Judge rules Santa Cruz not obligated to provide drinking water to UCSC north campus

SANTA CRUZ — A judge has sided with the city of Santa Cruz authorities’ assertion that it is not obligated to provide water service to match future UC Santa Cruz expansion.

Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Timothy Volkmann’s Aug. 30 ruling comes as a result of a breach of contract lawsuit filed against the city in October 2020. At the time, attorneys for the University of California Board of Regents and UC Santa Cruz announced the suit in a joint statement with the city. UCSC Chancellor Cynthia Larive and then-Santa Cruz Mayor Justin Cummings described the legal action as the university’s effort to “seek clarity,” a mutually agreed-upon step to settle an impasse in a long-brewing disagreement.

In subsequent court filings, university attorneys claimed that the city had committed to supplying the campus — particularly the northern edge that falls outside Santa Cruz’s borders — with water utilities, as codified in contractual agreements in 1962 and 1965.

In response to an inquiry Tuesday related to the recent ruling, UCSC spokesperson Scott Hernandez-Jason stressed that the court proceedings were focused on service access, rather than the more hotly contested local water usage debate sparked during recent droughts. Campus water usage has declined even as its student body has grown in the past 25 years, he said.

“UC Santa Cruz is only asking that the City of Santa Cruz fulfill the promises it made when it sought to persuade the Regents to build a campus in Santa Cruz — promises set out in plain language — to provide water service,” Hernandez-Jason wrote in an emailed response to the Sentinel.

In a release from the Santa Cruz City Attorney’s Office on Tuesday, the city said the judge agreed the 1962 and 1965 contracts only required the city to provide water delivery infrastructure of a specified capacity to the university campus border, and to bill the university at rates comparable to other water customers — a service currently ongoing by the city. A copy of the judge’s ruling was not available in court records Tuesday afternoon.

City leaders had previously balked at the asserted water service requirement when UCSC officials laid out the potential for future campus expansion during its 2005 Long Range Development Plan update. In more recent court filings, the city argued that it was not automatically required to provide the additional water service. Attorneys wrote that UCSC also would need to apply to the Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission, which oversees jurisdictional boundary issues, to add a new water connection serving unincorporated county land. UCSC officials disagreed, saying it was exempt from such requirements.

Volkmann also ruled that UCSC will need to seek an opinion from the Local Area Formation Commission on whether or not the city is exempt from seeking the body’s permission to provide water service outside its jurisdictional boundary.

Asked how the judge’s decision affect future campus development strategies, Hernandez-Jason said water service across the residential campus “would 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.”

“We are disappointed with the court’s ruling and are determining our next steps,” Hernandez-Jason added.