Guest Opinion: Rick Cole | Pasadena’s Water Future: The Challenge Isn’t Demand. It’s Supply

In the controversy over housing growth in Pasadena, one concern inevitably surfaces:

Will we have enough water?

It’s a reasonable question. California has endured repeated droughts. Climate scientists tell us the future is likely to be hotter and drier. And residents understandably wonder whether new apartments and condominiums will strain our water supply.

The answer may surprise you.

The City of Pasadena has provided water service since 1912. Today Pasadena Water and Power serves roughly 160,000 customers, including residents and businesses in Pasadena and portions of unincorporated communities north of our city limits.

Yet despite significant growth over the decades, Pasadena today uses about the same total amount of water that it used in 1949.

Think about that for a moment.

Our population has increased by roughly 40 percent during that period. We have more homes, more businesses and more economic activity. Yet total water use has remained remarkably stable.

Why?

Partly because conservation works.

Partly because appliances, plumbing fixtures and irrigation systems have become dramatically more efficient.

And partly because new apartments and condominiums generally use substantially less water than traditional single-family homes. Nearly half of Pasadena’s water consumption goes toward landscaping. Smaller lots and shared open spaces simply require less irrigation. New construction incorporates the latest in conservation devices to comply with tough State laws.

That is one reason I am less concerned about future demand than I am about supply.

On Monday, the City Council will consider the update for our Urban Water Management Plan. This 550 page state-mandated analysis looks twenty-five years into the future to evaluate how we will meet our community’s water needs.

The plan contains much to be encouraged about. Pasadena benefits from a diversified portfolio that includes local groundwater as well as imported supplies. We are better positioned than many California communities.

But we cannot ignore a simple reality.

Between 50 and 60 percent of Pasadena’s annual water supply comes from imported sources through the Metropolitan Water District.

That water ultimately depends on two systems facing increasing stress: the Sierra Nevada snowpack and the Colorado River.

For generations, California relied on winter snow accumulating in the mountains and gradually melting throughout the year. Climate change is disrupting that pattern. More precipitation is arriving in intense storms and less as long-lasting snowpack.

Meanwhile, the Colorado River Basin faces long-term challenges that affect millions of people across the American West.

The second threat to water reliability is the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the hub of California’s vast water delivery system.

For decades, California has debated how to protect water deliveries through the ecologically fragile Delta. The latest proposal, known as the Delta Conveyance Project, would build a massive tunnel intended to improve the reliability of water deliveries throughout much of the state.

Supporters argue it is essential to adapting California’s water infrastructure to climate change. Opponents question its environmental impacts, cost and effectiveness.

Reasonable people can disagree about the project and the argument has gone on for nearly half a century. But for Pasadena, the more important questions may be these:

• What if the project is delayed?
• What if costs escalate dramatically?
• What if future environmental restrictions reduce the amount of water that can be exported?
• What if climate change unfolds differently than current projections suggest?

Good planning for Pasadena cannot depend on the success of a single project hundreds of miles away and beyond our control. We need a strategy that works across multiple possible futures.

That is why my colleagues and I on the Municipal Services Committee are telling our staff we should accelerate our efforts to promote local water resilience.

One opportunity is stormwater capture.

In a wet year, an amount of water equal to roughly 150 percent of Pasadena’s annual water use flows through our watershed and eventually reaches the ocean. Capturing even a portion of that water could strengthen local supplies while helping replenish our groundwater basin, which has been drawn down over decades.

We should also expand the use of recycled and greywater systems for landscaping and other non-potable uses. Every gallon of recycled water used to irrigate a park, school or commercial property preserves higher-quality drinking water for homes and businesses.

And we should continue encouraging drought-tolerant landscaping. Replacing thirsty turf with climate-appropriate plants often achieves more lasting results than emergency watering restrictions imposed during drought years.

None of these approaches alone will solve Pasadena’s water challenges.

But that is precisely the point.

California’s water history teaches an important lesson. There is no single grand solution. Not the Los Angeles Aqueduct. Not the Colorado River Aqueduct. Not the State Water Project. And not any future Delta tunnel.

Each can play an important role. None can eliminate uncertainty.

The most resilient communities are those that diversify their water portfolio just as prudent investors diversify their financial portfolios.

The safest, most responsible and most sustainable path for Pasadena is to come as close as we can to self-sufficiency.

Our goal should be producing, capturing, conserving and reusing as much water as possible here at home even as we support reliable regional partnerships.

The future will be hotter and drier. That is exactly why Pasadena must be more self-reliant, more resilient and more prepared for whatever future arrives.

The Urban Water Management Plan should be our blueprint for aggressively pursuing every opportunity to ensure we have ample clean water at an affordable price for decades into the future. The decisions we make today will determine whether our children and grandchildren inherit a city vulnerable to forces beyond their control—or one resilient enough to thrive in an uncertain future.

Rick Cole is Councilmember for District 2 and serves on the Municipal Services Committee. He teaches public policy at Occidental College and Pepperdine University after a four-decade career in local government.