April 29, 2026
Water, fire, and finance: building more resilient systems
UCLA-led convening highlights need for clearer roles, stronger coordination, and more equitable financing strategies
Panel 1 presenters Mark Insco (Golden State Water), Jennifer Gorman (UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation), and A.R. El-Khattabi (UNC Chapel Hill Environmental Finance Center). Credit: Sustainable LA Grand Challenge
Key Takeaways
- A new UCLA-led convening highlights how wildfire risk could reshape water system planning and finance.
- Water systems were designed to provide drinking water and fight structure fires — not urban wildfires.
- Expanding system capacity to fight extreme events creates tradeoffs with water quality and affordability.
- Fire-related water use is often not fully paid for, straining system finances.
- Coordination between water and fire agencies is inconsistent and often informal.
- Recovery of wildfire-related costs raises equity concerns for ratepayers.
Wildfires Are Challenging Water Systems
The January 2025 fires in Los Angeles County exposed a critical gap: water systems were never designed to fight large-scale wildfires. As fire risks intensify, communities are asking what the role of water systems should be in extreme events moving forward and how these systems can remain reliable, affordable, and resilient.
On January 23, 2026, the UCLA and UC ANR Urban Water Supply + Fire working group — organized by the Sustainable LA Grand Challenge, Luskin Center for Innovation, and the California Institute for Water Resources — convened 54 experts to examine a critical and underexplored issue: how to finance water systems as fire risks change and intensify. The workshop organizers have just released a report, Water Supply Systems, Fire, and Finance, synthesizing key insights from the convening.
What the Experts Found
Participants emphasized that adapting water systems for wildfire response is both financially and logistically challenging. Funding constraints, including Proposition 218, limit how utilities can raise revenue, while disasters can sharply reduce income.
Further, fire suppression depends on the close coordination of two distinct local agency types – fire departments and water agencies – which are governed, funded, and operated very differently. Agency coordination varies widely; informal relationships may work for everyday needs, but often fall short during large-scale emergencies.
Water systems are being asked to do more than they were ever designed to do, without the funding structures to support it
Why It Matters
Water systems must now balance drinking water quality, affordability, and long-term stability, while responding to growing wildfire risks. The experts call for an “all-options” approach, including better coordination, new financing strategies, and investments that improve system resilience, however, it was cautioned that water systems should have a limited role in fighting wildfires.
We need to rethink how we finance resilience so costs and benefits are shared more equitably
What’s Next
Workshop 3: Addressing Post-Fire Challenges with Drinking Water Quality, Public Trust, and Communications will take place in May.
To learn more, read the Workshop 2 summary in Maven’s Notebook and the synthesis report for Workshop 1.
Get our latest research in your inbox.
EXPERTS
- Jennifer Gorman, Graduate Student Researcher
- Gregory Pierce, Senior Director
- Megan Mullin, Faculty Director
- Edith B. de Guzman, Cooperative Extension Specialist
More Fire or Water updates
Blueprint for a better planet
How Luskin Center for Innovation and other parts of UCLA are advancing a healthier, more sustainable future.
Sustainable LA Grand Challenge
Planning for recovery before disaster strikes
Lessons from California’s recent fires and floods
The Luskin Center for Innovation welcomes Jelena Jezdimirovic as a postdoctoral researcher
Learn more about her research.
