Water Everywhere, But Not a Drop to Drink

By Zach Friend, Supervisor 2nd District

Over the last few months a lot has been written about the political debate over water supply in the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District (SCWD2). The discussion has focused around the City’s decision to further study the feasibility of supply options (including desalination) and include more public participation in that process. The SCWD2, partner with the City in the desal study, has vowed to continue on a process of supply augmentation combined with possible drastic cuts in water usage. Both districts have been working hard to address a real crisis facing our county.

Why does all of this matter?

Water policy has remarkable economic and social ramifications on our district — and decisions being considered by SCWD2 and others could have a very real impact on jobs, small and local businesses, home prices, and the environment. While the County Board of Supervisors has no direct authority over the independently-elected SCWD2 or the City, our office has held multiple meetings with the districts and community leaders to discuss current proposals and what role we can play to ensure sustainability. After all, this is more than simply a discussion about water supply but also what the ramifications of not having that supply will have on the environment, economy and more.

Impact on the Economy

For example, let’s assume the Soquel Creek Water District (which provides water to much of my district) elects to have significant water curtailments, large price increases and/or a moratorium on new hookups. All of these things are currently under discussion. What would this mean for jobs or locally-owned small businesses? Can a small coffee shop owner absorb a 35% water price increase or significant curtailment? While a national chain might be able to have corporate absorb such costs a local business owner playing on thin margins may not.

How about investment in remodeling storefronts, rehabbing buildings or building something new? Without new hookups or unattainable offset requirements these things can’t (or won’t) happen. What impact does that have on jobs in our district? What impacts does inaction have on the environment? With the district in overdraft and salt water intrusion a very real crisis, inaction is clearly not a sustainable or environmental option.

Lastly, what would the impact be on home prices? If one district drastically increases rates and curtails usage and the neighboring district does not – in other words, your neighbor pays different rates than you do – what does that do to home values within a certain district? This is just a small set of what impacts these decisions can have.

What are the Answers?

The ramifications of the discussions occurring at the water districts are significant — and unfortunately have become too politicized and focused singularly on whether desal is the answer. Regardless of your opinion on it we need to acknowledge some facts:  we use less water in our area today than we did 30 years ago – yet the population has grown steadily – due to strong conservation measures. In fact, SCQD2 is often in the top 5% of conservers in the State – yet we are still over-drafting the aquifers and have been for quite some time.

Because of this I think it is unrealistic that we can conserve our way out of the problem. We need to have an honest (and factual) discussion on the supply side. Regardless of what the experts end up proposing, we should be prepared for a goal of increasing supply and still finding ways to conserve on the margins. Ultimately, we need to find a balance. Many of California’s fiercest battles have been fought on water and I imagine it will only get more fierce as we move forward. But we need to have these difficult discussions and we need to take the political arguments out of them. After all, the stakes are too high and there are real ramifications for our district if we fail to address this very real issue.

•••

As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts. Feel free to call at 454-2200.