Appeals court sides with UCSC over water access dispute with City of Santa Cruz

The City of Santa Cruz is required to provide water access to the UC Santa Cruz campus, including its land outside the city limits, and doesn’t need approval from a local commission to do so, a state appellate court ruled last week. 

UCSC officials have long planned to build housing in the northern part of the campus, including on parts of the campus that are outside the city’s boundaries. 

The Sixth District Court of Appeal on Nov. 21 reversed a decision by a Santa Cruz County Superior Court judge, issued in fall of 2022, that found the city wasn’t required to provide water access to the university’s property outside of city limits without approval from Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). 

The lawsuit, filed in 2020 by the university against the city, asserted that the city was obligated to provide water access based on agreements between the parties dating back to 1962 and 1965, when UCSC was established. The city argued that based on its interpretation of those agreements, it wasn’t required to provide water access to the school outside of city boundaries. 

Santa Cruz city attorney Tony Condotti said that the issues at the heart of the lawsuit are largely technical, as the city has already incorporated the university’s projected water use into its plans. 

“In so far as the city is concerned, it doesn’t have any real impact upon the city’s water supply or infrastructure planning,” he said. “It goes to the question of whether or not … prior to providing water service that will be used for development outside of city limits, LAFCO approval is required. We had argued in the trial court that it was required.”

LAFCOS are service planning agencies that have regulatory and planning powers; they’re located in all 58 counties across the state. The agencies also oversee government agencies. Santa Cruz County’s 11-member LAFCO is made up of county supervisors, city councilmembers from Santa Cruz, Watsonville and Scotts Valley, along with other local elected officials and two members of the public.

The court ruled that the city did not need LAFCO’s approval in order to provide water to the parts of campus outside of city limits, in part because it had already been providing water to areas of UCSC outside of city boundaries for decades. 

“The undisputed extrinsic evidence shows that the parties intended the city to provide water service through its lines that could then be used for distribution to any part of the UC Santa Cruz campus, without any distinction as to whether the water served new development or parts of the campus outside city limits,” the three members of the appeals court wrote in their ruling.

Lookout was unable to reach LAFCO executive officer Joe Serrano by publication time. 

UCSC spokesperson Scott Hernandez-Jason said the university is happy with the decision. He added that the ruling upholds its understanding of the decades-old agreements between the city and the University of California regents. 

“UC Santa Cruz has a track record of carefully managing — and reducing — its water use,” he wrote. “The campus is using less water than it did 25 years ago, when we had many fewer students. Providing water service to all parts of our residential campus will help UC Santa Cruz build housing, classrooms, and space for research and creative scholarship, and fulfill its commitment to the local community and faculty, staff, and students.” 

The appellate court reversed the Santa Cruz County Superior Court’s decision on Sept. 30, 2022, and directed the Santa Cruz court to enter a new order. 

Condotti said the Santa Cruz City Council will ultimately decide whether the city will pursue further legal action in the case or to accept the appellate court’s ruling. 

“We’re going to evaluate the decision and then we will consult with the city council about next steps, which may include seeking Supreme Court review, or the city council may decide to accept the decision of the court of appeal,” he said. “That’s a decision that we haven’t had a chance to consult with the city council on, and so we will be evaluating our position and advising the council.”

In its long-term planning document, called the Long Range Development Plan, the university has included plans to develop four new residential colleges in the north campus area. 

Two of them would be located northeast of the academic core and the other two would be located northwest of the academic core. The plan also shows a proposed academic building development adjacent to the two northwest residential college buildings. 

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.