Ventura Facing Key Decisions on Long-Term Water Sources

After spending nearly $400,000 on studies for a proposed desalination plant, Ventura city leaders are poised in the next few months to make some crucial decisions on long-term water sources.

Beginning this week, a Ventura City Council subcommittee will look at a proposal to buy more water from the Casitas Municipal Water District--a move that could reduce the size of the proposed desalination plant and delay its construction.

“This is going to be an important spring,” said Glenn McPherson, project manager of the desalination plant. “If there’s more water available from other sources, then obviously the desalination plant doesn’t need to be as big and may not be needed as soon.”

Council members say they are interested in buying more water from Casitas, but stress that they plan to continue looking for a long-term water source for the city.

Ventura gets its water from Lake Casitas, the Ventura River and underground aquifers. All three sources were partly depleted during the drought, causing the City Council to pass a strict conservation ordinance and look for another water source. Without an additional source of water, city wells are projected to run dry by 2010.

In an advisory measure in November, 1992, Ventura residents chose desalination over state water, 55% to 45%.

Some council members are fiercely opposed to building a desalination plant, and others have expressed reservations about its costs. Although importing water from Northern California was soundly defeated, some council members insist it is the best option. Only two councilmen, Steve Bennett and Gary Tuttle, have come out publicly in favor of desalination.

Bennett, in particular, is a strong voice for desalination. Before he was elected in November, the Nordhoff High School teacher helped lead desalination proponents to victory on the advisory measure.

He is now the chairman of the city’s Utilities Committee, which oversees water issues and would deal with the Casitas proposal. In his position, Bennett would be influential in making sure that the council did not scuttle the plant--something some of his colleagues would like to see abandoned.

Bennett said he is not opposed to scaling down the size of the proposed desalination plant because it would be much cheaper to operate.

“Now that we can get more water from Casitas in wet and average (rainfall) years, we don’t have to run the desal plant in wet and average years,” Bennett said. “It means we would only have to run the plant during dry years and . . . that is far less expensive.”

Mayor Tom Buford, Councilwoman Rosa Lee Measures and Councilman Gregory L. Carson have refused to commit themselves to any one option. They all said costs will be a major factor in whether they vote in favor of building a desalination plant.

“The advisory measure was certainly a vote for consideration of desal,” Buford said, “but it was not a directive to the council to build a desal plant at any particular time or any particular costs regardless of our needs.”

Councilmen Jim Monahan and Jack Tingstrom, who are the staunchest state water proponents, say desalination is too expensive.

“People did not realize what this plant is going to cost,” Tingstrom said. “It’s the council’s responsibility to provide a source of water at the most reasonable cost.”

Costs for building a desalination plant have ranged from $33 million to $55 million.

Bennett said now that it appears the council will be considering a plant used only for emergencies, he expects costs will be much less. The lower price tag would also make it politically easier for some of his fellow council members to vote in favor of the plant, he said.

City officials say it costs about $59 per acre-foot to draw from the Ventura River. Ground water averages $144 per acre-foot and buying from Casitas can range from $179 per acre-foot to $505 per acre-foot.

State water costs about $980 per acre-foot, and desalination is the most expensive, at $1,890 per acre-foot. An acre-foot is enough water to serve two families of four for a year.

All of the council members said they are inclined to buy from Casitas first because it would be cheaper than either desalination or state water.

Earlier this month, Casitas officials sent a letter to Ventura city leaders, asking for a meeting to discuss how Ventura could buy more water from the district.

Casitas Municipal Water District operates the Lake Casitas reservoir, and for years the city of Ventura was its largest customer, said John Johnson, district general manager.

But since 1990, the city has drastically cut back on the amount of water it has purchased, Johnson said.

For the fiscal year 1989-90, the city purchased 8,826 acre-feet of water, Johnson said. Last fiscal year, the city bought 1,605 acre-feet of water.

City officials said they have not purchased as much water from Casitas because residents have reduced the amount of water they have been using and two recent wet winters have swelled the size of the Ventura River, which has been drawn upon more heavily for water.

The city of Ventura is under no obligation to buy water from Casitas, Bennett said.

“We’re under obligation to use Ventura River water if it’s cheaper,” he said. “During wet years, we just don’t need as much from Casitas.”

Bennett said he wants to negotiate with Casitas officials to see whether Ventura can get a guaranteed amount of water from the reservoir in dry years, when the river will not be flowing as heavily.

“We have to know how much Casitas will sell us during droughts,” Bennett said. Based on that, the council will be able to decide how large the desalination plant should be, he said.

City officials said that during the recent drought, Casitas warned the city that Ventura in the future may be limited in the amount of water it can draw from the reservoir.

Although Ventura was never limited, the threat was enough to make city leaders look harder for other sources of water, Councilman Tuttle said.

“They weren’t our best friends during the drought,” Tuttle said. “They put the hammer on us. It’s interesting that they want us to buy more water now. I think we should if it’s cheap enough.”

Another factor that may delay the need for a desalination plant is the city’s own improvements to its water system.

Since 1990, the city of Ventura has spent more than $10 million in beefing up its water system. Reservoirs have been replaced, pump stations have been built and new wells have been drilled. A treatment plant has been expanded to operate more frequently, and more pump lines transporting water to different areas of the city have been added.

“All that could defer the time when we would need a supplemental water source, whether that’s desal or state water,” Utilities Manager Pam Cosby said.

Bennett called the water system improvement projects “a very wise investment” that maximizes the city’s ability to use its local water sources.

Still, he insists desalination should be used in emergencies because the Ventura River, ground water and Lake Casitas are all susceptible to drought.

“Our current water supplies all run low in droughts,” Bennett said. “The city of Ventura needs one water source that runs consistently in a drought.”

Ventura’s Water Sources

The city of Ventura depends on three sources for its water supply, but city leaders are looking for another source to supplement them. Some of the City Council members are pushing for desalination, but others say it is too expensive and would prefer importing state water from Northern California.

Percent Average Costs of water supply per acre-foot Lake Casitas 13% $179 to $505 Ventura River 51% $59 Ground water 36% $155 State water $980 Desalination $1,890

Source: Based on 1993 figures provided by the city of Ventura.