At the most conservative estimate, projected over the time Central Basin and Upper San Gabriel Valley MWDs would be expected to support the project, the additional costs would reach into the millions of dollars for each district and its customers.At a June meeting of the San Gabriel River Discovery Center Authority, board President and Central Basin Director Robert Apodaca said that customer cities and agencies were concerned about the district’s support for the project — a $22 million taxpayer/ratepayer-funded water museum and meeting hall — and that “they don’t feel [the project] is a priority for them.”
Central Basin's Robert Apodaca dismissed opposition to the Discovery Center from the district's own customer cities and water agencies as "excuses to criticize" the project.But Apodaca dismissed the opposition as “excuses to criticize” the project. He then offered additional district resources, saying, “We have a large staff. We have the resources. And we’re willing to share those,” adding later, “We have money to do things.”
At the same meeting, authority Executive Director Belinda V. Faustinos conceded that long-term funding for the controversial project is an “issue” and said that the authority would likely turn to Central Basin and a second district, Upper San Gabriel Valley MWD, to cover the project’s additional costs. “If we need to look at some ongoing operations costs down the road, it could potentially come from the water agency partners,” she said.
Faustinos said that long-term costs for the proposed facility — which would replace an existing Los Angeles County-owned-and-operated nature center already used by Central Basin to deliver education programs — will be a minimum of $200,000 annually beyond what the county and the two district’s pay for the nature center and for education programs, respectively.
Even at the most conservative estimate, projected over the time the districts would be expected to support the project, the additional costs would reach into the millions of dollars for each district and its customers. Such support, and statements that Central Basin has “money to do things,” stand in stark contrast to recent district actions, decisions and statements that seem to indicate a water district where finances are extremely tight — and getting tighter.
Those decisions and actions include: (1) more than doubling a surcharge on water, (2) borrowing tens of millions of dollars, (3) claiming to have made $1 million in budget cuts, and (4) passing on to customers the Metropolitan Water District’s most recent rate increase because, said Central Basin’s general manager, “We don't really have outside income to absorb this.”
If Central Basin officials have their way, their customers — some of whom pay among the county's highest property taxes or sales taxes — also will be absorbing the multimillion-dollar costs of a water museum they do not want.