Connect with us

Business

Some big water agencies in farming areas get water for free. Critics say that needs to end

Published

on

Some big water agencies in farming areas get water for free. Critics say that needs to end

The water that flows down irrigation canals to some of the West’s biggest expanses of farmland comes courtesy of the federal government for a very low price — even, in some cases, for free.

In a new study, researchers analyzed wholesale prices charged by the federal government in California, Arizona and Nevada, and found that large agricultural water agencies pay only a fraction of what cities pay, if anything at all. They said these “dirt-cheap” prices cost taxpayers, add to the strains on scarce water, and discourage conservation — even as the Colorado River’s depleted reservoirs continue to decline.

“Federal taxpayers have been subsidizing effectively free water for a very, very long time,” said Noah Garrison, a researcher at UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. “We can’t address the growing water scarcity in the West while we continue to give that water away for free or close to it.”

The report, released this week by UCLA and the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, examines water that local agencies get from the Colorado River as well as rivers in California’s Central Valley, and concludes that the federal government delivers them water at much lower prices than state water systems or other suppliers.

The researchers recommend the Trump administration start charging a “water reliability and security surcharge” on all Colorado River water as well as water from the canals of the Central Valley Project in California. That would encourage agencies and growers to conserve, they said, while generating hundreds of millions of dollars to repair aging and damaged canals and pay for projects such as new water recycling plants.

Advertisement

“The need for the price of water to reflect its scarcity is urgent in light of the growing Colorado River Basin crisis,” the researchers wrote.

The study analyzed only wholesale prices paid by water agencies, not the prices paid by individual farmers or city residents. It found that agencies serving farming areas pay about $30 per acre-foot of water on average, whereas city water utilities pay $512 per acre-foot.

In California, Arizona and Nevada, the federal government supplies more than 7 million acre-feet of water, about 14 times the total water usage of Los Angeles, for less than $1 per acre-foot.

And more than half of that — nearly one-fourth of all the water the researchers analyzed — is delivered for free by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to five water agencies in farming areas: the Imperial Irrigation District, Palo Verde Irrigation District and Coachella Valley Water District, as well as the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District in Nevada and the Unit B Irrigation and Drainage District in Arizona.

Along the Colorado River, about three-fourths of the water is used for agriculture.

Advertisement

Farmers in California’s Imperial Valley receive the largest share of Colorado River water, growing hay for cattle, lettuce, spinach, broccoli and other crops on more than 450,000 acres of irrigated lands.

The Imperial Irrigation District charges farmers the same rate for water that it has for years: $20 per acre-foot.

Tina Shields, IID’s water department manager, said the district opposes any surcharge on water. Comparing agricultural and urban water costs, as the researchers did, she said, “is like comparing a grape to a watermelon,” given major differences in how water is distributed and treated.

Shields pointed out that IID and local farmers are already conserving, and this year the savings will equal about 23% of the district’s total water allotment.

“Imperial Valley growers provide the nation with a safe, reliable food supply on the thinnest of margins for many growers,” she said in an email.

Advertisement

She acknowledged IID does not pay any fee to the government for water, but said it does pay for operating, maintaining and repairing both federal water infrastructure and the district’s own system.

“I see no correlation between the cost of Colorado River water and shortages, and disagree with these inflammatory statements,” Shields said, adding that there “seems to be an intent to drive a wedge between agricultural and urban water users at a time when collaborative partnerships are more critical than ever.”

The Colorado River provides water for seven states, 30 Native tribes and northern Mexico, but it’s in decline. Its reservoirs have fallen during a quarter-century of severe drought intensified by climate change. Its two largest reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, are now less than one-third full.

Negotiations among the seven states on how to deal with shortages have deadlocked.

Mark Gold, a co-author, said the government’s current water prices are so low that they don’t cover the costs of operating, maintaining and repairing aging aqueducts and other infrastructure. Even an increase to $50 per acre-foot of water, he said, would help modernize water systems and incentivize conservation.

Advertisement

A spokesperson for the U.S. Interior Department, which oversees the Bureau of Reclamation, declined to comment on the proposal.

The Colorado River was originally divided among the states under a 1922 agreement that overpromised what the river could provide. That century-old pact and the ingrained system of water rights, combined with water that costs next to nothing, Gold said, lead to “this slow-motion train wreck that is the Colorado right now.”

Research has shown that the last 25 years were likely the driest quarter-century in the American West in at least 1,200 years, and that global warming is contributing to this megadrought.

The Colorado River’s flow has decreased about 20% so far this century, and scientists have found that roughly half the decline is due to rising temperatures, driven largely by fossil fuels.

In a separate report this month, scientists Jonathan Overpeck and Brad Udall said the latest science suggests that climate change will probably “exert a stronger influence, and this will mean a higher likelihood of continued lower precipitation in the headwaters of the Colorado River into the future.”

Advertisement

Experts have urged the Trump administration to impose substantial water cuts throughout the Colorado River Basin, saying permanent reductions are necessary. Kathryn Sorensen and Sarah Porter, researchers at Arizona State University’s Kyl Center for Water Policy, have suggested the federal government set up a voluntary program to buy and retire water-intensive farmlands, or to pay landowners who “agree to permanent restrictions on water use.”

Over the last few years, California and other states have negotiated short-term deals and as part of that, some farmers in California and Arizona are temporarily leaving hay fields parched and fallow in exchange for federal payments.

The UCLA researchers criticized these deals, saying water agencies “obtain water from the federal government at low or no cost, and the government then buys that water back from the districts at enormous cost to taxpayers.”

Isabel Friedman, a coauthor and NRDC researcher, said adopting a surcharge would be a powerful conservation tool.

“We need a long-term strategy that recognizes water as a limited resource and prices it as such,” she wrote in an article about the proposal.

Advertisement

Business

Why is L.A.’s salad titan, Sweetgreen, wilting?

Published

on

Why is L.A.’s salad titan, Sweetgreen, wilting?

Sweetgreen’s salad business isn’t as fresh as it used to be.

Not long ago, the Los-Angeles-based company’s fresh bowls of fancy salads were all the rage, and its shares soared on hopes that salad-slinging robots could make it more profitable.

Last year was tough, though, as enthusiasm for the brand waned and cash-strapped diners abandoned fast-casual options for cheaper fast food and homemade meals.

Sweetgreen’s same-store sales slid 9.5% last quarter, even as it increased portion sizes and tried new menu items — including French fries, which flopped. It laid off 10% of its support center workforce in Los Angeles, and one of its founders stepped down.

Over the last 12 months, Sweetgreen shares have tumbled more than 75%. The stock closed Thursday at $8.

Advertisement

“Sweetgreen is more of a premium health product, and it’s going to cost more than a Big Mac,” said retail expert Dominick Miserandino, who runs the company Retail Tech Media Nexus.

“The average consumer, when they’re hit with survival-type questions about basic necessities, wellness is not going to be No. 1 for them,” he said.

Younger consumers are showing less interest in Sweetgreen salads at the same time as tariffs and other factors are driving inflation. The company fell short of Wall Street’s expectations last quarter with a net loss of $36.1 million on revenue of $172.4 million.

“Performance was impacted by softer sales,” Sweetgreen co-founder and Chief Executive Jonathon Neman said in November. “This was coupled with lighter spending among younger guests.”

As it braces for the future, Sweetgreen decided to sell the food automation company it bought only a few years ago. Sweetgreen closed the sale of its automated kitchen technology, dubbed Infinite Kitchen, to the takeout and food delivery company Wonder Group last month.

Advertisement

Spyce, the business unit behind Infinite Kitchen, was sold for close to $200 milion in cash and shares of Wonder’s Series C preferred stock. Sweetgreen bought Spyce in 2021 for about $70 million. Sweetgreen will continue to use the technology in some restaurants. The tech uses automatic conveyor belts to assemble salads and other meals.

“The sale marks a strategic milestone for Sweetgreen, enabling the company to reinvest in key priorities and focus on growth and operational efficiency,” the company said in a news release.

Sweetgreen did not respond to a request for comment.

Sweetgreen was founded in 2007 in Washington by Georgetown students looking to make healthy food as convenient as fast food. It moved its headquarters to Los Angeles in 2016.

The chain has grown to more than 280 stores in the U.S.

Advertisement

California — with 56 Sweetgreens — is the state with the most locations.

The company made its initial public offering in 2021, and a day later was valued at nearly $6 billion. Sweetgreen is now worth around $900 million.

Fast-casual eateries — considered a step above fast food but more affordable than a full-service restaurant — once boomed in popularity. But value-seeking consumers are now turning to other options, said Evert Gruyaert, head of U.S. restaurants and food service at Deloitte.

“There is extremely strong competition and pressure coming from quick-service brands, and casual dining now has very compelling value offers too,” he said. “Fast casual is really squeezed in the middle.”

Fast-casual chains such as Cava and Newport Beach-based Chipotle popularized the customizable lunch bowl, usually including a protein, grain, and veggies.

Advertisement

The idea took off after Chipotle founder Steve Ells noticed that customers were opening up their burritos and asking for a fork. The Mexican chain launched bowls in 2003, paving the way for the Mediterranean bowl destination Cava to open in 2006.

Sweetgreen’s menu includes a range of salads as well as warm bowls featuring rice, salmon and chicken. A caramelized garlic steak bowl sells for $17.95, and a garden cobb salad is $15.75.

With tax, tip and a drink, customers could easily spend more than $20 on lunch.

The trend of lunching on big bowls of healthy ingredients has lost some momentum in recent years.

On social media, some diners are complaining about “slop bowls,” saying that lunch shouldn’t be just a collection of ingredients thrown in a bowl.

Advertisement

Chipotle shares have slid about 30% over the last year and Cava shares have fallen close to 40% over the same time frame. Ells, who left Chipotle in 2020, returned to sandwiches and handheld foods in his new venture Counter Service.

On an earnings call in November, Sweetgreen’s Neman said the chain’s new handheld product will begin market testing early this year.

Whether in a bowl or on bread, much of Sweetgreen’s appeal comes from the perception that it’s a healthy choice. But even in Southern California, where wellness is often top of mind, its offerings are failing to attract as many customers as they once did.

“If you’re financially pushed to the limit, you need fast food to get you through the day at the cheapest possible price,” Miserandino said.

Millennials and Gen. Z, who according to Neman make up about a third of Sweetgreen’s customer base, are facing a difficult job market and cutting back on spending more than their older peers.

Advertisement

Sweetgreen is trying to find a way back into the sweet spot of salad consumers. It debuted a new nutrient-dense menu, created in collaboration with the wellness company Function.

The menu, which follows a recent surge in demand for protein and other macronutrients, includes options with extra iron, omega-3 fatty acids and antioxidants.

“Amid a challenging macro backdrop, our priorities remain clear,” Neman said in November. “I am extremely confident that our leadership team and focused strategy will lead Sweetgreen back to sustained, profitable growth.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy to step down

Published

on

Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy to step down

After nearly 14 years at the helm, Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy will step down this week, marking a major — though expected — changing of the guard at the Walt Disney Co.-owned “Star Wars” studio.

In her place, current Lucasfilm Chief Creative Officer Dave Filoni has been named president and will retain his creative title and Lucasfilm Business President and General Manager Lynwen Brennan has been named co-president, Disney said Thursday. The pair will co-lead the San Francisco-based studio and will report to Disney Entertainment Co-Chairman Alan Bergman.

“When George Lucas asked me to take over Lucasfilm upon his retirement, I couldn’t have imagined what lay ahead,” said Kennedy, 72, in a statement Thursday. “It has been a true privilege to spend more than a decade working alongside the extraordinary talent at Lucasfilm. Their creativity and dedication have been an inspiration, and I’m deeply proud of what we’ve accomplished together. I’m excited to continue developing films and television with both longtime collaborators and fresh voices who represent the future of storytelling.”

The move comes amid widespread speculation about Kennedy’s future. Handpicked in 2012 by “Star Wars” and “Indiana Jones” creator George Lucas to helm the company he founded, Kennedy oversaw the expansion of the “Star Wars” franchise into a new trilogy, two spin-off movies, as well as several TV shows, including “The Mandalorian” and “Andor.” Under her leadership, the studio also grew its presence in Disney’s theme parks with “Star Wars”-themed lands in both Anaheim’s Disneyland Resort and Walt Disney World in Florida.

But the expansion, and her tenure, were not without setbacks.

Advertisement

2018’s “Solo: A Star Wars Story” grossed a disappointing $392.9 million at the box office, after a fraught production in which the studio replaced the directors during shooting. Several “Star Wars” projects have been announced over the years with big names attached, only to be delayed or dropped, including a planned trilogy with “Game of Thrones” showrunners David Benioff and D.B. Weiss.

Kennedy told The Times in 2019 that perceptions of director churn at Lucasfilm were overblown.

“Nobody in our business develops something with one person, that’s it, and everything goes perfectly,” she said at the time. “That’s a fairly common part of the process. We fall under incredible scrutiny because it’s ‘Star Wars.’ Because of the quality I’m striving for, I’m reaching out to top talent, and vice versa.”

Kennedy also had to weather scrutiny from die-hard fans about the new direction of the franchise. Nevertheless, the newest “Star Wars” trilogy grossed a collective $4.3 billion in worldwide box office revenue, with spinoff “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” hauling in more than $1 billion globally and leading to the popular series “Andor.”

She will continue as producer of Lucasfilm’s next two theatrical films — May’s “Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu” and “Star Wars: Starfighter,” which is being helmed by “Deadpool & Wolverine” director Shawn Levy and set for release in 2027.

Advertisement

“The Mandalorian and Grogu” will mark the first “Star Wars” theatrical film since 2019’s “Star Wars: Episode IX — The Rise of Skywalker.” During production for that movie, Kennedy asked Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger if the company could take a pause on “Star Wars” films to give them more time develop new storylines. At that point, the company had released at least one “Star Wars” movie a year since 2015, while Lucas himself had previously waited at least three years between films. (Since 2019, the studio did release “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” as well as several “Star Wars”-adjacent series and and streaming films, including some Lego movies and an ILM documentary.)

“When we acquired Lucasfilm more than a decade ago, we knew we were bringing into the Disney family not only one of the most beloved and enduring storytelling universes ever created, but also a team of extraordinary talent led by a visionary filmmaker — someone who had been handpicked by George Lucas himself, no less,” Iger said in a statement Thursday. “We’re deeply grateful for Kathleen Kennedy’s leadership, her vision, and her stewardship of such an iconic studio and brand.”

Both Filoni and Brennan step into their new roles as Lucasfilm veterans.

Filoni, who frequently wears a cowboy hat in public and is thus widely recognizable to fans, was chosen by Lucas in 2005 to build the studio’s animation business. He created Lucasfilm’s first series, “Star Wars: The Clone Wars” as well as “Star Wars Rebels,” was the executive producer on shows including “The Mandalorian” and “Ahsoka” and is producer and writer of the “The Mandalorian and Grogu” film.

Brennan joined Lucasfilm visual effects studio Industrial Light & Magic in 1999 and currently leads business strategy, franchise and production operations, as well as ILM’s expansion worldwide.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Judge rejects Paramount’s request to expedite case against Warner Bros.

Published

on

Judge rejects Paramount’s request to expedite case against Warner Bros.

Paramount suffered a blow in a Delaware courtroom Thursday as a judge refused to expedite its lawsuit against Warner Bros. Discovery seeking information about internal deliberations and a financial analysis.

Reuters reported that Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn of the Delaware Chancery Court said during a hearing that Paramount had failed to show it would suffer “cognizable irreparable harm” without the financial details it sought.

Now the pressure is on Paramount to win over Warner shareholders before next week’s tender offer deadline. Investors have until Wednesday to sell their stock to Paramount for $30 a share. Paramount could extend that deadline.

Paramount sued on Monday, claiming investors needed information that Warner has yet to provide about how board members valued various assets in determining that its sale to Netflix was more lucrative.

Advertisement

Paramount wanted the judge to fast-track the proceedings to help boost its outreach to Warner shareholders.

The David Ellison-led company has insisted its $108-billion deal, including absorption of Warner debt, represents a higher value for Warner shareholders than Netflix’s Dec. 4 cash-and-stock deal. Warner board members closed the auction that night, awarding Netflix the prize.

Netflix, which has seen its stock slide about 17% since early December, is reportedly weighing whether to bolster its bid by offering all cash for Warner Bros. movie and television studio, HBO and HBO Max. Netflix declined to comment.

Paramount wants to buy all of Warner Bros. Discovery, including CNN and the other basic cable channels.

In a statement Thursday, Warner Bros. Discovery said Paramount Skydance’s legal challenge “was yet another unserious attempt to distract and the Judge saw right through it.”

Advertisement

“We are pleased a Delaware Court agreed with our belief and rejected the notion that this lawsuit needed special treatment and may have other serious flaws,” Warner Bros. Discovery said. “Despite its multiple opportunities, Paramount Skydance continues to propose a transaction that our board unanimously concluded is not superior to the merger agreement with Netflix.”

Paramount downplayed its latest setback, saying Zurn’s ruling “does not pertain to the merits of Paramount’s claim.”

Paramount, in its statement, said that Warner shareholders deserved information about how Warner board’s evaluated the value for Warner’s cable channels to better compare the two proposals.

Netflix doesn’t want the cable channels allowing Warner to move forward with plans to spin off those channels this summer. Warner shareholders would get stock in that new company, called Discovery Global.

“WBD shareholders should ask why their Board is working so hard to hide this information,” Paramount said, adding it “continues to urge WBD to make these disclosures so that WBD shareholders can make an informed decision.”

Advertisement

Times staff writer Samantha Masunaga contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending