For a Monday late afternoon, the United Methodist Church of North Scottsdale was fairly crowded, with most pews occupied.

Those sitting in rapt attention were advised to pray.

“For rain,” state water guru Rudy Fischer said.

“And snow.”

With massive water cuts expected, the Central Arizona Project board member and North Scottsdale resident had curious advice to his neighbors:

Don’t worry about it.

“We’ll be fine,” he said.

Just the same, he stressed the best thing CAP-reliant Scottsdale can do is to continue cutting its water use.

And, Councilwoman Solange Whitehead – who organized the event – also asked the informal congregation to entreat their leaders.

“Be united and be part of the solution,” Whitehead requested. “And then encourage – we want to encourage our city officials to do the same. Give them the confidence to know that doing the right thing for water is the right thing for them as well.”

Sarah Porter, director of ASU’s Kyl Center for Water Policy, also accepted Whitehead’s invitation to speak at the event. It was billed as “a closer look at the challenges facing Arizona and Scottsdale as Colorado River supplies decline and discuss the steps already being taken to strengthen our water security, the investments our city has made, and the solutions that can help us adapt and thrive.”

Porter shot down a common misconception before reinforcing a common fear.

“We are using less water now than we did in the Eighties and the Nineties … population growth is not the problem here,” Porter said.

But …

“We need to prepare. We in central Arizona, need to prepare for cuts of Colorado River water as much as 80%.”

The root of the problem is Colorado’s decades-long decline in rain – and, crucially, snow.

The frightening fall of Colorado lakes and rivers that quench Arizona’s thirst combines with an expiring agreement between seven states, with a federal ruling expected in the next few months.

Since roughly two-thirds of Scottsdale’s water comes from the CAP system, which in turn comes from Colorado – the city is almost destined to have a massive cut in its water supply.

Whitehead said Scottsdale “has more reliance on the Colorado River than any other city in the state. So that’s sort of the bad news. The good news is we’ve been planning for this for decades, and we have a strategic plan.”

The city and state, she stressed, “have the wherewithal, we have the knowledge to overcome this current water challenge. We can come out stronger where we better manage this precious resource.”

Then came a big, politically-charged “but”….

Whitehead, who is running for reelection, called out City Manager Greg Caton for attempting to backtrack on Scottsdale Water’s long-term plan.

“We have a strategic plan that was written by experts and approved by a council. We need to stick with the plan,” Whitehead proclaimed. “ … But we have a new city management.”

While not directly pointing the finger at Caton, Whitehead noted in the last two years “we’ve lost about 300 years of institutional knowledge citywide … we’ve also lost the top technical experts at the city water department.”

Whitehead then indirectly lowered the boom on Caton, who recently unveiled his 2026-27 budget plan.

“The City Council is now reviewing a budget that has defunded two out of four of the critical water projects we need,” Whitehead said.

“The city manager by not funding these projects in the budget has changed the policy.”

She later clarified she was referring to Scottsdale’s Advanced Purified Recycled Water (APRW) system and the Bartlett Dam Expansion project.

One of her slides showed four options for Scottsdale “long-term water solutions”: APRW projects in Scottsdale and Phoenix; the Bartlett Dam Expansion Project and Harquahala Valley water.

Last month, Whitehead told the Progress she was alarmed by “the city manager’s statement about APRW not being part of our long-term plan.”

For decades, Scottsdale has been a leader in “recycled water,” filtering and treating sewer water for use on golf courses and in storage.

Before Caton took over as city manager last year, Scottsdale Water had planned to mix treated, “purified” sewer water into the city’s drinking water system. 

New state requirements delayed that system – and Caton has insisted the current City Council must approve moving ahead on APRW, also referred to as Advanced Water Purification (AWP).

But, Whitehead preached at the church: “This is not the time to defund the city water projects we have planned for (projecting) a 30% cut.”

The water plan

Via Holly Peralta, a city spokeswoman, Caton responded to a Progress inquiry the day after the water event.

Whitehead’s commentary “is not an accurate reflection of the situation,” Peralta said.

As for Whitehead’s alarm that Caton is backing away from the city’s sewage water treatment – sometimes referred to as “toilets to taps” – project, Peralta referred to the “Source and Supply” line item in the proposed 2027-28 budget and in Caton’s proposed five-year plan)

That, Caton’s spokeswoman said, “could be acquisition of new water rights or implementation of Advanced Water Purification.”

She added city staff is working on “a study evaluating capital and operating costs associated with AWP.” A report to City Council is  expected “over the next 6-9 months with our analysis and recommendations. 

“Arizona Department of Environmental Quality has established rules that may change related to AWP, so that will need to factor into our analysis for implementation,” Peralta added. 

“This is new and emerging technology that we are preparing to implement once the rules are finalized and we receive City Council approval to move forward.”

Peralta said Whitehead’s view of the city backing away from the Bartlett Dam expansion was also inaccurate.

“The city remains committed – with funding – and is an active participant in the feasibility study for Bartlett Dam,” Peralta said. “The funding has simply moved from the capital budget to the operating budget.”

One of Scottsdale’s long-term options is being a part of the Bartlett Dam expansion, planned to capture more water.

A “feasibility study” is scheduled to last another four years, with potential construction aimed at by around 2040 – if funding for the $3-4 billion project is secured.

Peralta insisted “Scottsdale has made steady, measured investments alongside regional partners” on the dam project.

From 2022 through 2025, Scottsdale contributed $100,000 annually toward the study. Beginning in 2026, that contribution increases to $144,000 per year, continuing through 2027, Peralta noted.

“These incremental investments reflect Scottsdale’s strategic approach—maintaining a relatively low-cost entry into the project while preserving the ability to evaluate long-term benefits before any larger capital commitments are considered,” she said.

She noted Scottsdale is one of 20 partners “evaluating participation in the Bartlett Dam Expansion, a project currently estimated at approximately $3.6 billion.”

“… Any future investment by Scottsdale would be directly tied to the level of benefit the city chooses to secure—specifically, the amount of additional water storage and reliability it elects to participate in.”

Despite the expense, Peralta called the dam expansion project “a practical, forward-looking step … Unlike more complex or costly alternatives such as desalination or large-scale importation, the expansion represents a relatively efficient investment in existing infrastructure, delivering meaningful new supply with lower risk and faster implementation.”

Any formal presentations on Scottsdale’s water picture coming?

“At this time, there is no water portfolio overview presentation scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting,” Peralta said. “That said, city staff regularly and proactively keeps Council informed of emerging water-related information as needed.”

Additionally, she noted, the city’s General Plan annual report “provides a full overview of the water portfolio and long-term planning efforts.”

‘Cuts are coming’

Whitehead was unconvinced by Caton’s response.

“I believe the city manager has overstepped his authority by overriding a Council-approved Strategic Plan – one designed to deliver Scottsdale’s most cost-effective and reliable new water source: Advanced Purified Recycled Water,” Whitehead told the Progress.

“That should concern all of us.”

And, the veteran councilwoman added, “just funding a feasibility study for Bartlett Dam does not secure water – disciplined investment to pay for infrastructure is needed to secure future water.”

In other words, she wants the city to put the money where the spigot is.

“Water cuts are coming,” Whitehead warned. “Our responsibility is to plan for the worst case while diligently working towards the best for our residents.”

With a frown directed at her council colleagues who belittle the recycled water program, Whitehead noted, “Scottsdale has a plan to keep our water flowing – let’s not let politics get in the way.”

Caton’s new budget, Whitehead concluded, “cut funding for hundreds of millions in critical infrastructure, including water projects, to create the illusion of savings. 

“This is a costly mistake.”