Cost of bringing clean drinking water to California communities estimated at $11.5 billion

For a water system to come into compliance with regulations, it takes not only funding but also planning, engineering work and permits, Abhold said.

State officials have assessed other communities that are at risk by analyzing the potential for water quality violations or water shortages, among other factors.

The number of people affected has fluctuated in recent months as some water systems have come off the list and others have been added. The state’s latest estimates show that 738,000 people currently receive water from failing systems, while more than 1.8 million people depend on 548 systems with drinking water supplies determined to be at risk.

The state’s report includes estimated costs for infrastructure solutions such as installing treatment systems, drilling a new well, or consolidating by connecting one water system to another.

The estimated costs of solutions in the latest report were substantially higher than previous state estimates. In a 2021 report, the state water board included a range of estimated costs up to $9.1 billion. Officials said they used new methods and improved data this time, including more water systems and risks in their analysis.

According to the report, the estimated costs of long-term solutions for failing and at-risk public water systems total $6.6 billion over five years, while the costs of solutions for “high-risk” small water systems and domestic wells total $4.9 billion.

Those combined costs, totaling more than $11.5 billion, would be significantly higher if loan repayment costs and operations and maintenance costs are included, the report said, pushing the total estimated cost of “achieving the human right to water” to $15.9 billion.

Officials projected that $2 billion in state grant funds will be available over five years, as well as $1.5 billion in state loans, leaving a substantial gap in available funding. Officials said a large portion of the money to address the problems may need to come from “local cost share” funds collected through rates, fees and taxes.

The report’s higher cost estimates were released amid discussions about budget cuts in Sacramento.

Citing recent cuts, more than 180 organizations, including environmental groups and other organizations, wrote to state leaders urging them to approve placing a $10 billion bond on the November ballot to provide “direct and meaningful investments in the California communities and natural resources most impacted by climate change.”

...continued

swipe to next page