The Future of Utility Governance

Governance is not an easy topic to talk about in the water utility world. The mere mention of word governance evokes strong reactions related best and worst aspects utilities regulatory systems that oversee them. America's approximately 50,000 community are regulated under Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), providing a common framework for many treatment quality—this despite differences pertaining system type state primacy agency discretion. These rules apply serve public, regardless ownership model or structure. However, commonalities largely end there. Numerous types exist, broadly divided into publicly privately owned, but with considerable variation nuance both categories. Many functions local governments; others owned by independent authorities organized as form nonprofit organization. There also investor-owned either held have traded parent companies; yet part homeowners associations, military bases, trailer parks, several other models. One study found 26 California alone. Generally, although exceptions, answer economic regulator (such public commission) issues such rate-setting, whereas their governments (city council, board, etc.). present structure complex varied, so what vision future governance? This seemingly simple question generates more questions. First, having viable over long term? entirety United Kingdom (albeit much smaller than States) has only handful systems. Does this highly decentralized management create resilience sustainability, they impeded without economy scale? If up being consolidated, how do we ensure all involved just appropriate arrangement? And customers receive comparable quality service while paying rates will allow meet challenges? Second, one few models eventually emerge above rest? valid pros cons every governance. A successful plan term meeting needs. means investing today's maintenance well necessary infrastructure upgrades, identifying funding sources long-term sustainability. At same time, investment must leave low-income unmanageable bills. no leaders difficult challenge ahead, matter chosen. Third, our working? Despite incredible advances health through SDWA's history, national made strides recent years (see existing primary standards States), continue look new opportunities additional risk reduction (e.g., unregulated contaminant monitoring). great deal effort, money been spent scrutinizing chemical contaminants less health-risk certainty, some efforts abandoned unclear futures (as examples, former push carcinogenic volatile organic compounds regulations perchlorate). Are really focusing on largest threats safety community? Or should be focused on, example, remedying at failure from technical, managerial, financial deficiencies? I first admit answers these questions, likely there single “right” answer. sector need thinking hard questions can work toward answers. AWWA already working experts across adjacent sectors develop might like future, including encourage everyone participate AWWA's 2050 process, which begun, goal unveil ACE 2023. But beginning, it take achieve solutions resulting hands! Adam T. Carpenter manager energy environmental policy Government Affairs Office Washington, D.C. He reached [email protected].