September 11, 2025
Who manages your water in Southern California and why it matters
A new UCLA Atlas reveals fragmented water governance has unequal impacts on affordability, quality, and resilience
Southern California drinking water governance type
Key takeaways
- UCLA researchers’ 2025 Southern California Community Water Systems Atlas analyzes 663 community water systems serving 40 percent of the state’s population, giving policymakers, researchers, and communities an unmatched tool to track water system performance and target solutions.
- The report, interactive map, and dataset show that seven different water governance structures create uneven service and accountability, and stark disparities: Kern County had more than 1,500 water quality violations in the past decade, while Orange County reported just five violations over the same period.
- In Los Angeles County, water bills have risen nearly 60 percent over 10 years, vastly outpacing inflation and straining lower-income households.
Community water systems are the fundamental building blocks of California’s water supply. They provide drinking water to millions of households, businesses, and institutions across the state. But who governs these systems — and how they are managed — has a direct impact on whether communities have access to safe, affordable, and reliable water and if they can adapt to drought and climate change.
The 2025 Southern California Community Water Systems Atlas, produced by the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation and UC Agriculture and Natural Resources (UCANR), shows how fragmented governance affects communities differently. The Atlas expands the scope of earlier UCLA studies to cover not just Los Angeles County, but 663 systems across six counties: Los Angeles, Kern, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. Together, these utilities serve 40 percent of California’s population. The report and companion mapping tool provide the most comprehensive public resource on water systems, shedding light on disparities in water quality, affordability, governance, and climate resilience.
Fragmented governance
Water systems in Southern California operate under at least seven different governance structures, ranging from tiny mutual associations to large city-run utilities. This fragmentation complicates oversight, resulting in uneven capacity and disparities in service. It also makes it harder to fix water quality violations, which happen when drinking water has more harmful contamination than regulations allow.
Governance determines whether a water system has the resources and oversight it needs to succeed. This Atlas makes clear that the small and under-resourced systems that millions of Californians rely upon and which are often fragmented, face persistent barriers to meeting water quality, affordability, and equity goals.
In recent years, Los Angeles County has made modest progress with slightly declining water quality violations, in part because some small systems have been consolidated into larger providers. A 2021 Luskin Center for Innovation study led by the center’s senior director, Gregory Pierce, and Kyra Gmoser-Daskalakis found that systems with less consolidated governance or infrastructure have more water quality and affordability problems.
These governance gaps show up most clearly in water quality data, where some counties consistently perform better than others.
Water quality varies from county to county
Kern County recorded more than 1,500 drinking water quality violations in the past decade — far more than any other county. (The top contaminants causing violations in Kern County are arsenic, coliform, 1,2,3-Trichloropropane, and nitrate.) In contrast, Orange County’s more consolidated governance consistently ranks among the best performers. Los Angeles County shows modest but meaningful improvement, with larger utilities investing in upgrades that have greatly reduced violations. The top contaminants causing violations in the county are arsenic and coliform, with nitrate and manganese in distant third and fourth place.
However, many smaller systems in all counties lack the technical, managerial, and financial capacity to make similar improvements, perpetuating inequities in safe and affordable water access.
Affordability is uneven
Average household water bills in Los Angeles County climbed 60 percent from 2015 to 2025, rising faster than inflation. Disadvantaged communities often pay as much or more than wealthier neighbors.
“This Atlas provides a baseline that communities and policymakers can use to strengthen oversight, target investments, and ensure progress toward California’s Human Right to Water,” Pierce said.
A tool for action
As California faces mounting affordability pressures, climate extremes, and water quality challenges, the Atlas offers an unparalleled baseline and interactive map to track system performance. By making governance and outcomes transparent, it equips policymakers, water managers, researchers, and community advocates to target solutions — from consolidation to conservation — and advance the Human Right to Water.
Get our latest research in your inbox.
EXPERTS
- Edith B. de Guzman, Water Equity and Adaptation Policy Cooperative Extension Specialist
- Gregory Pierce, Senior Director
- Jennifer Gorman, Graduate Student Researcher
- Lauren Dunlap, Project Manager
- Michael Rincon, Graduate Student Researcher
- Itzel Vasquez-Rodriguez, Graduate Student Researcher
- Vivian Cruz, Graduate Student Researcher
More Water updates
Urban wildfire: water system capacities and limitations
Researchers convene statewide experts to assess firefighting capacity, infrastructure gaps, and policy solutions.
Phase 1 of statewide wastewater assessment sets foundation for equitable solutions
UCLA-led research delivers the first statewide baseline of wastewater system risks, gaps, and solutions to support equitable infrastructure planning in California.
Building resilient utilities: UCLA issues report on key water and power infrastructure needs
Smart meters and undergrounding power lines are among promising innovations in addressing climate and fire risks.
