Equity of Domestic Water Access a Case Study of Walla Walla Washington

Equity of Domestic Water Access: A Case Study of Walla Walla, Washington A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in Sociology-Environmental Studies. 2020 ii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 REVIEW OF THEORY AND LITERATURE .................................................................. 4 Environmental Justice: A Combination of Frameworks ................................................. 4 Conflict Theory: Growth, Resources, Dense Connections ............................................. 6 How to Think of Water? ............................................................................................... 10 Governance and Planning, Unequal Access ................................................................. 12 WALLA WALLA’S CONTEXT ..................................................................................... 18 Trends and Growth in Walla Walla .............................................................................. 18 Walla Walla’s Water System ........................................................................................ 20 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 22 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................. 25 FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................ 27 Water and Utility Rates ................................................................................................. 29 Growth .......................................................................................................................... 31 Wastewater, wine, beer, and juice ............................................................................. 32 Housing ...................................................................................................................... 33 Communication ............................................................................................................. 35 Intergovernmental communication ............................................................................ 36 Nonprofit communication.......................................................................................... 39 Public communication ............................................................................................... 41 Schlosberg’s Justices .................................................................................................... 45 Distributional justice.................................................................................................. 45 Procedural justice ...................................................................................................... 46 Recognition Justice .................................................................................................... 46 Conceptions of Water and Equity ................................................................................. 48 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 53 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 57 Appendix A ....................................................................................................................... 60 Appendix B ....................................................................................................................... 62 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 63 iii iv Introduction This thesis sets out to investigate how domestic water access operates as an environmental justice issue in the rural setting of Walla Walla, Washingotn. Equity of domestic water access may be an issue in Walla Walla case for a two reasons: Walla Walla has undergone and is undergoing large water related projects (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016; Go Walla Walla.us 2015) and the city is expanding, annexing land as it does so. As Lichter et al. have discussed, rural annexation can often “be a political tool used by municipal leaders to exclude disadvantaged or low-income populations, including minorities...from receiving access to public utilities and other community services” (2007:48) Understanding how Walla Walla’s annexation is operating along with its already established systems of distribution is crucial to determining if and how inequity exists. Specifically, I investigated how (changes to) infrastructure and policy have affected equitable access to domestic water in Walla Walla. I am defining equitable water access using the definition laid out by the recently released report from Dig Deep and the US Water Alliance; equitable access refers to safe, acceptable, accessible, and affordable access to water (2019:13). Additionally, I assert that equitable access accounts for differing needs and abilities of communities within a given locality, with an emphasis on race and class divisions. I chose this topic because I want to understand if there are structural inequities that limit the ability of residents to access water, a vital resource for both individual and community health. Additionally, this study is intended to help my readers understand where such inequities may lie and how they are constructed, which will allow them to mobilize resources in order to address said inequity. The field of environmental sociology can be conceptualized as “the study of how social systems interact with ecosystems” (Gould and Lewis 2015:3). While the field is looking at how these two realms interact, it is important to recognize that environmental sociology is grounded within sociology, applying a sociological lens to points of interaction between social and ecological systems (Gould and Lewis 2015:4). This thesis follows in the footsteps of the environmental sociology tradition and contributes to the discipline through its focus on distribution and access to a natural resource in a contemporary setting. Water equity falls into these bounds as it is a natural resource which has been manipulated and distributed by human systems, which are constructed, evaluated, and refined through deliberation and decision making processes, and influenced by institutional structures, power structures, and the perceptions of individuals. Walla Walla is a particularly salient location to focus on due to its recent and continual growth as a tourist destination (Walla Walla Trends 2018a; 2019a; 2019b, Visit Walla Walla 2016; 2018) and its unique water situation (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016). Gaining a better understanding of how growing and changing rural communities deal with providing water to their residents is key to navigating an increasingly water stressed and complex future. This thesis is organized into multiple sections. It begins with an introduction, followed by a review of relevant theory and literature which are grouped in subheadings. This begins with broader theoretical frameworks, eventually transitioning into a review of contemporary research on water and governance. Next comes contextual information on Walla Walla’s growth and water system, followed by a description of my research 2 methods and their limitations. Finally, my findings are reviewed and analyzed, followed by a discussion and conclusion section. 3 REVIEW OF THEORY AND LITERATURE Environmental Justice: A Combination of Frameworks Environmental justice at its most broad extent strives for equity in the process of environmental lawmaking and protection, as well as the distribution of environmental burden. Access to in-home potable water certainly falls within these bounds and has been the concern of much environmental justice work for decades. To situate my research, I will be drawing from multiple environmental justice frameworks, as a combination of different yet interrelated conceptions provides a nuanced and strong approach in creating a theoretical base and conceptual frame. Firstly, I am drawing from Schlosberg’s (2007) four conceptions of justice – distributional, recognition, procedural, and capabilities. Schlosberg highlights the importance of “combining numerous concerns into a broad and multi-faceted approach to justice” (2007:11) and not simply focusing on or giving primacy to purely distributive theories of justice, as distributive theories don’t reveal or examine what causes poor distribution. Distribution under Schlosberg is seen as the outcome, as opposed to the process or framework itself – distributive justice cannot be achieved without the presence of the other three. Recognition justice centers around (an absence of) “recognition in the social and political realms” (Schlosberg 2007:14); in short, who’s voices are counted and seen as part of society. Schlosberg breaks this down into psychological recognition – an interpersonal approach looking at “insults, degradation, and devaluation” (2007:18) occurring on cultural and individual levels – and status recognition – “a structural understanding” of how misrecognition operates institutionally via cultural domination, nonrecognition, and disrespect via stereotypes (2007:18). Recognition justice is deeply 4 connected with issues of class, racism, and stratification – all issues that are not easily addressed, making clear that the struggle for justice is a constantly ongoing process that is not simply achieved through performative means or mere legislative action. Procedural justice is concerned with fair and equitable processes via the state or an institution, with a focus on the political process and power to address distribution, recognition, and other injustices (Schlosberg 2007:25). When one does not receive respect, recognition, and equitable distribution, “real participation in political and cultural institutions” greatly decline (Schlosberg 2007:28). A lack of procedural justice also manifests through structures and rules that prevent everyone from having a voice during deliberation, and additionally shapes how groups are (not) seen as part of society. Lastly comes capabilities justice, which assesses “a person’s opportunities to do and to be what they choose in the context of a given society”, with a focus “on individual agency, functioning, and well-being” (Schlosberg 2007:30). While capabilities justice would be lacking if inequitable water access is present in Walla Walla, it is not as relevant to my research as recognition and procedural justice are; I am not focusing as much on the effects of inequitable access as opposed to how inequity (if it is present) has come to be. Secondly, I am using Bullard’s environmental justice framework to incorporate the precautionary principle which “states that, before you undertake an action, if you have reasonable suspicion that harm may result from it, and if there is scientific uncertainty about it, then you have a duty to act to prevent harm” (2005:28). A key addition to the precautionary principle is moving the burden of proof with regards to safety onto those “whose activities raised the suspicion of harm in the first place” 5 (Bullard 2005: 28) – in terms of my research, water managers, city employees, government officials, and industry that has the potential to affect water access. Bullard also highlights how the environmental justice movement has redefined the “term ‘environment’ to include the places where people live work, play, and go to school…[and] how these things interact with the physical and natural world” (2005:30). This definition is especially important when looking at the issue of water supply, as it quite literally defined by the intersection of built infrastructure with the natural world. The combination of these environmental justice frameworks serve as a lens through which this research can be viewed. I am concerned with equity and access to domestic water, and the presence or absence of equity and the actions that create these conditions can be partially understood through the concepts laid out above. These frameworks may also be used to conceive of recommendations for areas where policy needs to be created or updated based on a lack of representative or participatory mechanisms. Conflict Theory: Growth, Resources, Dense Connections Like environmental justice, conflict theory is a very large field that encompasses many areas of action and literature. In short, conflict theory is concerned with inequality, how resources are distributed, and the balance of power within society, all which factor into how water is accessed in the home. Within the tradition of conflict theory, Zwatarveen and Boelens outline central concepts when engaging in water justice research and action. They begin their work with a statement on the function of power and politics: 6 power and politics are everywhere, and not confined to the formally designated realms of decision making and official political areas. Nor is power expressed only in explicit laws, rules and hierarchies – it is also expressed through less visible norms that often present themselves as natural or inevitable. (2014:144) They further frame their work through the concept of “hyrdrosocial networks’” (2014:144), an understanding of nature, technology, and society as mutually constituted and interrelated. This meshes well with Bullard’s (2005) work, emphasizing the expansive and interrelated definition of ‘environment’ or ‘natural’ while also stressing the two-way characteristic of human interactions with the world and water. Zwartaveen and Boelens further describe water “is an intrinsically contested resource…[with] four main echelons of water contestation” (2014:149-50): distribution of water, “the contents of rules, norms, and laws that determine water distribution and allocation” (2014:150), conflict over who has authority and visibility regarding water decisions, and “the discourses used to articulate water problems and solutions” (2014:150). These ‘echelons’ compliment and focus Schlosberg’s work regarding justice, combining his concepts with a more explicit emphasis on water. In terms of my research, they point to areas where an absence of equity and accessibility may appear and the forms that these absences may take (i.e. language used by water engineers, water utility regulations, physical infrastructure). Finally, water allocation and management are identified as “[belonging] in the domain of the ‘unordered’, where decisions are based on power, perception, and situated perspectives and understanding” (Zwartaveen and Boelens 2014:150). Such an understanding of water is particularly important to my research as what I can observe and understand, as well as what different residents and employees of Walla 7 Walla can observe and understand, will only represent one of many facets comprising the hydrosocial network that Walla Walla belongs to. It also provides an additional explanation for how harmful processes or actions can take place, as decisions can be made from specific subjectivities within a variety of power dynamics; such a dense and multifaceted understanding of water and water related decision making renders clear that operating with ‘blinders’ or a limited understandings of the hydrosocial network is a very real possibility for both policymakers and constituents. Dovetailing with Zwartaveen and Boelens (2014) is the writing of Harvey Molotch, focusing on growth as the “political and economic essence of virtually any given locality” (1976:309-10) in America. Growth, Molotch argues, provides a common ground for “politically mobilized local elites” (1976:310) – often belonging elite/upper class due to land possession – and those “who have the resources to make their caring felt as a political force” (1976:310). Furthermore, growth operates as the dominant constraining force upon local action regarding economic or political reform (1976:310). These elite and resource-rich individuals will then organize in various “land-use interest groups” which compete for public money and guiding power over land use decisions, with local government being stage for this struggle (1976:312). Here the effort to affect the distribution of growth becomes “the essence of local government as a dynamic political force” (1976:312). Molotch further informs this position through the work of Murray Edelman by proposing that the “politics of distribution” – deciding who, in a material sense, is getting what and where/how this happens – takes place in largely unseen or hidden settings such as closed door committees or meetings (1976:313). This type of politics can be contextualized through Schlosberg’s justices and can further 8 explain how inequity of water access can be produced through policy. Underpinning this process is the constant maintenance of the “’business climate’ that attracts industry: for example, favorable taxation, vocational training, law enforcement, and ‘good’ labor relations” (Molotch 1976:312). While Molotch identifies the formation of previously mentioned “land-use interest groups” (1976:312) in the push towards/imperative of growth, he gets more specific through the concept of “growth ‘statesmen’” (1976:18). These statesmen can be found in semi-public institutions and agencies – including utilities – and mobilize public sentiments without letting distributive issues become part of local discussions. Growth is often not as financially advantageous to taxpayers as is believed or touted and is also kept out of discussion (Molotch 1976:318-19). These understandings of growth within localities can guide my research similarly to how Zwartaveen and Boelens (2014) will; by identifying actors such as the growth statesmen and land-owning elites, and concepts such as the eclipsing power of growth as a local issue and the hidden nature of distributional politics, Molotch provides potential sites and mechanisms/attitudes/politics that can produce inequitable access to domestic water. One can specifically think of how investments or political decisions regarding the budding tourism industry (Walla Walla Trends 2019a; 2019b; Visit Walla Walla 2016; 2018) of Walla Walla could potentially stifle a push for more reliable water provision to low-income residents and/or mobilize landed elites to exert political pressure on policymakers. 9 How to Think of Water? Integral to any discussion about water is how one understands it’s being and how this being has changed over time. Daniel Jaffee and Soren Newman’s work on bottled water and commodification begins to shed some light on what this change looks like. Water as a resource has been conceived of as a public good and as something that is included with citizenship for many years (Jaffee and Newman 2012:130). However, this conception of a public good or commons is not compatible with neoliberal ideology, which emphases the importance of the individual and the market with a focus on privatization, deregulation, and a belief in competition as breeding the best outcome for society. An increase in neoliberal policy since the 1980’s (Castro 2007:12) has effectively suppressed the conception of water as a public good or commons. The Dublin Statement and Principles of 1992 is an influential document indicative of such a shift; it frames water as having an economic value and claims that it should be identified as an economic good (Jaffee and Newman 2012:130). Since then, a slew of actors (water firms, utilities, states and federal governments) have begun to frame water in an economic way, foregoing the notion of water as a public good or a resource that everyone is entitled to (Jaffee and Newman 2012:130). Part of and parallel to the growing strength of neoliberal framing is the process of accumulation by dispossession, whereby previously public or inaccessible resource enters the market through commodification and control (Jaffee and Newman 2012:319). The neoliberalization and commodification of water makes it much easier to justify or produce conditions where one does not have access to water in their home; if water is 10 treated like a purchasable consumer good, like a TV or car, then a lack of funds is perfectly acceptable criteria to deny access to domestic water. Here we can turn to José Esteban Castro for a valuable qualifier to this conceptual transformation: In particular, the process of transforming the status of [water supply and sanitation services] from public or social goods into marketable commodities and cancelling the rights of citizens by reducing their role to mere consumers is taking place independently of the public or private character of the providers. (2007:114) This is particularly important as many discussions of neoliberal policy and theory related to water focus on extreme and highly visible cases, such as Nestlé’s extraction of water in California or the proliferation of private water companies in South America. What Castro is making clear to us is that there need not be a massive multi-national corporation or foreign government present to continue the shift towards market-based thought and citizens-as-consumers; it is happening all around us, nearly everywhere. This rise of the citizen-as-consumer can make it easier to ignore or conceptually reduce the severity of unreliable access to domestic water, as describing those without water in terms of consumption reduces their humanity. However, we need not despair and resign ourselves to the forces of neoliberalism – Vandana Shiva makes this clear through an alternate framing found in her nine principles for water democracy (2001). Most relevant to my research are principles one, four and seven. Principle one states that “water is nature’s gift” (Shiva 2001: 35), implying that we all have an equal right to access water; it is a gift given to humanity, not to specific people or groups. Principle four states that “water must be free for sustenance needs” (Shiva 2001:35) which combats the idea of water as a commodity that must be 11 paid for regardless of use, while also working against the neoliberal transformation of water. It can additionally lead us to conclude that government (local, state, or federal) should shoulder or at the very least assist greatly with the costs and resources needed to access water for sustenance. Alternatively, we can conclude that there should be structures in place (reduced work and school days for example) that allow for citizens to come together and work towards providing and expanding access to water. Principle seven states that “water is a commons” (Shiva 2001: 35-6), reinforcing the notion that water is not for sale, and not to be accumulated through dispossession – we all have a right and duty to share water. When examining Walla Walla’s provision of domestic water, findings can put up against both Shiva’s principles and neoliberal concepts in order to contextualize where limits and problems may be coming from, or to highlight particularly strong and equitable policy that is already present. Governance and Planning, Unequal Access While establishing the theory and history surrounding conceptions of water and environmental justice is important, addressing how planning and governance operate in a contemporary setting – beyond the work of Molotch (1976) – is necessary, as localities do not operate in a vacuum; they interface with other systems at both smaller and larger scales. Balzas and Ray (2014) elucidate this through their drinking water disparities framework, developed from the results of a five-year field study in the San Joaquin valley. While they are approaching water from a standpoint of social epidemiology, their framework can be used to understand how equity of access operates. The central characteristic of this framework is its multi-level structure of actors (state, county, 12 community, and households) that interact through different factors (e.g. water infrastructure, social vulnerability, land use) across three environments (natural, built, and sociopolitical) on three scales (regional, community, and household) (Balzas and Ray 2014:605). This intertwined structure “[emphasizes] the role of historical and structural factors, and [traces] the mechanisms through which these lead to…disparities” (Balzas and Ray 2014:604). Within the framework, “structural factors are not deterministic…communities and individuals exercise agency within the structures that constrain them” (Balzas and Ray 2014:604). Zwartaveen and Boelens (2014) show us that water is greatly mixed up with power and the ‘unordered’, but Balzas and Ray provide a more structured and agentive perspective with which to approach issues of equitable access and emphasize the dense connections between community, county, and state that will inevitably be present throughout my research. A study from 2015 on collaborative water governance in coastal California integrates many of the concepts outlined in the previous sections and ultimately reveals the difficulties and limits to collaborative approaches to water governance, a strategy often deployed to combat water issues (Brown et al.) – especially when operating in the tradition of Schlosberg (2007). The authors make the crucial point that “participatory and collaborative groups are rarely evaluated to discern power dynamics or, explicitly, processes of exclusion” (Brown et al. 2015:8); we must retain our critical lens when approaching water problems, as even solutions that seem to be embodying ‘the right way forward’ may produce or re-produce the very issues we set out to address. The main findings from Brown et al. include stakeholders leaving the group based on limited 13 comfort, trust and resources (2015:9), stakeholders not joining in the first place due to the same factors (2015: 9), and a dominating presence of large scale farms (2015). It was also observed that Hispanic and Latino farmworkers are not involved in participatory or collaborative groups due to constraints on time and resources as well as language barriers (Brown et al. 2015). Overall, the authors conclude that there is a need for “increased comprehension of social processes that result in group unawareness, limited trust, and lack of resources” (Brown et al. 2015: 13), and that using seasoned facilitators and emphasizing empowerment once the actual need for collaborative governance is assessed will reduce pitfalls (Brown et al. 2015:13). Public meetings and hearings can be an alternative to a strictly collaborative approach but can still have similar issues. Eric Kojola’s (2019) study of decision making processes, participatory work, and indigeneity surrounding resource extraction in Minnesota found a variety of barriers and problems with public meetings and hearings; these include highly limited speaking time with no follow-up discussion, logistical difficulties preventing marginalized communities from participating, and an underlying bureaucratic/technical ideology restricting political or moral arguments (Kojola 2019:137). Such problematizing of participatory processes further informs my critical lens which can be used to examine established channels of participation in Walla Walla’s water decisions, and is particularly relevant due to the non-white population in the county (U.S. Department of Commerce 2017). Coming back to Castro (2007), he emphasizes how systemic conditions “such as structural social inequalities” (2007:108) can affect water and sanitation services. Many systemic conditions reside outside of water and sanitation services, but they can “shape, 14 constrain, and even determine how these services are organized” (Castro 2007:109). Even though developing nations are often the focus of such discussions around water and sanitation services, the impacts of these conditions can still “[preclude] a significant proportion of the population from reliable and regular access to [water and sanitation services]” (Castro 2007:110). How problems are framed by municipal planners and government can also (re)produce unequal access. Reinforcing the work of Castro, Kojola notes that presentation of “environmental problems as technical issues” (2019:133) to be dealt with by experts and technical/scientific knowledge can ignore underlying ideological and structural causes. In addition, Kojola found that environmental justice issues were often left out of public hearings and official documents (2019:133). These findings point to specific actions, policies, and logics that lead to injustice in the domain of water, once again providing a guiding hand and context to my policy-oriented research. A recent metanalysis of case studies looking at intermittent domestic water supply across the globe has identified many causes and consequences of unrealizable domestic water access (Galasti et al. 2016). Listing all the cause-consequence pathways relevant to my research would be excessive; regardless, these pathways reinforce the ideas that development, construction projects, political misunderstanding of progress indicators, poorly targeted policy, and not believing that poor residents are willing to pay can produce inequity of access (Galasti et al. 2016:5-8). This information can be helpful in identifying what types of infrastructural conditions and decision making can create or reinforce inequitable access to water. Like many of the other authors, Galasti et al. note how nebulous the problem of intermittent and inequitable access can be (2016:14). 15 Recent literature also provides an understanding of how water managers approach problems within water systems. Baehler and Biddle (2018) conducted interviews and ran focus groups with twenty-two water utility managers within the United States with emphasis on “pressures, challenges, and opportunities facing their organizations and communities” (2018:24). The authors were primarily interested with how water utility managers navigate transitional periods within water systems and how some socialecological systems support adaptability and transformability better than others (Baehler and Biddle 2018). Walla Walla has gone through and is currently going through somewhat of a transitional or transformative process, with an ongoing effort to replace aging infrastructure and large updates to the water treatment process (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016; Go Walla Walla.us 2015) operating alongside a growing tourism and business climate (Walla Walla trends 2018a; 2019a; 2019b; Visit Walla Walla 2016; 2018). Baehler and Biddle note that there can often be divergence between the reality of water systems and managerial aspirations due to “the stickiness of management processes and institutions” (2018:24) that are institutionalized in good faith, but remain in place for too long to the point of harm. This is important to look for when examining the history of water policy in Walla Walla and whether appropriate updates have occurred, and how (if at all) resistance to change has operated. Through their qualitative work Bahler and Biddle uncover a divide and at times an opposition between water managers, the public, and local politicians. Many interviewees state that gaining public support for maintenance and upgrades is difficult; underlying this difficulty is the belief that people “‘don’t want to pay, and don’t understand, the real cost of water’” (Baehler and Biddle 2018:27). Additionally, a general 16 frustration with local politics, officials and what some interviewees felt was an aversion to making unpopular political moves to provide funding was widely expressed (Baehler and Biddle 2018:27). There was a shared agreement that transparency and building public support is important, but some interviewees felt that communication was a chore (Baehler and Biddle 2018:27-8). Challenges specific to smaller towns were discussed, including a “lack of redundancy, difficulties raising capital, and small-town rivalries that stifle cooperation” (Bahler and Biddle 2018:27). While collaboration with transit and roads departments was common, there was no talk about “real power-sharing of the type that would require commitments from utility leaders or public officials” beyond listening (Baehler and Biddle 2018:30). Lastly, the authors note that there was an absence of any discussion related to equity and social justice; “it is difficult to speculate responsibly” on this absence (Baehler and Biddle 2018:33). Although these results cannot necessarily be generalized to all water managers in the United States, including Walla Walla, they do point to areas of questioning and discussion that will be helpful for my research – collaboration, communication, rivalry, and relationships with the public, politicians and elected officials. 17 WALLA WALLA’S CONTEXT Trends and Growth in Walla Walla As mentioned prior, growth can be an important factor in decisions that can affect water access. Walla Walla is and has been in a period of growth; this can be understood through data from Walla Walla Trends, a website run by Eastern Washington University’s Institute for Public Policy and Economic Analysis which collects and visualizes a wide variety of data pertaining to civic life in Walla Walla. In recent years Walla Walla has seen an increase in both tourism in business inquiries. Since 2000, direct spending per capita on tourism and travel has increased nearly threefold from fifty-seven million dollars to 150 million dollars as of 2018 (Walla Walla Trends 2019a). Since 2010, this spending has increased by fifty-six million dollars alone (Walla Walla Trends 2019a). Visit Walla Walla has had no small part in this continued growth – their 2016 annual report covers the extensive marketing effort gone into promoting Walla Walla as a tourism destination (Visit Walla Walla 2016). The 2018 annual report, albeit much less detailed, shows a continued push and increase in promotion and marketing (Visit Walla Walla 2018). The Walla Walla trends newsletter for quarter four of 2018 sheds light on business growth, stating that staff at the Port of Walla Walla: fielded well over 30 valid potential business leads from site selectors and/or businesses…obviously not all these business leads will call Walla Walla County home, however, it’s important to understand that 20 was a strong a year for private businesses looking for expansion opportunities here in Walla Walla, Washington. (Walla Walla Trends 2018a:1) 18 These trends link directly into Molotch (1976), reinforcing the notion that growth may be diverting resources and attention away from Walla Walla’s water system, or that growth may be leading to increased stress on the system. With new growth can come new attention from individuals looking for a second home, a vacation, or to rent property to out of town visitors. A large part of Walla Walla’s growth as a tourist destination has been due to the wine industry; looking again to Walla Walla Trends, one can see the large growth of wine production and wineries in the region (Walla Walla Trends 2018b; 2018c). While enjoying wine is not inherently expensive activity – one can often find cheap tastings and bottles to purchase – wineries can attract wealthier customers and be considered as a draw to move or buy a second home in town. In 2016, the Union Bulletin reported on a rapidly growing rental market in Walla Walla (Hillhouse 2016), which was followed by a ban on new non-owner-occupied short-term rentals in 2018 (City of Walla Walla Development Services 2018). This trajectory lines up with literature on amenity migration, defined as “the movement of people based on the draw of natural and/or cultural amenities” which can result in a multitude of shifts, among them changes in the “socioeconomic dynamics of rural communities” (Abrams and Gosnell 2009:303). In their review, Gosnell and Abrams state that amenity migration “can be thought of as both driver and outcome of [rural transition]”, which can include “the displacement of local households through increases in the cost of living and home prices” (2009:308). This process could increase water bill costs through wastewater plant upgrades (covered in the findings section) or could indirectly lead to residents struggling to pay for utilities due to an overall increase in the cost of living. The resultant increase to cost of living and the hardships that come 19 with it are well documented by Jennifer Sherman in her study on amenity migration in eastern Washington (2018). Walla Walla’s Water System Walla Walla obtains its water from within the Mill Creek Watershed, drawing directly Mill Creek itself at an intake site about 14 miles away. The Army Corps of Engineers operates a flood control dam on the creek, which can divert water into Bennington Lake during high flows. All systems involved with providing water to residents are owned by the town. The town also has seven deep wells maintained through the Aquifer Storage and Recovery program as secondary source to be used in times of high flow or high demand, if the intake pipe is damaged, or when stream levels must be sustained to serve fish (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016:2-3). Water is diverted from the watershed and run through the city’s water treatment facility, capable of treating 24 million gallons of water per day. Water is treated using a biological process as well as grit removal, aeration, two levels of clarification, sand filtration, and UV disinfection before being delivered to the city (City of Walla Walla Public Works Division). This covers about 80% -90% of the city’s water needs (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016:2). As of 2016, 91 out of 191 miles of water piping in the city were facing failure, resulting in an estimated one billion gallons lost per year – about three times more than what is allowed by the state of Washington (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016:5-6). What failure looked like was not explicitly defined in the relevant documents, but it appeared to imply heavy leakage or damage resulting in drastically 20 reduced function. At this point in time there were “160 miles of failing infrastructure systems in the City” and “43 miles where the water, sewer, and streets [were] failing in the same locations” (City of Walla Walla 2018b:2). To address this, the city began the Infrastructure Repair and Replacement Program (IRRP) in 2010 to address the locations where water, sewer, and streets were all failing. In order to fund the IRRP program, a “six-year stepped utility rate increase” was adopted (City of Walla Walla 2019:28). This generates “approximately $5.1M per year” which “translates into approximately 1.3 linear miles of infrastructure (water, sewer, street) replaced per year” (City of Walla Walla 2019:28). At the end of 2018, 8.3 miles of infrastructure replacement had been completed with about 34.7 miles remaining (City of Walla Walla 2018b:2). This puts the time to fully complete IRRP repairs at about 26 years. The other 48 miles will be funded through a separate program that is expected to replace piping at about 0.6 miles per year, taking 145 years to fully replace the non-IRRP eligible piping (City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division 2016:4). There was no information on the previously cited document regarding the rational for such a drawn-out timeline. I did not find any information for the timeline of non-IRRP funded pipe replacement outside of the source from 2016 cited above. 21 METHODOLOGY For my research I decided to use a mixed methods approach, as water in an inherently complex subject that requires more than one perspective (Babbie 2013:28889). My data collection consisted of semi-structured qualitative interviews along with content analysis of interview transcripts and documents pertaining to Walla Walla’s water policy and infrastructure. I interviewed six individuals who were involved in local government and nonprofits and collected a variety of documents pertaining to Walla Walla’s water system, water policy, infrastructure projects, and its continued growth as a tourist destination. These documents included Walla Walla’s water system plan, Walla Walla’s comprehensive plan, and annual reports from the Port of Walla Walla. Talking to key actors and reviewing a variety of information sources reveals the technical side of water, while also providing a window into how decision making occurs, the logics behind it, potential conflicts, issues and disagreements surrounding water. All documents and participants were selected via purposive sampling. Participants were identified and contacted by using publicly available email addresses and information found within various parts of the Walla Walla governments website and the websites of local assistance organizations. I selected participants based on their proximity to decisions around infrastructure, water rates, water policy, and their potential for having interactions with individuals who may be having difficulty paying for or accessing water. Emails were sent out to all interviewees with relevant information about the interviews and the nature of my research. Interview locations and times were reached through mutual decisions between participants and myself. However, some interviews did need to 22 be rescheduled due to the flooding of Mill Creek that occurred on February 7th, 2020. This and other issues will be further addressed in the limitations section. At the beginning of each interview I introduced myself and my research before prompting my interviewees to sign a written consent form. Interviews were an average length of 40-50 minutes and employed an interview guide, partially based on the guide designed by Baehler and Biddle in their study on adaptive capacity and resilience (2018). The guide questions served as jumping off points for more specific questioning that was tailored to the position and experiences of participants. could follow up on answers provided to questions from the guide. The full interview guide is included in the appendix. All interviews were transcribed and then imported into NVivo along with the various collected documents. Documents were obtained from the Walla Walla government website as well as google searches incorporating key terms related to water. Throughout the research process, I periodically reviewed the relevance of collected documents. An open coding method was used in order to identify themes and concepts arising from interviews and documents. This was flowed by axial coding in order to include concepts and topics that I felt were central to my research question and were prominent in the literature review (Babbie 2013:388-89). I went through two rounds of coding while also using a concept map in order to better understand how my codes were linked. After both rounds of coding were finished, I evaluated all codes for redundancy and for relevance against my research question. Codes that appeared redundant were merged, with the more frequently appearing code as the ‘parent’. During the process of 23 consolidation and deletion, the concept map was adjusted in order to reflect the changes to codes. A full list of codes is included in the appendix. 24 LIMITATIONS The first major limitation I encountered within my research was the fact that I am an outsider within the worlds of Walla Walla water and assistance organizations. Being an outsider also meant that I was not familiar with the inner workings and common problems, challenges, and vocabulary within the organizations and departments that my interviewees worked in. However, being an outsider did provide an advantage; the fact that I was unfamiliar reduced the amount of assumptions that I carried into my interviews and forced my interviewees to reiterate many things that could be taken for granted by someone who is immersed in their institutions on a day-to-day basis. The second major limitation I faced was my general lack of connection to Walla Walla residents. One of the most important parts of Walla Walla’s hydrosocial network are the residents of the city itself, and my data does not reflect this. This is partially due to the length and scope of my project; I do not have the time to include every aspect of Walla Walla water within my research. However, if I had a broader network or more time, it could have greatly assisted in identifying key issues or problems to focus in on. The third limitation I encountered was my lack of technical expertise in the world of infrastructure and city planning. This made it quite difficult to obtain useful information out of the documents I had collected, and caused me some confusion when trying to further understand financial and technical mechanisms. The final limitation I faced was the flooding of Mill Creek on February 7th, 2020. Heavier than average rainfall combined with snow melt brought an incredible amount of water rushing down the creek, destroying bridges, roads, and many homes across the county. Additionally, parts of the city’s drinking water line were destroyed during the 25 flooding (LeValley 2020), which demanded immediate attention from most of my participants and took priority over scheduled interviews. Two interviews were rescheduled for the following weeks, and one interview was cancelled. I was wary about following up with or contacting many more interviewees during this time, as I understood that there were more pressing issues at hand. 26 FINDINGS My reasoning for asking how equitable access to domestic in Walla Walla is affected by policy and infrastructure was twofold: first, the existing literature suggested that both policy and infrastructure can have a serious effect on how water is accessed in the home. Secondly, Walla Walla is going through a period of change, both in infrastructure and in the character of the town. As in many cities and towns across the United States, there are some Walla Walla residents who are struggling to meet their water needs; however, based on the information that I received from policymakers, public works employees, and nonprofit employees it does not appear that this population is alarmingly large or growing due to concrete actions by the city, with the potential exceptions of increasing utility bill prices and relations with the Latinx community. Participants from the public works department and city council recognized that utility prices have been increasing, and that this is affecting residents. An engineer stated that residents have started to “feel a little bit of the pain of higher water rates” according to comments given during public meetings, and a council member mentioned they have “most definitely” received more complaints about utility bill prices. On relations with the Latinx community, a participant who came from a Latinx background noted that “[the Latinx] community a couple years ago, even 10 years ago, was apprehensive of interacting with the city because of the language…because they didn’t feel comfortable”. They went on to mention that the city has been improving on this front by hiring more Spanish speaking employees and providing more information in Spanish, but said that increased comfort will “take time” and can be largely influenced by word of mouth. 27 These as well as other potential barriers will be directly addressed more directly further on in the findings and discussion sections. What was communicated to me from participants in the public works department, city council, and nonprofits implied that there were no major injustices at play with regards to physical water access in the home. To clarify this further, one can look to data from the American Community survey. The 2018 5-year estimates for Walla Walla County put occupied housing units without complete plumbing facilities at 16 out of a total 22,304 homes (U.S. Department of Commerce 2018a). A second table from the American Community Survey which looks at comparative housing statistics puts occupied housing units without plumbing at .1%, or 22 homes. (U.S. Department of Commerce 2018b). However, my research did uncover multiple actions and relationships that shape how people pay for and access water. These actions and relationships became clearer as my interviews progressed and as I engaged in the coding process. My findings show that Walla Walla has been increasing its efforts to provide transparency – both within government and with the public – on developments relating to water and utilities and has been shifting towards planning in a holistic manner. Holistic policy involves a mode of thinking and action that incorporates long term cross-department planning, citizen input and oversight, and attempts to ensure that all communities can be involved, heard, and receive water in an equitable manner. I also found that participants struggled to define equity, and often thought of equity as fairness. This led to blind spots regarding procedural and recognition justice These findings tie back into my research question as they give a picture of how the city works towards providing equitable water access, as 28 well as potential barriers and problems that are arising and may appear in the future. My findings still fit into the environmental justice frame, but in a more subtle manner than was initially expected. Water and Utility Rates Rates for utilities – which include water, sewer, stormwater, trash, and recycling – have been increasing over the last decade in order to pay for the IRRP and updates to the wastewater facility. With the most recent utility rate study and more generally, participants mentioned receiving comments about the higher rates. A long-term public works employee with an engineering background said that the city “[gets] a lot of friction for the cost of utilities”. They also expressed frustration with the lack of care shown for the town’s infrastructure in the past. A second public works employee had similar comments on the city’s water rates, stating that public comments during the previous utility rate study were “very favorable”, but that residents are now saying that they “feel a little bit of the pain of higher water rates”. A council also member expressed their constant surprise at the high cost of monthly utility bills for their home. When comparing Walla Walla’s water rates to rates within the state they fall above the average, according to a rate study put out by the city of Pendelton in September of 2019 which was reported on by the Hermiston Herald. The study looked at water rates of 41 cities in Oregon and southeastern Washington, basing prices off the average Pendleton resident’s usage of 9,725 gallons per month (McDowell 2019). The average price came out at $115.05, with Walla Walla having a price of $135.20. Pasco was the lowest at $68.79 and Portland was the highest at $222.89 (McDowell 2019). The original 29 study did not seem to be available online. Another document, published by the Washington department of Ecology in 2016, lists residential sewer rates for 292 towns and water districts in Washington based on a water consumption of 250 gallons per day. By bringing the data in Microsoft Excel, I was able to determine the average, minimum, and maximum to be $57.18, $20.73, and $156.93 respectively. Walla Walla had a price of $52.10 (State of Washington Department of Ecology 2016). The combination of these two sources point to Walla Walla’s water pricing being close to the median for Washington and Oregon, but outlier cities with particularly high rates may be skewing this data somewhat. The city has recently approved an expansion of the low-income senior and disabled discount for utility bills to encompass all low-income households. Low-income in this case is defined by “[having] an annual household income at or below 125% of the federal poverty guidelines” (City of Walla Walla Finance Division). The previously cited council member expressed concern for residents who are on the cusp of being low income but don’t qualify for assistance programs, stating that “there’s programs like BMAC…but those are for extremely low income and you have to qualify for that. What about the middle kids…because they can always go down to the lowest, so we need to catch them before they go low”. This participant also described a split in the council over providing this type of assistance: That’s probably where we as a council, we have a hard time because we’re either ‘yes, provide a system to help’ and others are ‘no, we’re gonna enable them’. I don’t know, I don’t think there’s a clear answer. Yes, the utility bills are expensive, I see it, I get it, and we pay, it’s expensive. But then if we don’t charge the utility tax where are we going to get it? 30 While there is a common understanding that water and utility rates are becoming a bit uncomfortable for some residents, there appear to be splits within government on how to handle the potential problems of increasing costs. Of particular note is the concept of ‘enabling’ those who are struggling by creating assistance programs, an argument that has often been used to reduce the government assistance and overlooks the cycle of poverty. Since utility prices have been consistently rising and there has been public pushback, council members said they were trying to avoid increasing utility prices when possible and obtain funding from other sources. Participants from non-profits spoke on how water rates intertwine with general home improvement and insulation; if there is poor insulation, heating and cooling (including hot water) become expensive , and if there’s poor water infrastructure in the home (leaks, high flow showerheads etc.) that can end up costing residents in the long run. These same participants, as well as an engineer from the public works department, reported that new water meters that have improved leak detection and a weatherization programs from a local nonprofit have reduced water bills for those that are energy or financial burdened. A participant from a nonprofit emphasized how working towards sustainability can end up saving a lot on utilities for some households. Growth The town is growing economically, with the hospitality industry (food, drink, lodging) driving this growth. There hasn’t been, nor is there expected to be, an influx of new residents to the point that the town can’t handle in terms of resources. According to 31 my participants from the development services and public works department, there is enough water capacity to handle a rise in population, so domestic access isn’t expected to be an immediate problem on that front. However, the town does need more residential housing, according to a participant from the development services department. On that note, Walla Walla has recently received a $110,000 grant from the Washington State Department of Commerce, part of which will be used to fund a housing needs assessment to determine what type of housing is most needed within Walla Walla and the greater area. With the creation of more housing comes the issue of connecting water and paying the capital facilities charge, most importantly for affordable housing and new annexations. The growth of the wine and beer industry will potentially lead to more updates to the wastewater treatment plant, and the money needed for upgrades has the potential to come from consumers or from industry. Two participants from the public works department spoke on this issue and expressed a desire to have parties which are increasing the load on the wastewater system pay for such an increase. Wastewater, wine, beer, and juice Most participants believed that the volume of material coming through the treatment plant doesn’t seem to be an issue (although I did receive conflicting information on this), but the type of material coming through the plant is. A public works engineer said the plant is “getting so much organic material from the wineries and the breweries and the juice plant”, and that the “basins [for storing and treating wastewater] aren’t big enough”. A different engineer commented on the developing nature of the issue 32 – it’s currently unfolding, and the city is working to figure out how to handle it. This engineer provided conflicting information on the issue of capacity, saying that “it’s not a capacity component…our peak flows going through the plant have actually gone down”. A city council member supported this position, stating that they had not received any information about the plant being “at a potential maximum”. All the waste coming from wine, beer, and the Refresco plant – a juice manufacturing and bottling facility – is sharply upping biochemical oxygen demand and having undesirable pH impacts. A participant from the public works department reported that there has been a notable growth of breweries in the last ~5 years, but I was not able to get a specific number for how many have opened. This participant also noted that some wineries have been moving production facilities internally, within the bounds of Walla Walla. Participants who are connected to this new challenge expressed desire in having industry pay for tackling the higher demand coming down on the treatment plant. One participant mentioned working with industry on higher control at the source. No one reported having to field demands from industry representatives or dealing with political pressure to make concessions to industry, but this issue is still actively developing. Housing Walla Walla is expecting some growth in the next two decades. A participant from the development services department stated that the city is “expecting roughly about 6,000 people in the next 20 years, and we can certainly accommodate that with the [water] infrastructure that we have.” This isn’t an unmanageable number, but new construction has fallen over the past few years which could present a problem. They also 33 mentioned that “[Walla Walla’s] housing supply is pretty down. In 2018 [the city] got 121 new single-family homes, while last year was only 55.” As a result, the city is trying to encourage the creation of more housing. Generally, policy has dictated that those who are developing must foot the bill for extending utilities, which can “increase housing prices, because [extending utilities] is very expensive”. However, the city “never really had a conversation [asking], ‘should the city initiate some of that utility work?’” With policy, I learned of two measures which Walla Walla has taken that may assist with ensuring equitable water access, although not through explicit means. First is a change to Walla Walla’s zoning regulations, which was spoken about by the same participant. In 2018, the city “completely overhauled [its] zoning regulations – got rid of…single family zones and collapsed them into one, and…opened up what can be developed in that zone”. This change could slow an increase in housing prices, as there won’t be space explicitly set aside for spacious or luxurious housing, and affordable housing could be put anywhere. This is no guarantee though. Secondly, the city won’t connect property to its system unless the property meets standards the city has set. Again, the same participant described issues with development off Cottonwood road, where property “was developed under the county and…annexed after it was all built out” leading to challenges with utility infrastructure. After this incident, the city council decided that “if you want utilities, you have to come under [Walla Walla’s] standards. Such policy prevents the creation of homes outside of the city with poor water or utility infrastructure from being annexed, only to learn about the existence of such infrastructure after hooking up to the city’s utilities. This could prevent residents from renting or 34 buying such properties and having to take on the financial burden of repairing poorly planned infrastructure in order to access water and other utilities. Similar to the evolving nature of the wastewater plant and utility costs, the city is approaching a decision point for housing. An increase in housing prices could create a larger financial burden for residents, leading to problems paying for essentials such as water. Furthermore, the same participant mentioned that with the 6-year utility rate study coming up, the capital connection charge — the fee you pay when you connect to the water system — is being examined in the context of affordable housing. For example, if a developer “[had 60% of [their] units affordable, you [would pay less], to try to incentivize affordable housing” Communication Overall, communication appeared as one of the central, if not the central theme in my interviews. With something as complicated as supplying water, communicating with and educating everyone involved is integral in making sure that necessary and appropriate changes to the system go smoothly, and that everyone is receiving equitable access. Communication within the world of Walla Walla water looks like many different things and takes many different forms; it can be at community gatherings between nonprofit workers and their neighbors, it can be in your monthly water bill, it can be whisper-down-the-lane between neighbors after attending council meetings, and it can be discussions between city employees during the work day. Looking back to the beginning of the IRRP, there was an “extensive public education campaign” in order to help residents, businesses, arms of government, as well 35 as nonprofits to understand Walla Walla’s water problems and the proposed solutions (IRRP Award). From the beginning nonprofits were plugged into the information network surrounding IRRP, which allowed them to relay important information in a digestible manner to multiple communities across Walla Walla. This is particularly important as not everyone has the skills and knowledge to interpret and understand important developments or problems with water policy or infrastructure. As a whole, communication regarding water within the city appeared to be helpful and beneficial, although it was not without its challenges and occasional setbacks. There were three avenues of communication that stuck out during my analysis: intergovernmental communication, nonprofit communication, and public communication. Intergovernmental communication Intergovernmental communication refers to any communication between different governmental agencies or parts of government. For example, this could encompass communication between individual members of city council as well as communication between the public works department and the development services department. Intergovernmental communication often revolved around responding to comments from the public, relaying technical information, creating long term plans, and ensuring that the infrastructure repair and replacement program — as well as updates to the wastewater treatment plant — were running smoothly. The infrastructure repair and replacement program (IRRP) was a program created by Walla Walla in 2009 - 2010 to address greatly aging water and transit infrastructure. Before the creation of the IRRP, the city was losing about 30% of all water that was 36 running through its pipes and working in a highly reactive fashion to address numerous leaks. Obviously, such an issue needed to be addressed, but doing so would require a large, coordinated effort and plenty of funds. A city document describes coordination between “Engineering, Water, Wastewater, and Street divisions to assemble the data for water leaks, sewer backups, system maintenance issues, and pavement conditions throughout the city” (City of Walla Walla 2013). Additionally, there was involvement of the “Technology Services division and its GIS staff in creating an enhanced city map to illustrate the condition issues” (City of Walla Walla 2013). This coordination was echoed by a participant from the public works department. They spoke about how the “IRRP program is a great layering of data to try and make decisions on where we spend…limited capital dollars”. They went on to describe how the program layers multiple factors such as leak history, sewer problems, and traffic load to locate and prioritize areas that have the most overlapping failure. The concept of layering also applied to acquiring funds that are essential to the operation of the IRRP and general infrastructure efforts. Participants from the city council, the public works department, as well as the development services department all spoke on the effective leveraging of funding from multiple sources (when available) in order to pay for projects. From the information these participants gave me, it appeared as if the public was not directly involved with acquiring funding, but this was not confirmed. Creating this patchwork of funding requires open and effective communication between multiple areas of local government, as well as different levels of government (county, state, federal). Many of my other participants spoke highly of the public works department and administrative staff in general, emphasizing their tendency 37 to adopt a broad and future oriented approach to addressing water related issues. This way of approaching water issues is relatively new for the city of Walla Walla, again described by an engineer from the public works department: I mean, if they knew that in the 1950’s, I don’t know what they did... [past administrations] may not have spent much time telling the story. We’re trying to do a better job – I’m not saying we’re doing a great job either – but we’re trying to collect that data and get that out here as transparency. And it’s hard to find some of it. Important to note are the ideas of ‘telling the story’ and transparency. There is clearly a much different attitude and outlook present within the public works division than in years past. However, such transparency with the public as well as other parts of government can demand communication of more technical data. This appeared to be challenging at times, as not everyone has the same experience or relevant background information. Information must often be simplified and presented by individuals who don’t feel that this type of communication is necessarily their strong suit. An engineer from the public works department remarked that they didn’t go to school for “marketing and communication”, so they “try really hard to distill complicated information”. However, they felt that they “don’t always hit the mark” when communicating technical information. A council member who is on the receiving end of such information commented on the complexity of understanding water issues, describing how “not only is it federal and state run – we also do work with the [Army] Corps of Engineers, as well with the tribes, so there’s so many components that I was unaware of. So I’m still learning ‘what is it? How do we get it? Why is it so expensive?” 38 These kinds of difficulties are inevitable when trying to communicate the nuances of water and should not be taken as an undesirable or negative result. Instead, I believe that these difficulties are a positive sign that there are sustained efforts underway to keep everyone within local government on the same page, and assist in a broader understanding of the problems and challenges that Walla Walla’s water system is and will be facing. A concrete indication of this is Walla Walla’s comprehensive plan, which “ensures its water, sewer, stormwater, solid waste, transportation, capital facilities, parks, and sustainability plans all coordinate with the overall comprehensive plan” (City of Walla Walla 2018a:18) Nonprofit communication Nonprofit communication includes any communication between nonprofits or from nonprofits to local government. Understanding how nonprofits are communicating with each other and with local government is an important piece in understanding water equity. Many nonprofits in Walla Walla assist residents who are struggling to have their basic needs met, and getting a better picture of how this assistance is carried out can reveal potential barriers or efforts to ensure equitable water access. Building on the broad educational effort at the beginning of IRRP, the city of has partnered with Commitment to Community (C2C), a program run by Blue Mountain Action Council (BMAC) which focuses on strengthening economically disadvantaged neighborhoods by facilitating the building of social infrastructure and resources within such communities. C2C has worked with the city in bringing residents into council meetings, where they speak on issues or developments going on in the city that affect 39 their communities. This partnership has also allowed the city to plug into established networks that already have the trust of the community in order to keep people informed and aware. A participant who holds an administrative position at BMAC recalled C2C work done on Kerry avenue: ...down by the penitentiary on Kerry avenue the city partnered with [BMAC] in commitment to community in that neighborhood which is a pretty disadvantaged neighborhood. And so our staff helped communicate with everybody on that block about the infrastructure and repair that was gonna happen. So when it happened in that neighborhood, and the city even got a [community development block grant] grant to add sidewalks on one side and streetlights – which there weren’t – and then do all the water and sewer stuff in the streets, and they even went the extra step to facilitate it with our staff to one-on-one the neighbors to make sure everyone understood what was going on, where they could park, when they couldn’t drive, that kind of stuff. In this instance, we see a well-coordinated effort between a nonprofit and the city government which focused on clear communication and beneficial action. The existing social structures that BMAC was involved in were utilized in keeping residents informed and aware. Nonprofits often work with each other in order to assist in bringing utilities back up for residents who cannot afford them. Additionally, they sometimes serve as a mediating factor between residents who are struggling to pay for utilities and the utility providers themselves (the city, as well as private utilities such as cascade gas), although not without challenges. A different nonprofit administrator said that their organization does “the best that we can in working with the utility providers” and felt that they “do have a voice for the clients that might not be able to necessarily feel as prepared” to interact with the city. However, they mentioned that the city has a limited amount of aid it can provide because “it’s taxpayer money in there”. 40 As far as direct communication with the city about the needs of nonprofits and their clients, things seemed to be smooth and positive. One interviewee who held an administrative position at a local nonprofit did mention that it “feels different” when communicating with city government (as opposed to other nonprofits) and attributed this difference to the nature of how government works, namely it’s bureaucratic structure. This wasn’t clarified further. Ultimately, they stated that “that the city personnel is very good at working with local agencies” and “has been very involved in trying to work with community partners.” Positive relations can also be seen in the prior example of C2C work on Kerry avenue. Although information about nonprofit communication was the least plentiful out of the three type of communication my interviewees indicated that this type of communication was helpful, and that the city was earnestly invested in partnering with Walla Walla’s large nonprofit network in order to keep residents informed about changes to the water network, and to make sure that all residents had equitable access to water. Public communication Public communication includes any communication with the public, both from nonprofits as well as local government. This type of communication is key to understanding current or persisting issues around water access in addition to what actions by the city and nonprofits are working particularly well. All but one participant spoke explicitly about working on improving transparency or public outreach/understanding in general. However, this participant was an engineer, who is not directly tasked with interfacing with the public. A central part of this ongoing effort was integrating different 41 modes of communication. A council member spoke about this way of communicating, saying that they felt “finding the ways to communicate with the people, the intended people you want to communicate with on their level, and then doing that” was the best way to reach the public. They qualified this further by giving the examples of “taking a city council meeting to the neighborhood” and making it more informal, incorporating shared food and social time. This one-on-one, more informal style of communication, came up multiple times across participants. However, this type of communication could be a problem when interacting with individuals that do not feel comfortable in a one-onone scenario so due to past legal trouble or being an undocumented immigrant, for example. There have also been more bureaucratic channels to increase transparency and communication, namely the citizen oversight committee for the IRRP, which reviews progress on an annual basis, and the work done by the city communications manager to field various questions and ensure accurate information is circulating in the public sphere. A participant from development services said that the city manager “does a great job communicating with the public, especially if he sees something that’s not accurate. He’s really good at saying ‘well no, here’s where you can find the information’ or ‘here’s the actual story.’” While some individuals within city government may not feel confident or adept at communicating, there is a specific position that can be deferred to if a member of the public is looking for information about developments in government or infrastructure. As with the other types of communication I identified, there are inevitably going to be challenges; first, with public input on infrastructure projects. Two participants who each interacted frequently with such projects, mentioned that there was sometimes 42 difficulty with soliciting input during the conceptual and planning phases of a project, as opposed to when it has already been zoned or construction has started. The participant from the development services department said: I think maybe, one of the hardest things we deal with is ‘how do we get people involved at more of the planning stage?’ when we do our comprehensive plan. Because once it’s zoned, it’s really hard to say no to a project. And a public works engineer had this to say about public input: When I think of how the public plays in, there’s certain elements of – conceptually, at a project, and then as you work towards actually building it. When you’re at the conceptual level there’s a lot more room for input than there is, now we’re out at construction, we’ve already designed this, it’s in the process of being built – changing that at this stage is basically too late. While public input was welcomed by all my participants, there was a general agreement public input is not as meaningful or helpful when coming during the later stage of a project. For an example, a public works engineer mentioned that very few members of the public, if any, have given beneficial input regarding technical aspects of replacing water mains. Second, participants noted problems with residents being able to understand the water system, and what they were seeing on their utility bill. Interpreting this bill, understanding where charges are coming from, and what can be done to lessen them can be challenging for many who do not have a formal education or do not have English as their first language. A public works engineer acknowledged the complicated nature of the bill, saying “our utility bill is pretty confusing.” A Latinx participant spoke further on the difficulty surrounding water bills and the Latinx community: But with the Latinos, I think it used to be, one of the bigger issues was the language. Just knowing your own water system within your own house. Why is 43 your utility bill so expensive, or there’s a leakage and you don’t even know, you have a sprinkler system, things like that. The community a couple years ago, even 10 years ago, was apprehensive of interacting with the city because of the language, the language was one of them – because they didn’t feel comfortable. The city has more employees that speak Spanish, so now they can go in and ask, ‘why is my bill so expensive?’ And then they look at, they send somebody to their meter and things like that. It’s just gonna take time. While there is more information available about water systems – both for the city and the home – there is lingering distrust and discomfort for some members of the Latinx community. This does appear to be changing, albeit slowly. However, the city started sending an explanatory inserts along with utility bills beginning about three to four years ago, according to a councilmember. The inserts are in both Spanish and English and break down each item on the bill using color-coding and simple explanations. The council member quoted above suggested that adding in a more electronic based form of communication which would provide short and digestible updates could be effective, similar to platforms like Snapchat. This participant also suggested a monthly workshop covering the literacy of graphs, property and utility taxes, and general data interpretation skills. Thirdly, some participants expressed frustration with what they felt to be a lack of genuine engagement with or understanding of local governance, particularly in the realm of social media. What follows is an exchange between myself (A) and a public works engineer (B): A: Oh no I love engaging with the public. I love it – let me back up. What I love is when somebody is truly interested and wants to understand. Not everybody is like that. You mentioned Facebook. B: [laughs] Yeah, it’s a nasty world out there. 44 A: It can be. And, they don’t want to understand, they don’t want to learn. I don’t want to spend my time there, it’s not time well spent. If you’re not open to try and understand the systems and how they operate, and how to make them more efficient and effective…I have better things to do. I mean it’s sad, I wish more people took a vested interest in the shape of our – this is our civilization here, we’re building. Here there appears to be an almost binary belief that people are either able to open to engaging and learning or aren’t, and subsequently won’t change. It’s unclear if this participant felt this way solely about public communication over social media, or more generally. A councilmember noted that there are misconceptions held about how the city reaches funding and development decisions, saying that “You have to look at it almost like a business and [city employees are] not doing it to make themselves rich, even though people think we are – but you know it’s because we need to grow our services, you need them, I need them…and we need good people.” Schlosberg’s Justices Distributional justice As previously mentioned, in the last year the city has expanded its low-income discount for seniors and residents with disabilities to all households fall at or below 125% of the federal poverty guidelines (City of Walla Walla Finance Division). There’s been a recent history of planning which ensures that the city has access to water via the aquifer recharge program, so that supply can always be met even in times where surface water cannot be accessed. The town also works to get funding from many different sources (CDBG funding, for example) so infrastructure benefits can be extended to all. However, one participant did mention that residents will continue to be billed for other utilities and 45 services (such as sewer and storm water) when their water is shut off, so when their water is turned back on it is usually a higher bill than they can pay. Procedural justice Procedural justice surrounding Walla Walla water ties directly back into my findings about communication, particularly public communication. As previously mentioned, different parts of government have been making concerted attempts to get residents involved in the planning process and to increase transparency. The bringing of government meetings out into different neighborhoods within Walla Walla has started to shed light on the procedures and processes of decision making and allows for residents to be more involved in the process. For the IRRP, there is a citizen oversight committee which continuously reevaluates the efficacy of the program on a regular basis. However, the efficacy of this committee’s evaluation depends on who it is comprised of and their ability to give voice to communities in Walla Walla that have been marginalized. This intersects with recognition justice; having a committee that incorporates the different communities in the city and their differing levels and types of need communicates social and political recognition. Additionally, the prioritization of IRRP work seems to be handled internally, within government, without input from residents. One participant discussed how they were part of more informal networks within the Latinx community, but that there was still much more to be done in order to get everyone involved. Recognition Justice There is some overlap with recognition justice and procedural justice when considering the city’s actions surrounding water. The city has been sending out 46 information on utility bills in both Spanish and in English and hiring bilingual employees according to participants from nonprofits, and many pages on the city website have a Spanish translation. For those that do not, there is the option to Google Translate the entire page into a language chosen by the user. Three participants reported challenges in dealing with the Spanish/English language and cultural barrier and building trust in predominantly Spanish speaking and Latinx communities. One participant spoke about members of the Latinx community in town not always feeling that they can run for city council or departmental positions. While there was recognition that members of the Latinx community do not always feel comfortable interacting with city government, there was not much explanation or recognition of why this was, beyond the identification of language and cultural barriers. Only one participant – the only participant of color – spoke about the presence of systemic racism in interactions between white and non-white residents. This can also be connected back to participation justice as well – the very present reality and history of systemic racism in the U.S. can make interactions between white administrators or politicians and nonwhite residents uncomfortable, and potentially discourage nonwhite residents from participating in matters (such as the creation of water infrastructure) that affect them. However, three participants – two from the city council, and one from a nonprofit – spoke explicitly about trying to focus on communities that have either been historically marginalized, underrepresented, or been less engaged with city government, and directing less resources towards communities that already had high social capital or income. 47 Conceptions of Water and Equity Most participants reported having a multifaceted understanding of water, understanding it as a commodity alongside other conceptions like water as a human right, as life itself, and as a public service. These ways of understanding water often operated in tandem with each other, with some participants viewing the city’s operation of water as a business yet still believing water to be a public service/good or human right. An engineer with the city noted that “Walla Walla has a very unique connection with its water”, which they felt was exemplified by the city’s decision to not privatize the water system. They further described water as “an important and valuable service more than a commodity”, even though the delivery of water is “run as a business”. A councilmember – cited earlier in findings on communication – shared a somewhat similar viewpoint. While they felt that “water is life” and must be “[managed to make sure it’s equitable for everybody”, they also felt that “at the same time [the city] must charge something, because of the fees and maintenance behind [providing water access]”. What appears in this response is a tension between belief and reality; while there is an assertion that water is more than a commodity – even life itself – there is still recognition that water is delivered in the manner that any other business would deliver a product and should be considered as such, even if it is not privatized. A nonprofit administrator expressed a view that explicitly thought of water as a commodity which they attributed to childhood experiences travelling, where “nine times out of ten you could not drink the water”. This led to a realization as a teenager that “Walla Walla…had a commodity that no one else had”. Such a belief was particularly 48 interesting to hear from a nonprofit member, especially since this individual worked with residents who were having trouble paying for utilities. However, it seemed that this belief was more a reflection on how valuable it is to have access to safe water, instead of a belief that water is a market good. Another nonprofit administrator expressed a very different view on water. They stated “that water is a human right, absolutely” and cited Flint, Michigan as an example of water inequity. They went on to cite the Walla Walla community’s rejection of Nestle as displaying an “awareness…that [this is not] the way we want to go with [Walla Walla’s] water”. This take on water was different from most of my participants, as it did not get qualified with any language about business or monetary compensation. While there was one question explicitly asking participants to speak on their understanding of equity, there were some responses to other questions which revealed how participants defined equity. Respondents often gave a definition that included decision making based on what is fair for all and paying for your fair share. There was also a recognition that working together is the right way to go about decision making, and that equity is not something that can easily or even ever be fully achieved. A participant from the development services department spoke about equity as “fairness…kind of fair for all”. They provided a second definition of equity as ensuring essential infrastructure and services are equally distributed, giving affordable housing and transportation projects as examples. When asked the same question about defining equity, an engineer from the public works department began by stating that the city is “never going to be perfectly fair and equitable”, although they constantly “strive for it”. They went on to describe “fairness 49 and equity [as being] in the same boat”. This was related to water usage as “we all utilize the system”, so it must be determined “what our fair and equitable share is…for the great things that we have here”. This participant acknowledged that “we all benefit” from the water system, but “some more than others”. As mentioned earlier when examining the wastewater system, they felt that when “some use more capacity than others” they should pay for it. Lastly, they emphasized that “working together is generally the right way to do that”. The central idea from both answers is equity being equivalent to fairness – a sort of universal approach to problems that is applied in the same way to all people in a community. There is also some recognition that groups of people will benefit from physical systems (utility and water infrastructure) or decision making processes more than others, and that equity should deal with this, but both answers are vague as to how this would happen or what it would look like. Looking back to Schlosberg’s justices, recognition justice is lacking in this conception of equity. Another theme which came from participants definitions was the difficulty in defining equity and the confusion of how it could relate to water. A councilmember discussed their changing understanding of equity and their reaction to my initial email: [Equity] actually means quite a bit different today than it did, I would say even 6 months ago. We’ve been focused on diversity and equity in the last probably 6 months so – I was at a conference, it was a homeless conference in Spokane, and she was a really very sharp lady, I think she was s PhD. And she was talking about adverse experiences in your life, and it was a room full of 60 people and she’d like to know ‘if you’ve ever had this happen to you, move one step closer to that side of the room. If you’ve ever not had that, move one step’– I ended up clear over on this side with a lot of middle aged white guys… and a lot of other people, it kind of just transitioned over to this other side, of people that were female, or had different skin color, or looked different, and I was like, I couldn’t believe that they could be treated that much different than me. Cause I said, ‘everyone gets treated like me.’ No. That’s what I used to think but not anymore. I 50 think it’s very possible that there are inequities broadly, so female, male – I don’t know how that would effect water, I just don’t know whether it would be…I can’t see it at the city help desk, where Jasmine, she’s extremely helpful, and I don’t know whether it’s just because it’s me or she’s like – I’ve seen her working with other people. I don’t know, how that would equate to inequity, and the ability to get water? Or use water? I’m not sure. I know that’s one of the things that puzzled me when I saw your email. And I’m sure it’s a possibility, I’m just not sure how it would connect. Important to note is how drastically this participants notion of equity has changed. Being physically present with others who have experienced discrimination, harassment, or poor treatment due to their background clearly had a profound impact. Furthermore, this a positive and welcome shift for anyone that holds an elected office. As noted earlier, though, confusion arises when trying to apply the idea of equity to water access. Part of this confusion seems to come from the fact that this participant has not seen concrete evidence of inequity around water access in the way they did during the conference in Spokane. A different councilmember shed more light on the challenge of defining equity, this time in the context of council meetings. When asked if there is a common understanding of what equity means during council meetings they replied, “oh no, absolutely not”. They attributed this to everyone “[coming] from different backgrounds” and different “experiences [that] determine what we see in life”. When asked if they wanted a more explicit definition of equity during meetings, they replied, “I do but I’m afraid of the repercussions, because if we get into it so much people will shut down because they don’t like being confronted. They don’t like knowing they’ve been wrong. And I don’t like feeling too hostile, and then we won’t get anything done”. Overall, all of the answers I received on the question of defining equity show that there is a level of 51 disconnect on what equity means, a struggle to define equity in the first place, and a conflation of equity with fairness. Additionally, this problem seems to be an ‘elephant in the room’ during some council meetings and could hamper productive discussion if brought up. 52 DISCUSSION As stated in the beginning of the findings section, the information I’ve gathered from my interviews appeared to present me with a set of data that diverged from my initial research question. Upon further examination, however, it became possible to tie them back in to what I had initially set out to uncover: how have developments in infrastructure and policy affected the equity of domestic water access in Walla Walla? While this tie hasn’t explicitly answered my question in the way I envisioned at the beginning of my research, it has provided a valuable look into the many actions, beliefs, policies, programs, and infrastructure projects that inevitably effect how Walla Walla residents access water in their homes. What stood out as an important piece of the Walla Walla water equation was communication. In nearly all spheres of life good communication is key to accomplishing anything, and water is no exception. In order to ensure that residents are receiving equitable access to water in their homes and that they have a say in important water and infrastructural decisions, there must be open and transparent platforms for communication between residents, nonprofits, and government. Additionally, it must be ensured that these modes of communication assist and can be utilized by all communities within the town, particularly those that have been historically given less attention or marginalized. However, as seen in the literature from Kojola et. al. (2019), Brown et al. (2015), and Scholsberg (2007) in particular, attempts to ensure communication and participation for all communities within any given locality can be ineffective, and at worst counterproductive. This often occurs when trying to accomplish communication and participation across race and class lines, or when recognition of existing struggles 53 and inequities does not happen. While the city has certainly been making efforts to extend multiple forms communication and participation to residents, there was little recognition of how pre-existing struggles and historical injustices could sabotage or impede these efforts by the city. This became clear through the definitions of equity given by most participants and related exchanges. The idea of equity as fairness given by many participants does not acknowledge racial disparities, or that many individuals and communities may be starting from a baseline of ‘less’ – less education, less cultural and social capital, less financial capital, and less privilege. As Schlosberg notes, “the central question regarding distributional justice is not…’what is the best model for distribution’, but instead ‘how does the current maldistribution get produced?’” (2007:15) The city has certainly improved its interactions and engagement with the public on matters surrounding utilities, and there are clearly individuals who have an evolving understanding of what equity means, and what actions should be taken to ensure equity of water access – this research does not seek to diminish that in any way. However, it is important to point to blind spots in how participants think about equity, which in turn relates to concepts of justice, as these beliefs can have very real effects on water and infrastructure in Walla Walla. While there may be difficulties conceptualizing equity and dealing with recognition justice in the realm of Walla Walla water, there has been a clear effort to pivot how the city handles the construction and repair of water infrastructure. With a large proportion of the city’s water mains in disrepair, there was an opportunity to change how Walla Walla approached water planning as well as general infrastructure repair and city planning. The creation of the IRRP and a focus on long term, comprehensive 54 planning has shifted the city away from what a public works engineer described as a “reactive” approach. As a result, the IRRP has been able make concrete and beneficial progress for multiple types of infrastructure. Finding funding for this is not always easy, however, but the city has been trying to obtain funding from a diverse range of sources in order to keep its budget balanced and avoid increasing utility bill costs where it can. Even so, utility bill prices have been rising, and have the potential to keep rising in the future with upgrades to the wastewater plant. It is important to note that participants from the public works department explicitly stated that they would seek to have wineries, breweries, and the Refresco plant – all of which are contributing to the need for a plant upgrade – pay for future work on the wastewater plant. Coming back to the theme of communication, it appears that the city council relies on coordinated input, information, and education to make decisions. For example, if the wastewater treatment plant requires upgrades due to increased wine, beer, and juice production, councilmembers depend on receiving information from the public works department on the technical aspects of an update, budgeting information from both public works and the finance department, and information about new wineries from the development services department. The ability of council members to make informed decisions relies on getting accurate and comprehensive information from other individuals; if these individuals have a narrow understanding of equity, then the ability of councilmembers to make decisions that account for equity of water access may be limited. A particularly interesting and unexpected piece of information was the relationship of energy related home improvement to equity of water access. A participant 55 from a nonprofit spoke at length about a weatherization program that focuses on improving heating and insulation, which in turn lowered the use of hot water and gas and reduced the financial burden for residents living in homes with poor infrastructure. Additionally, this program helped install low flow showerheads and toilets which helped residents save on their water bills. While there was confusion around conceptualizing potential equity issues surrounding water access through the lenses of procedural or recognition justice, these programs do show an understanding of how inequity can lead to financial burden in paying for water; in this case, residents who are energy burdened and low income are stuck in a cycle of paying more than they should in order to maintain an acceptable quality of live in the home. 56 CONCLUSION I began my research by asking the question: how have (changes to) infrastructure and policy have affected equitable access to domestic water in Walla Walla? This question has provided me with information that first and foremost, shed light on the complexity and coordination behind the management of water, water infrastructure, and utility infrastructure within Walla Walla. The six interviews that I conducted revealed multiple themes. Firstly, communication; the ability to create comprehensive, future oriented plans and take targeted action depends on effective communication between multiple areas of city government and nonprofits. Additionally, the city has been prioritizing increased transparency and communication with the public. However, not all residents may be equipped to engage with the available information. This leads into the second theme: recognition and procedural justice. The definitions of equity given by participants as well as their answers to questions about communication revealed a blind spot for these two types of justice. Some participants recognized that communities in Walla Walla – in particular the Latinx community – experienced barriers or difficulties in communicating with the city but did not recognize the potential drivers and history behind these barriers and difficulties, and how they could impede participation related efforts. Third comes growth. Many of my participants talked about the increased load being put on to the wastewater plant from wineries, breweries, and the Refresco plant. This situation is currently developing but it seems likely that it will demand an update to the wastewater plant, which could end up costing residents more on their utility bills. Walla Walla is also expecting residential growth, which will lead to discussions on the capital facilities charge and housing prices. This leads to my last theme, increasing costs. 57 The cost of water and wastewater services has been increasing over the past decade to the implementation of the IRRP, and residents are starting to feel these higher costs. The program has fixed a notable amount of water infrastructure, reducing the city’s water loss from 30% slightly under 20% according to participants from the public works department. However, with more work to be done and IRRP revenue coming from these increased costs, it appears that prices for water and other utilities are unlikely to fall. Even though I came across revealing findings during my research, it is only a small slice of the processes and actions around Walla Walla’s water. This is compounded by limited by the limitations of my study. I solely interviewed a small sample of individuals in administrative positions, which will give a more top-down and technocratic view of the city’s water. Additionally, my data in almost all qualitative, which can only tell so much of the story. As Zwartaveen and Boelens say, water belongs in “the domain of the unordered” (2014:150), and further research is needed in order to get a more comprehensive picture of water access in Walla Walla. Further research should interview a larger swatch of city employees in different departments, particularly in departments that are tasked with communicating information to the public. Interviews should also be conducted in communities that have struggled with paying their water and utility bills or have had difficulties interacting with the city. Finally, it could be beneficial to do a more quantitative analysis of water and utility prices and water shutoffs in the context of household earnings in order to get a better picture of any financial burden that bill payments may be causing. At this point in time, it appears that Walla Walla is doing ok in providing equitable water access to its residents. However, there are potential hang-ups and barriers at play; blind spots around equity, recognition and procedural justice, as well 58 as the rise of utility costs and impending growth must be kept in the spotlight in order to ensure that water access does not suffer in the years to come. 59 Appendix A Interview Questions 1. Begin with script, overview a. State your research question! Make it clear that you’re interested in a lot of stuff here, and there’s no right/wrong answers. b. State that you’re recording this, providing confidentiality i. Give them the form, talk through what’s on it 2. Start with broad questions & job overview a. Tell me a little bit about your background and how you came to do what you do now b. “tell me about your agency/department/position and its priorities, both short and long term” (baehler/biddle 2) i. Can pursue responses from here ii. Do you think these are the right goals? Would you make changes? (baehler/biddle) c. How do you/your department fit into the city’s water governance? d. How is your department structured? e. Can you talk to me about any challenges that you’re currently facing, either within the department or with your work itself? i. Are there any challenges specific to Walla Walla’s water infrastructure? f. Can you describe a water issue that has come up in your work, and how you’ve dealt with it? 3. Start to focus in on a category, and then determine some topics that you want to prioritize in the interview at this stage 4. Infrastructure, maybe get into cost? a. Can you tell me about some of the water infrastructure projects the city has worked on recently/over the past decade? i. What are some of the challenges you or your department faced during these projects? ii. Can you tell me about the infrastructure repair and replacement program and how it’s played out/been implemented? b. Can you tell me more about how costs are handled for these projects? Distributed to taxpayers incrementally, etc. c. SEGUE INTO PUBLIC & COMMUNICATION 5. Public/Communication a. How do you/your department think about communicating with the public? b. How does public response/input play into infrastructure projects? c. Are there any forums available for public input about the city’s water? 60 d. Can you give me an overview of your experience(s) with public input/interactions? i. Have there been any challenges with public communication? e. What are the challenges with public input? i. Can you tell me about any times where dealing with the public was frustrating or caused problems? f. SEGUE INTO TOURISM 6. Tourism/growth a. What has Walla Walla’s growth as a tourist destination meant for your department/job? The city’s water? b. Something about more political conflict internal to government; How has the growth of the wine industry impacted your department/job? How has it impacted the city’s water? 7. Equity, pricing a. There are often discussions about equity when thinking about water access. What does equity mean to you within the context of your work? Does it come up at all? b. Can you talk to me about how the city determines pricing for water? i. Are there any mechanisms in place to help those with lower incomes pay for water? If so, what was the process of creating these mechanisms like? c. How do you understand the term Environmental Justice? Does it ever come up in your work? How so? 8. Thinking about/conceptualizing water a. Do you understand water as a commodity? Do you think the average consumer thinks of it that way? b. What are your thoughts about privatized utilities? Is this something that Walla Walla has ever considered? 61 Appendix B Codes 62 Bibliography Babbie, Earl. 2013. The Practice of Social Research Fourteenth Edition. Boston, MA: Cengage learning. Baehler, Karen J., and Jennifer C. Biddle. 2019. “Governance for Adaptive Capacity and Resilience in the U.S. Water Sector.” Ecology and Society 23(4):24-39. Balzas, Carolina L., and Isha Ray. 2014. “The Drinking Water Disparaties Framework: On the Origins and Persistence of Inequities in Exposure.” American Journal of Public Health 104(4):603-611. Brown, Abigail, Ruth Langridge, and Kirsten Rudestam. 2015. “Coming to the table: collaborative governance and groundwater decision-making in coastal California.” Journal of environmental Planning and Management 59(12):2163-2178. Bullard, Anthony. 2005. The Quest for Environmental Justice: Human Rights and the Politics of Pollution. San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books. Castro, José Esteban. 2007. “Systemic Conditions Affecting the Universalization of Water and Sanitation Services: A Sociological Exploration.” Journal of Comparative Social Welfare 23(2):105-119. 63 City of Walla Walla. 2013. “2012 J. Robert Havlick and Thomas H. Muehlenbeck Innovation Award: City of Walla Walla Infrastructure Repair & Replacement Plan.” Retrieved March 20th, 2020. (https://icma.org/sites/default/files/303749_Walla%20Walla%2C%20WA.pdf). City of Walla Walla. 2018a. “Walla Walla Comprehensive Plan Update.” Retrieved March 10th, 2020. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/home/showdocument?id=854). City of Walla Walla. 2018b. “2018 Annual Progress Report: Infrastructure Repair and Replacement Plant (IRRP).” Retrieved March 15th, 2020. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/home/showdocument?id=2664). City of Walla Walla. 2018c. “Final 2019-2024 Capital Facilities Plan.” Retrieved March 20th, 2020. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/home/showdocument?id=2468). City of Walla Walla Development Services. 2018. “Short-Term Rental FAQ.” Retrieved April 13th, 2020. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/government/developmentservices/short-term-rental-faq). City of Walla Walla Finance Division. “Utility Bill Discounts.” Retrieved April 10th, 2020.(https://www.wallawallawa.gov/government/finance/utility-bill-discounts). 64 City of Walla Walla Public Works Department. “Wastewater.” Retrieved April 12th, 2020. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/government/public-works/wastewater). City of Walla Walla Water Distribution Division. 2016. “City of Walla Walla Water System February 2016.” Retrieved November 29th, 2019. (https://www.wallawallawa.gov/home/showdocument?id=666). Dig Deep, US Water Alliance. 2019. “Closing the Water Access Gap in the United States.” Retrieved December 5th, 2019. (http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/Closing%20the%20Water%20A ccess%20Gap%20in%20the%20United%20States_DIGITAL.pdf). Galasti S. E., Robert Russel, Amahl Bishara, John L. Durant, Jennifer Bogle, and Anette Huber-Lee. 2016. “Intermittent Domestic Water Supply: A Critical Review and Analysis of Causal-Consequential Pathways.” Water 8:274-295. Go Walla Walla.us. 2015. “Water Treatment Project: Plant Upgrades.” Retrieved April 5th, 2020. (https://gowallawalla.us/current-projects/list/item/280-water-treatmentproject-plant-upgrades). Gosnell, Hannah and Jesse Abrams. 2009. “Amenity migration: Diverse Conceptualizations of Drivers, Socioeconomic Dimensions, and Emerging Challenges.” GeoJournal 76:303-322. 65 Hillhouse, Vicki. 2016. “Market of Vacation Rentals by Homeowners Takes Off in Walla Walla Valley.” Walla Walla Union Bulletin, October 2nd. Retrieved April 13th, 2020. (https://www.union-bulletin.com/news/business/market-of-vacation-rentals-byhomeowners-takes-off-in-walla/article_237a7ce8-880a-11e6-8073-cbee5c02f4a0.html). Jaffee, Daniel and Soren Newman. 2012. “A Bottle Half Empty: Bottled Water, Commodification, and Contestation.” Organization & Environment 26(3):318-335. Kojola, Eric. 2019. “Indigeneity, Gender and Class in Decision-Making about Risks from Resource Extraction.” Environmental Sociology 5(2):130-148. LeValley, Chloe. 2020. “Work Underway to Fix City of Walla Walla’s Water Line Broken in Flood.” Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, March 4th. Retrieved April 15th, 2020. (https://www.union-bulletin.com/news/local_governments/walla_walla/workunderway-to-fix-city-of-walla-walla-s-water/article_a50c447f-36cb-5c6c-bc64748bf55416e9.html). Lichter, Daniel T., Domenico Parisi, Stevem Michael Grice, and Michael Taquino. 2007. “Municipal Underbounding: Annexation and Racial Exclusion in Small Southern Towns.” Rural Sociology 72(1):47-68. McDowell, Jane. 2019. “Hermiston Residents Still Questioning Water Rate Increase.” Hermiston Herald, September 9th. Retrieved April 10th, 2020. 66 (https://www.hermistonherald.com/news/local/hermiston-residents-still-questioningwater-rate-increase/article_6682dd7e-d356-11e9-9883-33d48e6095a0.html). Molotch, Harvey. 1976. “The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place.” American Journal of Sociology 82(2):309-332. Schlosberg, David. 2007. “Distribution and Beyond: Conceptions of Justice in Contemporary Theory and Practice.” Pp 11-41 in Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. New York: Oxford University Press. Sherman, Jennifer. 2018. “‘Not Allowed to Inherit My Kingdom’: Amenity Development and Social Inequality in the Rural West.” Rural Sociology 83(1):174-207. Shiva, Vandana. 2002. Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution and Profit. Cambridge, MA: South End Press. U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S Census Bureau. 2018a. “Table B25048: Plumbing Facilities for Occupied Housing Units.” American Community Survey. Retrieved April 12th, 2020 (https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=walla%20walla%20county%20plumbing&g=050 0000US53071&hidePreview=true&tid=ACSDT5Y2018.B25048&vintage=2018&layer= VT_2018_050_00_PY_D1&cid=B25049_001E). 67 U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Census Bureau. 2018b. “Table CP04: Comparative Housing Statistics.” American Community Survey. Retrieved April 12th, 2020. (https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=walla%20walla%20county%20plumbing&g=050 0000US53071&tid=ACSCP5Y2018.CP04&layer=VT_2018_050_00_PY_D1&vintage=2 018&hidePreview=false). U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Census Bureau. 2017. “Table DP05: Walla Walla-College Place CCD, Walla Walla County, Washington.” American Community Survey. Retrieved November 23rd, 2019 (https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Walla%20WallaCollege%20Place%20CCD,%20Walla%20Walla%20County,%20Washington&hidePrevi ew=true&g=0600000US5307193664&table=DP05&tid=ACSDP5Y2017.DP05&lastDisp layedRow=54). Visit Walla Walla. 2016. “Visit Walla Walla 2016 Annual Report.” Retrieved November 27th, 2019 (https://www.wallawalla.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/VWWAnnual-Report_web-singles.pdf). Visit Walla Walla. 2018. “Visit Walla Walla 2018 Annual Report.” Retrieved November 27th 2019 (https://wallawalla.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018ANNUAL-REPORT.pdf). 68 Walla Walla Trends 2018a. “Walla Walla Trends: Q4 2018 Newsletter.” Retrieved December 5th, 2019 (http://wallawallatrends.org/newsletter/wpcontent/uploads/2019/05/Walla-Walla-Trends-Newsletter-2018-Q4.pdf). Walla Walla Trends 2018b. “1.4.6 Total Gallons and Gallons per Capita of Wine Production.” Retrieved April 14th, 2020 (http://wallawallatrends.org/graph.cfm?cat_id=1&sub_cat_id=4&ind_id=6) Walla Walla Trends 2018c. “1.4.7 Total Number of Wineries & Annual Growth Rate.” Retrieved April 14th, 2020 (http://wallawallatrends.org/graph.cfm?cat_id=1&sub_cat_id=4&ind_id=7). Walla Walla Trends 2019a. “1.3.3 Share of Employment in Top-5 Largest Employing Sectors.” Retrieved December 5th, 2019 (http://wallawallatrends.org/graph.cfm?cat_id=1&sub_cat_id=3&ind_id=5). Walla Walla Trends 2019b. “1.4.4 Total Direct Travel and Tourism Spending & Spending Per Capita.” Retrieved December 5th, 2019 (http://wallawallatrends.org/graph.cfm?cat_id=1&sub_cat_id=4&ind_id=5). State of Washington Department of Ecology. 2016. 2016 Residential Sewer Rate Survey. Retrieved April 14th, 2020 (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1710024.pdf). 69 Zwartaveen. Margreet Z. and Rutgerd Boelens. 2014. “Defining, researching and struggling for water justice: some conceptual building blocks for research and action.” Water International 39(2):143-158. 70