Gilroy garnered 15.33 inches of rain this year, only a couple inches less than normal, but Gov. Schwarzenegger hath declared it: we are officially experiencing a drought. We are being bombarded with tips on how to save water, most of which I practice reflexively, compulsively, even in January when rain tumbles from the sky. (I admit that I never use commercial car washes, though. Instead, on the rare occasions when I wash my car, I park on the lawn to simultaneously wash the car and irrigate. But I digress.)

Put these data together: the state is officially experiencing a drought. Santa Clara Valley Water District, that bloated exemplar of inefficient bureaucracy run amok, is raising water rates. And landowner Luke Brugnara is offering to sell the city half of the water we need at a price that would save us a collective $1.3 million for the year.

The proposal seems like, not merely a win-win, but a win-win-win-win situation. Mr. Brugnara would make some money. Gilroy residents would save money. So would the city. And even SCVWD would be able to save water for its northern customers. Some questions have already been answered, at least to my satisfaction.

The plan appears to be legal; Mr. Brugnara apparently has water rights dating back to the last century. And since we would still be getting about half of our water from SCVWD, it seems that they would not have any excuse for refusing to sell us more in the future, should Mr. Brugnara's reservoir become depleted. We would not be dissolving service with the water district, just using less water.

Two questions plague me. First, is the water safe? This is relatively easy to ascertain. And, closely related, how exactly is this going to work? As I understand it, Gilroy's water supply comes from a subterranean aquifer. The water is pumped out of city-owned wells. The aquifer slowly fills during good rain winters, and is rapidly depleted during summers and droughts. The aquifer is replenished by water released from area reservoirs, most notably, for Gilroy, from Uvas Reservoir. By the way, as I drove past Uvas Reservoir last week, I saw 11 wild turkeys, mostly young females, wending their way up the hillside, and two deer drinking from the verge. This was at noon, when most wildlife is bedded down for the day.

The reservoir is still high, not at March levels, to be sure, but looking very good for mid-June. I remember years when cracked mud plastered the bottom of Uvas and Coyote Reservoirs by June. So, how exactly does the status quo work? Do I understand correctly that we pay the water district for all water pumped out of the aquifer by city pumps? Or do we only pay for water released into Uvas and other creeks by the water district? Would we be paying Mr. Brugnara for groundwater going straight from his reservoir into city treatment facilities? Or paying him to discharge water into Little Arthur Creek, to recharge the aquifer so we could pump water out with ever more expensive diesel fuel? Does the water district get paid for water they release into our aquifer, or for water we pump out? If the former, it will be relatively simple to pay the water district only for the diminished quantity of water they release into the aquifer. If the latter, I really cannot envision SCVWD agreeing that they should only get paid half of what they used to get because Mr. Brugnara is recharging half the aquifer.

SCVWD has a history of mismanagement and waste and greed. The latest rate hike will mean that water rates have nearly doubled in seven years. I cannot imagine that they will be reasonable about us seeking to buy water elsewhere. Not even in a drought year.

Cynthia Walker Cynthia Anne Walker is a homeschooling mother of three and former engineer. She is a published independent author. Her column is published in The Dispatch every Friday.