The Central Coast Blue project is one agency down after Arroyo Grande City Council members voted unanimously to back out of the three-city cost-sharing agreement on April 9.
The project—which aims to inject treated wastewater into the Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin as a drought buffer—was supposed to provide water to the cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande.
As the lead agency, Pismo Beach agreed to pay 39 percent of the project, followed by Grover Beach at 36 percent and Arroyo Grande at 25 percent.
In 2022, the project was expected to cost between $85 million to $112 million before staff settled on $93 million, according to an April 9 staff report. However, with inflation being factored in, the expected cost of Central Coast Blue shot up to between $134 million and $159 million.
Some of that increase came after the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Financial Assistance reduced a $15 million Water Recycling Funding Program Grant it awarded to Pismo Beach in September 2023 to $5 million due to the statewide effort to address the state’s budget deficit, according to the same staff report.
Community members who spoke during public comment during the April 9 Arroyo Grande City Council meeting complained that certain numbers weren’t made public.
“I have never seen $85 million to $112 [million],” Los Osos resident Julie Tacker said. “That variable was never presented to the public. They landed on $93 million and shoved it in your face, and you didn’t come back to the community and say, ‘Whoa, whoa, wait a minute, how far do we want to go.’ But there’s a big difference between $85 million and $112 million, just like there’s a big difference between $134 million and $159 million.”
Mayor Pro Tem Jim Guthrie agreed that the price of Central Coast Blue is getting out of hand and said the city was a good partner that stayed with the project when it reached $95 million—which wasn’t a number they’d originally agreed upon.
“The total number I’m comfortable with is way less than $90 [million]. Before I was even on council, I was very uncomfortable with this project,” he said. “Not exactly based on cost, but indirectly it was because if you look at that time, the cost of [desalination] was very close to the cost of this project and [desalination] is the only thing that works in a drought.”
Although Arroyo Grande is the first city to officially opt out of the project, some Grover Beach residents have urged their city to do the same, claiming Central Coast Blue will cause more harm than good.
Due in part to ongoing public backlash, Central Coast Blue General Manager Geoff English told New Times, the project is currently on pause while waiting to hear if the cities want to continue with the project.
“We have suspended all work on technical work, on design, and on permitting,” he said. “We have pulled the permits; we pulled the permit application from the state’s Coastal Commission.”
English said Central Coast Blue also withdrew its development permit from Grover Beach but is continuing to apply for grants to lessen the cities’ financial burden.
“Without that funding, the project would be challenging to move forward,” he said.
While Arroyo Grande City Council voted to pull out of Central Coast Blue, it decided to stay in the joint powers authority (JPA) with Grover Beach and Pismo Beach to focus their efforts on looking at alternative water suppliers or projects that are less expensive.
“I would like to see our JPA to stay together, and I would like to say, ‘Hey yeah … we have the $500,000 for the next fiscal year, let’s continue to find an alternative solution to securing more water,” Councilmember Lan George said. “Our responsibility as a council is to plan for the future. I believe we should continue to invest money into finding another water alternative.” Δ
This article appears in Apr 11-21, 2024.
The longer you wait the more expensive it will be to exercise this option in the future. Having a reliable source of fresh drinking water for your population is priceless. You know since California has never been in a multi year drought where taps were running dry in the Central Valley and water basins were nearly shot. Sure we should look at recycling poop water but desalination in my view is the way to go along with modern nuclear for power. Combine the two nuclear powered desalination. Stable power and water sources for the future seems like a great investment of public funds.
Agree a long term solution would be the best use of our taxpayer money. CCB should pause ALL efforts except finding a long term approach. Focus on addressing the risk of droughts matched with desired growth and embrace a regional equitable approach to water allocation and fair impacts. The more efforts spent on this old project that admittedly needs changed are improper and just wasting taxpayer money. Why spend money on grant applications if the project will change and some grant information is inaccurate and misleading. That’s not a “pause”. Plus, there are aspects not discussed in this article related to social justice that remain problematic without a better regional partnership. The partner missing here is Oceano which is a forced “stakeholder” to use in grant applications and for land use but with no voice and impacted residents have no knowledge of what is being proposed in their backyard which include impacts in hazard zones and environmentally sensitive coastal areas. And no governance or decisioning for use of their census and land used for others. Incorrect sympathy claims are used to make the grant proposals look better for Pismo Beach, the lead agency, who benefits the most- shameful. It’s a classic case of “real inequity” through power that needs a light shined on it right in our own backyard. And fixed in “round two”.
I have followed this project since 2013, and I agree with Arroyo Grande Council’s Jim Guthrie that it always had some issues, but at the original $25-29 million, it was competitive with other options. Water recapture technology and state and federal funding are trending with the times, but there has been no current cost-benefit analysis of our alternatives. It’s time for an independent review of current options. There are many, and most will be eligible for grant funding. Nearly 4,000 people in Grover Beach have been raising red flags on the project since September 2023. Unfortunately, the majority of their elected representatives refused to investigate or listen to their concerns about the project, preferring to claim their constituents were slanderous, libelous, and misinformed, even telling people not to listen to them. Thank goodness Arroyo Grande listened!
AG has two sources of water; Lopez Lake and groundwater. At least ten years ago the City declared they reached 100% allocation of its two water supplies. No new supply has been defined (some farm to city water rights have exchanged with development of farm land in city limits). Development continues with water resources for the new development coming from conservation by current residents.
The City’s groundwater rights do not meet the City’s needs – not even close. Just a few years ago the City was within weeks of declaring a water supply emergency as Lake Lopez dropped close to dead pool (water unattainable). Do you remember the ‘musty’ water we all drank for months?
Prior to that time, the City Council adopted an ordinance that allows them to buy State Water should an water supply emergency be declared. The voters of AG had turned down State Water participation once or twice previously.
Assuming State Water and a willing seller are available during the emergency, you can assume the price will be… quite high and sales term will be short.
AG, Oceano, and Grover send their collected wastewater to South County Sanitary. The water is treated to State/Fed standards and then discharged to sea. Pismo (and Shell B) treated wastewater is conveyed to the same ocean discharge – one of the few (and larger) remaining ocean discharges along the central and southern california coast. Over a million gallons of viable reclaim water sent to sea each day. ALL other wastewater generated in south SLO County is treated at returned to groundwater.
It will only take 3-5 years of drought to empty Lopez again. As before, the empty lake will serve to focus residents on the issue and value of a safe dependable water supply. It will also help to constrain former elected officials and other gadflies who continue to chase the spotlight by attacking current officials and agencies that are attempting to responsibly address serious long-term community issues.
Costs will never be lower than they are today Only real options are reclaim and desalinization – and if you think desal would be cheaper, I have some great farm land to sell you just a few miles west of Oceano. 😉
CcB could never make good on the benefits it promised. While producing 900 af/y of recycled water , the maximum available yield would only be 627 af/y of recycled water. That volume of water is not nearly enough to sustain its member agencies in a severe drought. The cost per unotwas always going to be extreme. The lead engineers in this project had never completed a project like this one. The had been excused from a few successful projects. For these reasons alone, and many others the CCB project was a poorly planned, clearly inompetent,hopeless waste of time and rate payer funds.A good idea in general,but with o realistic execution. Eventual cost was not the failure, lack of competent design a d management