Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
about mwdnewsbusinessmember agenciesfinanceauditethicsjobscontactsearch
San Diego County Water Authority v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, et al.


Feb. 25, 2014
Metropolitan General Manager Releases Statement on Rate Case Tentative Determination by San Francisco Superior Court

Nov. 3, 2011 Letter to Chairman Foley regarding mischaracterization of group

Metropolitan’s Response to the SDCWA letter of March 28, 2012

Metropolitan’s Response to SD Union-Tribune’s March 13, 2012 editorial

Letter from Member Agency GM's regarding Metropolitan’s rate structure (June 1, 2010)



Metropolitan News Releases

News Articles

Legal Documents

Metropolitan Water Rates

Pricing Water Fairly in Southern California
As the primary provider of imported water for a six-county region, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and its Board of Directors must fairly allocate the costs of water through its rate structure. More than a decade ago, Metropolitan began a comprehensive three-year process with extensive public input to develop a new regional pricing system for its 26 member public agencies that provide water to 19 million residents. The new pricing system was put into effect in 2003. After seven years, the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) sued Metropolitan, challenging the rate structure and the allocation of costs.

Click image to enlarge

At Issue: San Diego’s Above-Market Water Purchase

A key issue is SDCWA’s agreement to purchase water from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID).  SDCWA chose to pay more for IID water than it would for Metropolitan’s water, supposedly to achieve a degree of water independence and additional reliability.  However, SDCWA has no pipeline network to transport this water from IID and so currently can only use Metropolitan’s facilities.  Metropolitan subsequently agreed to accommodate SDCWA’s request to exchange the IID water for Metropolitan water, at a set price.  While the IID water comes from the Colorado River Aqueduct, the water that Metropolitan delivers to SDCWA in its place has less salinity and is a blend of both Colorado River and Northern California water. SDCWA’s lawsuit now seeks to change the agreed price structure to receive that water.  If successful, SDCWA’s lawsuit would shift the cost of delivering SDCWA's exchange water to consumers in Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.  This cost would be tens of millions of dollars.  SDCWA claims the cost would be well over $1 billion.  Consumers in those areas are not inclined to pay for SDCWA’s business decision to pay more to purchase and exchange IID water. 

Transporting Water: The Primary Cost
The bulk of the water that Metropolitan delivers comes at relatively little cost for the water itself; the cost is in delivering the supplies. Metropolitan gets its water from the Colorado River – over 200 miles to the east – and from Northern California’s Feather River system – over 400 miles  away.  This water moves through a complex system of pipes, canals and aqueducts.  The water is lifted hundreds of feet over mountains and hills by massive pumps.  SDCWA’s lawsuit seeks to avoid paying its share of maintaining this transportation system – at the expense of the system’s other users.

Water’s Real Costs
Metropolitan sets rates through an open and transparent process that assures equity and fairness throughout its 5,200-square-mile service area.  Metropolitan’s Board of Directors, who represent the region as a whole, rely on this rate system to evenly collect costs across the region. The water system funded through these rates provides Southern California with a reliable supply of high quality water that benefits all residents and businesses and serves the region’s $1 trillion economy. 

Metropolitan’s rate structure separates or “unbundles” its rates and charges to provide transparency and clearly show what service member agencies receive, what that service costs and what they pay for it.  As an example, the cost to transport water is paid through the System Access Rate, reflecting the cost of operating, maintaining and investing in the basic infrastructure.  In addition, the System Power Rate collects the cost to pump water through the Colorado River Aqueduct and from Northern California.  All Metropolitan deliveries include the Water Stewardship Rate, which funds Metropolitan’s conservation and recycled water programs.   Metropolitan also has a Water Supply Rate, reflecting Metropolitan’s cost to acquire water.

In addition to challenging why it should share in the cost of maintaining Metropolitan’s water transportation system, SDCWA argues that it should not have to pay the Water Stewardship Rate as part of Metropolitan’s transportation (delivery) charges.  Exempting SDCWA’s exchange water from these charges would simply mean that everyone else outside of San Diego County would have to pay more for conservation and recycling as well as for  operating and maintaining a reliable delivery system.

At Risk: A Regional Approach to Water Reliability
Metropolitan has built and funded a water supply system that is the backbone of the region’s $1 trillion economy.  This complex system has been built and maintained over more than 80 years through Metropolitan’s cooperative, regional, cost-share model.  The SDCWA lawsuit seeks to undermine this proven and successful regional approach and replace it with cost-shifting strategies that benefit one community over another.  Outside of San Diego, there is overwhelming support for Metropolitan’s current rate structure which reflects an equitable and regional approach.




June 24, 2012
Riverside Press-Enterprise, Op-ed by Joe Kuebler and Tom Evans
End big campaign to shift water costs Inland

April 30, 2012
The Planning Report, by Professor Steve Erie
Imperial Irrigation District Transfer, Not MWD, Drives Rates in San Diego

March 23, 2012
Read Metropolitan General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger's response to San Diego Union-Tribune's March 13, 2012 editorial

March 8, 2012
San Diego Union-Tribune, Michael Gardner and Mike Lee
Campaign slams regional water district 

Union Tribune, Michael T. Hogan
Split decision in water rate case


November 23, 2011
Read Metropolitan General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger’s response; Lawsuit undermines regional approach

November 13, 2011
North County Times and The Californian, Editorial
Fair Flow

Read Metropolitan General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger’s response (scroll down to “Setting water rates best done through democratic process”).

June 15, 2011
Read Metropolitan Board Chairman’s statement in response.

October 14, 2010
San Diego Union-Tribune, Op-ed by Jeffrey Kightlinger
Mud in the Waters: Law Firms Win, Ratepayers Lose

August 6, 2010
San Diego Union-Tribune, Op-ed by Timothy F. Brick
The true price of imported water


Page updated: March 5, 2014