In a critical moment for water management in San Diego, City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera has suggested it may be time for the city to evaluate its relationship with the San Diego County Water Authority. This assertion is a significant follow-up to recent comments made by Councilmember Marni Von Wilpert, who expressed frustration regarding recent water rate hikes proposed by city staff.
For decades, the city of San Diego has held control over the Water Authority through city appointees who have navigated it into substantial debt and drawn-out projects, thus resulting in the high rate increases being faced now. Elo-Rivera’s mention of potentially leaving or dissolving the Water Authority has sent shockwaves through the community, considering the history of city’s stewardship over the water agency.
Elo-Rivera stated, “I think we have a responsibility to consider everything we need to consider to improve affordability in San Diego. If the current structure doesn’t make San Diego more affordable, then we’re acting irresponsibility to not consider structural reforms.” This shift in dialogue indicates a growing concern among city officials regarding water pricing and its impact on affordability for residents.
Historically, the Water Authority has operated under a model that demanded high fixed costs due to its agreements for purchasing desalinated water and water from Imperial Valley farmers. These contracts have led to a situation where, despite lowered water usage among consumers, residents must bear increased costs, creating a political and fiscal quagmire. The disconnect between operational costs and water sales has triggered public outrage, particularly as the Water Authority gears up for long-term financial forecasts amid expected rate increases.
This week, the San Diego Union-Tribune interpreted the Water Authority’s forecasts with a headline stating, “San Diego County water rate hikes won’t be as painful as feared,” even though a 12 percent increase was projected for the following year. The city of San Diego previously managed rate increases of merely 5.5 percent and faced significant backlash from constituents.
City COO Matt Vespi sent a stern letter to Daniel Denham, the Water Authority’s general manager, urging the agency to reassess its fiscal strategies. Vespi’s concerns emphasized that the financial standing of the city’s water system is precarious and that substantial changes must be implemented immediately. One crucial aspect of Vespi’s argument included the need for the Water Authority to adjust its sales projections to correlate with current and future demand patterns.
Denham responded to the city’s proposed changes, intimating that this request might lead to an unavoidable increase in rates due to fixed costs associated with existing contracts. He expressed skepticism regarding the plan, stating, “Every single general manager who read [Vespi’s] letter says ‘What’s he talking about?’ Long-term, is this region, this board, ready to double down on double-digit rate increases? It makes rates higher, not lower.”
The dialogue surrounding the Water Authority’s financial health grows even more complicated when considering the city’s will to push for rate reductions without acknowledging the underlying financial implications. Elo-Rivera dismissed Denham’s concerns about rate increases in response to reduced water sales, arguing that complexity should not deter efforts to make water more affordable for San Diegans.
“People cannot afford to live here. One of the costs increasing at an alarming rate is water and the Water Authority has to figure out what it needs to do. It is unacceptable to me that there isn’t an acknowledgement from the Water Authority of the amount of struggle people are experiencing,” Elo-Rivera articulated.
Should discussions advance toward dissolving the Water Authority, this could potentially allow for the region to escape the costly agreements made for water from Imperial Valley, specifically the Imperial Irrigation District. However, Denham contends that city officials may be grappling with complications arising from their water project, Pure Water—a wastewater recycling program that is essential for meeting the region’s future water needs.
Vespi and the city appear to be advocating for a reevaluation of water sales assumptions to showcase that higher rates would substantiate the economic outcome of Pure Water. Denham pointed to the impending completion of Phase 1 of Pure Water that would lessen the city’s dependency on the Water Authority by decreasing water purchases, thereby exacerbating financial strain on the Water Authority.
Despite concerns about future constraints on the Water Authority’s financial position, Denham clarified that he is not opposed to the city’s pursuit of Phase 2 of the Pure Water project, which aims to fulfill nearly half of the city’s water requirement moving forward. However, he was clear about the reality that the Water Authority must supply the necessary water for such processes, underscoring the interconnectedness of these projects.
Denham warned that if the city fully dissolved the Water Authority and exited the agreement for Imperial Valley water, it would require a complete reliance on the Metropolitan Water District. He laid out a dire scenario: “Our water from the Colorado River costs roughly $600 per acre foot. Nobody is going to get water at $600 per acre foot now. If you don’t have that, then you’re saying ‘We’re going back on Met.’ Well, take a look at where Met is.”
He indicated that the Metropolitan Water District would face challenges meeting San Diego’s needs, especially considering the resource management difficulties many Southern California regions are still encountering despite improved weather conditions. Such a move would leave San Diego vulnerable, essentially returning them to a historical precedent of dependency and increased water costs without any local governance.
Denham’s words painted a cautionary tale: “Those rate increases then still come, and you’re right back in the same spot you’re in but you don’t have local control. You’re back to the Stone Ages, beholden to Met and their resource mix and yet in the same spot financially.”
The stakes could not be higher as San Diego residents and businesses brace for increased water prices. The Water Authority grapples with insatiable operational costs, and the potential for losing revenue as customers seek alternative sources looms larger.
Denham aims to find an outlet to sell excess water, but with dwindling customers—as evident by two agencies leaving and the city of San Diego now threatening to do the same—the task appears increasingly difficult. As debts continue to mount, the Water Authority risks insolvency if new revenue streams cannot be established.
In the coming days, the discourse surrounding the Water Authority is expected to escalate, especially with the upcoming podcast interview featuring Daniel Denham, which will explore these pressing and complex issues in further detail. Denham and other leaders confront significant challenges as they aim to either rescue the Water Authority from its financial brink or witness its demise, a scenario that could resonate deeply with residents and businesses across San Diego.
The anticipation surrounding Denham’s interview presents an opportunity for transparency and dialogue concerning the future of water management in San Diego, a topic of immeasurable relevance for the community at large.
image source from：https://voiceofsandiego.org/2025/04/26/politics-report-water-authority-faces-existential-crisis/
