A coalition of conservation groups wants Southern California to get 85% of its water locally, up from 50% now, by 2045, and says the new plan shows how.
It is urging state leaders to abandon plans for a 45-mile tunnel under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and consider asking voters to approve a bond measure to fund local water solutions. The 34-page plan was released as critical decisions await local officials, California’s next governor and legislators.
Over the past hundred years, Southern California has grown and prospered thanks to huge canals built to bring water from hundreds of miles away – the Eastern Sierra, the Colorado River and Northern California.
But with water costs are rising and climate change threatens these remote sources, there is growing interest in finding ways to get more water locally.
Coalition groups are calling for more wastewater recycling, more stormwater capture, improved efficiency and cleanup of contaminated groundwater.
“We have to prioritize our investments, and prioritizing local water makes a lot of sense,” said Bruce Reznik, executive director of the group Los Angeles Waterkeeper.
The coalition includes fishing groups, environmental organizations and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe of Northern California.
Yours system calls for a “new urban water renaissance” in California that prioritizes local water. This approach would be more productive and cost less than Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal Delta Conveyance Project under the Delta.
The state estimates by 2024 that the tunnel will cost $20.1 billion, but opponents say it could cost three to five times as much.
“Local water is reliable, affordable, and flexible, so we don’t bind California taxpayers to higher bills they don’t need,” said Kyle Jones, a water expert and consultant who helped prepare the coalition’s plan.
Southern California imports about half of its water from other states.
The cooperative’s plan says the county could access up to 2 million acre-feet of local water per year. It estimates the cost of increased conservation and efficiency, more stormwater and groundwater treatment, and additional water recycling at $44 billion over two decades. The Delta tunnel, in contrast, it would cost 60 billion to 100 billion, says.
Whether the tunnel project is eventually built may depend on whether major water agencies, including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, decide to participate and pay.
1. Cranes rise above the Donald C. Tillman Water Reclamation Plant in Van Nuys. 2. Once completed, Los Angeles will nearly double the amount of recycled water for 500,000 residents. 3. The storage tanks sit behind the fence before being placed in the ground at the plant. (Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
“The Metropolitan Water District has an important decision to make, one that not only affects ratepayers but affects everyone in the state,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the group Restore the Delta. “Are we going to spend $20, $60, maybe up to $100 million on a tunnel? Or are we going to invest significantly in local solutions that provide water resiliency and sustainability for everyone in California? That’s what’s at stake right now.”
The Metropolitan Water District already exists planning a a large new building in Carson to convert wastewater into clean drinking water. Los Angeles and San Diego too building water recycling plants.
“At the same time, imported water from the northern Sierra and the Colorado River provide the basis for a reliable water supply in Southern California,” said Shivaji Deshmukh, MWD general manager.
He noted that MWD invests in water efficiency and stormwater capture, and has helped reduce per capita water use by more than 40 percent since 1990.
The agency’s 38-member board last year adopted a climate action plan that sets goals for collecting more water.
Los Angeles city leaders and LA County management also set goals for better independence in the area.
Advocates writing the policy plan say these efforts should be accelerated and expanded. They pointed out that Colorado River dams are dangerously low, and native fish in the Delta are dwindling as water pumping harms the environment.
“Climate change is increasing the challenges to those ecosystems, which means less water will be available for import,” said Ashley Overhouse, a water policy advisor for the group Defenders of Wildlife. “All the while, water costs continue to rise.”
About 20 other environmental organizations have adopted the coalition’s strategy.
“We have to do a better job in the next 100 years than we did in the last 100 years, if we really want to build a place of abundance again,” said Frankie Myers, a member of the Yurok Tribe in Northern California. “This idea that we can steal … and allocate water as we want without consequences must end.”
Construction is underway on the Donald C. Tillman Water Reclamation Plant in Van Nuys in October 2025.
(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)
Benjamin Bass, a UCLA student scientist how climate change is affecting the Colorado River and other water sources, joined the group as they presented their proposal in an online forum.
“Traditional water sources from other countries are less reliable than they used to be,” said Bass. “The most reliable source of water in the future is local water.”
Other experts have reached similar conclusions.
Researchers at the Pacific Institute, a water think tank in Oakland, have tested improvements such as fixing leaking pipes, turning off inefficient washing machines and toilets, and replacing dry grass with plants suitable for the Mediterranean climate.
In the 2022 report, they found that a set of common practices and technologies could reduce urban water use entirely. by 30% or more.
