Whilst We Deliberate It Becomes Too Late

In a prior blog, titled “Water Pricing-A new Paradigm” we discussed how
Perth, Australia finances their desalination and potable recycling.
California has substantial roadblocks to following Perth’s example of
linking the value of property to water. Proposition 13, was further amended
by Prop 218 in 1996 by California voters. The latter is also known as the
Right to Vote on Taxes Act. It was codified at Articles XIIIC and XIIID of
the California Constitution placing both procedural and substantive
limitations on property-related fees or charges, including water utility
rates.

It is this blog’s opinion Prop 218 effectively blocks financing of new water
sources using tiered rates with the exception (quoted from Private Water Law
Blog, “Collision Course: Proposition 218 and Conservation Water Rates in
California) “that some water professionals have suggested setting the
highest rate tier at the cost of developing new, currently undeveloped
supplies, and that fits well with the marginal cost approach. This would
appear to be defensible under Proposition 218 because it expressly connects
each tier rate to the cost of service, and good policy because it
effectively communicates the cost of developing new water supplies to
ratepayers.”

An alternative funding mechanism to assure potable water design and
construction could parallel the financing of the Carlsbad Desalination
Facility by Poseidon that required a high degree of cooperation between the
San Diego County Water Authority, the State of California, major financial
institutions and other players.

This blog does not have the background and/or education to discuss the
details of either of the two funding mechanisms above, but what is known is
the first step, before conceptual engineering design is considered, the way
forward has to be clearly understood and laid out to finance potable
recycling design and construction. There are smart people who know how to do
this, and maybe even Poseidon will consider it. Potable recycling processes
and desalination processes are very similar.

What this blog is very concerned about is the current SDCWA schedule for
achieving potable water recycling that is decades away. Felicia Marcus,
chair of the State Water Resources Control Board is concerned we may be in
an Australian-like ten year drought. If she is right, 2035 is too far away
to rescue water users in California.

Projected reduced snow pack in the Sierras, reservoirs already at historic
lows, first-ever meetings convened about the diminishing Colorado River and
dangerously lowering aquifers cannot have a good ending if the current
drought drags on six more years to 2020. Health and water officials are
doing a great job of balancing the water needs of California, but like a
bank account that has little or no income, there is only one outcome when it
comes time to pay the bills.

If Prop 218 is an insurmountable obstacle to providing the funding mechanism
for potable recycling, then we must look to private/public partnerships to
get the job done. As the old adage goes, “Whilst we deliberate, it becomes
too late”.

Milt Burgess