South County cities are worried about future water supplies—whether it’s groundwater, surface water, or conserved water. On June 16, I attended the second community workshop of the Grover Beach water supply study, which is focused on supplemental water supply alternatives. The presentation by consultants was informative and well organized with detailed information, including projections that the city will need and additional 300 to 400 acre-feet of water in the coming decades.
So imagine my surprise when the experts said, as far as water conservation goes, that “the turnip has been squeezed dry.” There was no mention of the Coastal Commission’s 2017 mandate to the South SLO County Sanitation District to begin planning for a probable relocation of its operation to a brand new facility safe from floods and sea level rise by 2047. That facility would be required to treat all municipal wastewater to drinking water standards. At current wastewater levels, that would create 2,200 acre-feet of “new water” every year—and the experts estimate Grover Beach needs only 400 acre-feet of that to be safe.
Why does this project not have top billing in a study of supplemental water alternatives? Especially when the fact is that Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach mayors and the Oceano CSD president are the board of directors of the South SLO County Sanitation District. All three of them are very well informed on the South SLO County Sanitation District relocation issue and have been voting approval for $100,000s in studies required by the Coastal Commission. Almost all of the operations, maintenance, and administration of the South SLO County Sanitation District is paid for by Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Oceano citizens and businesses who have a sewer line.
About three years ago, I learned about the South SLO County Sanitation District relocation issue and saw it as an opportunity to do a great and necessary thing. It is a significantly time-sensitive issue because the billions of dollars available in grants for addressing climate change coastal impacts are still available. This project is a poster child for it. With an estimated price tag of $300 million, we need all the help we can get.
This is not a county responsibility. It all falls on our shoulders to do the right thing. Over the past two years, I have written to every elected city council and Oceano CSD member with information and relevant documents urging them to make this a priority. I have attended their meetings to do the same, including the South SLO County Sanitation District.
The South SLO County Sanitation District relocation issue … is a significantly time-sensitive issue because the billions of dollars available in grants for addressing climate change coastal impacts are still available. This project is a poster child for it.
So again, imagine my surprise when at the June 16 meeting with the public, neither the consultants nor city administrators ever mentioned a possible 2,200 acre-feet of new water, nor did they seem very knowledgeable of the project. The lead consultant on supplemental water sources told me he knew nothing about it. The lead study consultant seemed to be way more interested in desalination and did not express knowledge of the South SLO County Sanitation District relocation topic.
Over the past few years, the South SLO County Sanitation District has spent a large amount of money completing Coastal Commission mandated studies on plant life expectancy, potential operational hazards, potential hazard mitigations, and so forth. I believe serious consideration should be given to embracing the Coastal Commission’s concerns about relocation (it is not if, it is simply when), and we should begin to actively move forward, starting with acceptance of the need, timeliness, and advantages, to initiate the relocation process, which will be at least a 15-year project.
It’s a legacy project of water resiliency for us as well as our children and grandchildren. Can we all come together and do the right thing? ∆
Charles Varni writes to New Times from Oceano. Send a letter for publication to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in June 25 – July 2, 2026.
