Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Conservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Casa GrandeSave It program reports roughly 5,000 acre-feet saved since 2020; utility calls cost ~ $108/acre-foot

City of Casa Grande City Council · January 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Arizona Water Company and the City of Casa Grande said their six-year 'Save It' integrated demand management program delivered about 5,000 acre-feet of water savings from 2020to 2024, with roughly 1,200 acre-feet saved in 2024 and an estimated delivered cost of about $108 per acre-foot, presenters said.

Arizona Water Company and city staff told the Casa Grande City Council study session that the six-year Save It integrated demand management program has reduced local water use and produced measurable water savings.

"Between 2020 and 2024, cumulatively, we saved about 5,000 acre feet," said Terry Sue Rossi, the lead presenter for Arizona Water Company, summarizing the utility's analysis. Rossi also said the utility saved a little over 1,200 acre-feet in 2024 alone.

The program began after a 2019 grant-supported workshop and subsequent collaboration among the city, Arizona Water Company and other partners, Fred Schneider, president of Arizona Water Company, told council members. Schneider said the effort was designed around three goals: reduce dependence on groundwater, invest in sustainable supplies and use existing water more efficiently.

Rossi described Save It as an "integrated demand management" program tailored to Casa Grande rather than a single statewide template. She said the city contributed planning and policy tools (general land use plan goals, ordinances and turf-reduction efforts) while the utility offered customer programs, audits, rebates and conservation-oriented rate structures.

On metrics, presenters said the utility's per-customer usage fell from about 161,000 (reported for 2020) to about 141,000 (reported for 2024), which the presentation labeled a 12.4% reduction. A control-group analysis of roughly 14,000 customers who had the same accounts across the period showed about a 6.1% reduction among that cohort, the presenters said.

City and company analysts tied those per-customer changes to the acre-feet totals and to longer-term projections. Rossi said conservation was projected to supply roughly 4,000 acre-feet per year going forward under the program's assumptions and that the city's general land use plan had a comparable projection of about 4,500 acre-feet.

On cost, Rossi told the council the program has spent, as presented, "a little over half $1,000,000" since inception and said the delivered water-supply cost based on the reported savings is about $108 per acre-foot. (The phrase was presented verbatim in the session; presenters used the figure of about $108/acre-foot to illustrate cost-effectiveness.)

Rossi and Schneider said the Save It approach has been recognized by state regulators: elements of the program were incorporated into ADWR management planning and the Arizona Corporation Commission approved conservation-spending pathways for private water utilities modeled on this program.

Council members asked practical questions about reporting leaks and about the Central Arizona Project (CAP) charge on bills; presenters said customers should contact the utility's local office for leak reports and explained that CAP allocation and costs are set by the CAP board and passed through in rates.

The presentation concluded with staff and presenters thanking each other for the public-private partnership and encouraging continued community participation in conservation programs such as Project WET and the city's turf-reduction initiatives.

The council did not take formal action during the study session; presenters stood for questions and staff signaled further agenda items on effluent allocation would follow in future meetings.