Civil War (again) at MWD

MWD's water allocation formula [prior post] is challenged by one member agency:

An agency that supplies water to 2 million residents of southeast Los Angeles County has filed suit to overturn a new Southern California drought plan, saying it inequitably allocates water and "robs from the poor to pay the cost of new development in more affluent areas."

[snip]

The lawsuit contends that the plan, championed by Los Angeles, San Diego and Inland Empire cities, unfairly penalizes the Central Basin's lower-income, largely Latino communities while benefiting growing inland areas.

The plan would deliver water unfairly "by giving 'cheap' water to growing, more affluent water districts and communities, at the expense of poorer water districts and communities," the complaint says.

Bottom Line: There will always be winners and losers with formulas because they put too much weight on one thing and not enough on another -- depending on where you sit. Notice that nobody complains about allocation of gas, coffee shops, Lexus cars, etc. That's because those are allocated by supply and demand. Water allocation by markets would not have winners and losers -- if done as I suggest here.