly to consider.

“Although 2002 was the driest year in urban Southern California’s recorded history and prompted higher demands, water sales did not reach the levels that we saw in 1990 at the height of the last major drought in 1991 because of the investments the region has made in water conservation, recycling and other water management projects that diversify the Southland’s supplies,” said Metropolitan Chief Executive Officer Ronald R. Gastelum.

With the higher demand for water in 2002, the district had $36.3 million in unanticipated revenues. Last November the board of directors distributed those funds to its 26 member public agencies with incentives for local investment in water conservation and reliability projects and programs.

“In these difficult financial times, our board seized this opportunity to assist member agencies and stimulate investment in necessary and critical supply infrastructure, programs and projects that will help ensure future water reliability,” said Metropolitan Chairman Phillip J. Pace

Looking for supply, in our own back yard

There was a time when “supply” was a code word for dams and reservoirs. Now, there’s far less emphasis on concrete and more on groundwater storage, recycling, conservation, desalination and similar measures. That switch, and the billions of dollars invested locally by Metropolitan and its member agencies for alternative sources of supply, have translated into real water; more than half of
the water used in Southern California is local.

The diversification paid off during recent Colorado River negotiations. Despite a major federal cutback of water at the beginning of 2003 and Biblical-like drought conditions in much of the country, Southern California averted hardship. Furthermore, the lingering effects of the drought have caused Southern California to consider what had previously been unthinkable–forgoing the “surplus” water it had obtained from the Colorado for decades.

Metropolitan’s theory about water supply issues was that the key solutions could be found in our own back yard, if you will. Others took note. According to the federal Water 2025 report, released last June: “In the long run, shortages in water
quantity can be met only by increasing efficiency of existing uses, transfers of water between uses, reducing or eliminating existing water uses, the development of alternative sources such as desalination or by storing additional water in wet years for use in dry years.”

The report further concludes that water agencies must manage water well even in the absence of drought, because trying to manage a crisis after it erupts is bad policy.

Even Washington noticed. During the negotiations that surrounded the contentious signing of the Quantification Settlement Agreement, Interior Secretary Gale Norton lauded Metropolitan’s planning.

“Because the Metropolitan Water District in Southern California had the leadership and foresight to develop alternative water supplies, people there will continue to see water flow from their taps,” she said during a December 2002 speech that took place during the depths of the drought in the western United States.

How it happened

The change of focus–and the investments required to make it work–didn’t happen overnight. For Southern California, the shift from imported supplies to local programs came two decades ago, after the drought caused some to question the region’s water reliability.

Metropolitan and its member agencies identified future needs in its planning process and, since 1982, have spent $8 billion for water conservation, recycling and storage projects. Those investments appear to be paying off.

Using its Integrated Water Resources Plan and Capital Investment Plan to prioritize capital improvement needs as they relate to overall resource strategy, Metropolitan identified and planned for capital projects that ensured the reliability of the delivery system and the quality of the water in it. That process pointed out the need for last year’s rehabilitation of the Colorado River Aqueduct, as well as future needs for desalination and water recycling projects.

Metropolitan’s Local Resources Program includes 53 recycling, 22 groundwater recovery and five proposed seawater desalination projects–all designed to make Southern California’s water supply more reliable.

Once the domain of sci-fi novels, desalination is becoming a more viable supply source due to technical advances and potentially lower costs. Metropolitan has been working with five of its member agencies that submitted proposals under the 2001 Seawater Desalination Program to finalize uniform agreement terms and principles. Additionally, to help launch member agency research efforts, Metropolitan’s board approved a contribution of $250,000 that will be divided equally among the five member agencies to conduct research leading to full project implementation, including site assessment and feasibility studies.

In 2003, Metropolitan committed $20 million to conservation programs and related activities, including augmenting indoor conservation programs with an advertising campaign designed to encourage residents to get their automatic sprinkler schedules in sync with their plants’ watering needs. To support greater consumer awareness of the benefit of water-efficient landscaping, Metropolitan launched its City Makeover program, which grants funds to retrofit prominent public spaces with native and California Friendly® plants. Since 1992 Metropolitan has invested more than $191 million in conservation programs in the region.

In its fourth year, Metropolitan’s Community Partnering Program continued to provide grants for conservation-themed projects and awarded more than $500,000 in 2003 for 97 projects.

Regional recycled water production in 2003 was about 204,000 acre-feet. A growing portion of landscape is being irrigated with recycled water, and more and more agencies are expanding their recycling programs to insulate against future droughts. The most recent program expansion is a Metropolitan agreement with the Inland Empire Utilities Agency that expands the geographic area of their existing project eligible for Metropolitan’s financial contributions.