Water Board Picks Improvements Over Rebates to Cities

A regional water board voted Wednesday to use its surplus to fund infrastructure improvements in 43 cities in Los Angeles County rather than return $50 million to customers.

The Water Replenishment District of Southern California, which supplies ground water to 3.5 million people in a 430-square-mile area from Redondo Beach to City of Commerce, accumulated a $60-million budget surplus last year--in part because of El Nino storms that bolstered underground water supplies.

A coalition of 12 cities in southeast Los Angeles County had demanded that the district use $50 million of the surplus on rebates. The cities planned to use the rebates for customer refunds or to offset future water rate increases.

But the district’s board of directors decided to create a $30-million grant program to pay for conservation programs and water infrastructure projects in the 43 cities. To win a grant, the cities must submit a request.

District General Manager Bob Campbell said the water board approved the grant program because the district’s bylaws prohibit the agency from offering rebates. Water customers, he said, will benefit from the water projects.

The response to the board’s decision was mixed.

“We would still like to see an outright rebate,” said Desi Alvarez, director of public works for Downey, which would have received a $3.4-million rebate.

Jim Glancy, director of water resources for Lakewood, called the decision a “positive step.” But he said he is not sure if the move will appease the Lakewood City Council, which sought the rebate.

Michael Gagan, a Vernon spokesman, supported the district’s decision. “We think the grant program is a good response to the demands that were made by many of the cities,” he said.

Animosity between the cities and the water district has been building over the past eight years. The Water Replenishment District has increased the fees from $51 per acre-foot in 1990 to $151 per acre-foot today. An acre-foot is the amount of water used by two typical homes in a year.

Campbell said the fee increases were needed to pay for several improvement projects.

Many of the cities have criticized the rate hikes, arguing that the projects are unnecessary.

Robert Sepulveda, public services director for City of Commerce, said he has yet to study the grant program approved by the water district board. He believes that his city deserves a rebate of about $325,000.

“It’s obvious that we were overcharged, and we want it back,” he said.

The district was created to protect the underground water supply in the Central and West Coast basins by charging cities a fee to pump water from underground aquifers. The district also is responsible for keeping seawater from seeping into the underground water supply.

The district replenishes aquifers with water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District.

Part of the district’s budget surplus resulted from heavy winter rains, which replenished underground supplies, Campbell said. That reduced the need to purchase as much water from the MWD as planned, he said.

“Everybody benefits from El Nino,” Campbell said.

In addition to approving the grant program, he said, the water district board voted to use the budget surplus to establish a $20-million reserve account and the remainder to help fund an $83-million capital improvements budget.