Judge rules in favor of Ontario in water dispute

Ontario is claiming victory in its battle with the Inland Empire Utilities Agency regarding the agency’s approval of the Chino Basin Program.

San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Donald Alvarez last month ruled in favor of Ontario’s challenge to the creation of the $985 million Chino Basin Program, a series of water projects designed to help make the Inland Empire’s water supply more modern by treating recycled water and injecting into the Chino Groundwater Basin.

In a lawsuit filed in May, Ontario maintained that the utilities agency violated the California Environmental Quality Act in several areas when it approved the basin program in May 2022.

First, the city alleged that the utilities agency conducted a “piecemeal” evaluation of the basin program by not properly assessing the effect it could have on the Feather River Exchange, according to a statement.

The Feather River Exchange allows for the transfer of water rights between different water agencies and municipalities that will help the environment and make for a more even distribution of water throughout the state.

The Feather River is major tributary of the Sacramento River in Northern California. It is a major source of water for the California State Water Project, a water management program that collects water from rivers in Northern California and distributes it statewide to communities that lack water.

Ontario’s lawsuit also claimed that the utilities agency failed to evaluate “reasonable alternatives” to the basin program that would keep locally generated water to be used by Ontario and the other Chino Basin cities: Chino, Chino Hills, Montclair, Upland, Fontana, and Rancho Cucamonga.
None of those cities participated in the lawsuit.

Also, the utilities agency did not evaluate the basin program as a 25-year project, but based its findings on the incorrect claim that it will provide water benefits to the Chino Basin for 50 years.

“IEUA evaluated the environmental impact of the Chino Basin Program (based on) a 25-year period, but claimed water-supply benefits over a 50-year period, said Courtney Jones, Ontario assistant general manager for utilities, engineering and operation. “They didn’t evaluate the environmental impacts over that 50-year period in which they’re claiming water-supply benefits.”

The Chino Basin is one of the largest groundwater basins in Southern California, with an estimated 5,000 acre-feet of groundwater, and room to store another 1,000 acre-feet. It’s considered an important part of the regional and statewide water supply system.

In approving the basin program, the utilities agency tried to impose a massive water transaction on Ontario that would have sent the city’s water elsewhere, and it did so without addressing environmental problems the project might create, according to Councilwoman Debra Porada.

“This is a major victory for Ontario and every community in the Chino Basin that depends on a secure, local water supply,” said Porada in the statement. “The (utilities agency) … did not tell the full story of the adverse environmental and water supply effects of the basin program.

“We fought back because our future depends on protecting the resources our residents already paid for and rely on.”

Ultimately, the court found the utilities agency – a 75-year-old regional entity that treats wastewater and provides imported and recycled water to parts of western San Bernardino County – violated the environmental quality act because it did not address the effects of transferring 375,000 acre-feet of water to Northern California, according to the statement.

“Ontario had repeatedly raised concerns with the utilities agency about the lack of transparency and analysis surrounding the Chino Basin Program, in letters, public meetings, and outreach,” the statement reads in addition to Porada’s remarks. “The court’s ruling validates those concerns, and it underscores that the utilities agency committed multiple violations against the environment quality act.”

But Ontario’s biggest concern isn’t environmental, it’s the “transfer” of water out of the Chino Basin that would happen under the basin program plan, according to Scott Burton, Ontario’s utilities general manager.

That exchange, known as an in-lieu transfer, would move water from the basin program to the state water program. Ontario would accept a reduction in imported water that otherwise would have gone to the utility’s agency.
That might create a better distribution of water statewide, but it would not generate the extra water Ontario and the other Chino Basin cities will need to accommodate growth, the Inland Empire being one of California’s fastest-growing regions.

“It would be trading two dimes and a nickel for a quarter,” Burton said, calling that the main reason Ontario decided to file the lawsuit. “We won’t lose anything, but we won’t gain anything either.”

In a statement, the utilities agency also claimed victory, saying that “the major technical aspects of the (Chino Basin) program were upheld,” while admitting the court did also require that a few areas of the program “be further examined and/or refined.”

The utilities agency’s board of directors has filed an appeal of the court’s ruling, and it intends to carry on with the Chino Basin Program.

“IEUA will continue to make the Chino Basin Program a priority,” the statement reads. “The benefits of the program are far-reaching; it is our responsibility to ensure safe and adequate water supplies to support the economic growth of our region.”

Both sides are scheduled to appear before Judge Alvarez Oct. 30, during which both will submit final plan proposals. Alvarez will be able to choose either proposal or a combination of the two, but the dispute is not likely to end there.

“It’s difficult to say how long this will go on,” Jones said. “Whatever happens during the Oct. 30 meeting will probably help decide that. It could go on for a long time.”