A crowd of 50 local residents and community advocates gathered at San Pascual Park in Los Angeles in opposition to the city of Pasadena’s Arroyo Seco Water Reuse Project on Monday, June 29, ahead of a Los Angeles City Council meeting this week where the project might be officially opposed.
The project, between South Pasadena and Pasadena as the lead agency, seeks to address water-quality issues along the Arroyo Seco channel through the San Rafael and San Pascual sites.
The San Rafael site is in Pasadena, southwest of the San Rafael overpass and to the west of the Arroyo Seco Channel; the San Pascual site is in South Pasadena and Los Angeles, near San Pascual Avenue on the north and Stoney Drive on the east.
Several spoke out against the project, citing the environmental impact, removal of trees, diversion of water to a local golf course and calls from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation for “full avoidance” of the area.
“You cannot claim to be protecting the environment while removing mature trees, destroying wildlife habitat and threatening one of the few accessible green spaces available to our community,” Amada Segura, a local resident and organizer with Save San Pascual Park said.
The Arroyo Seco Water Reuse project is a result of years of planning since 2019, and aims to respond to a state mandate to reduce bacteria levels of the Arroyo Seco Channel. In 2010, The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board established a total maximum daily load number for bacteria, representing “the capacity of a receiving water to absorb a pollutant.” This implementation affects the L.A. river watershed, including the Arroyo Seco Channel.
The two sites would divert, infiltrate and treat water from the channel before returning it — 84 million gallons infiltrated per year at the San Pascual site and 6 million gallons at San Rafael. Treatment would remove 157 pounds of zinc per year and 12.5 pounds per year at San Pascual and San Rafael, respectively.
Other project co-benefits include: increasing walkability plus access to recreational spaces and replacing invasive species with native plants aligned with the chaparral, sage-scrub and riparian habitat.
Nearly 140 trees would be removed from both sites — including 82 non-native Mexican palms, 29 protected trees and 14 trees significant under city ordinances. The project would plant 216 trees; the city of Pasadena purchased native sycamores and is currently propagating 52 native oaks for site placement.
The project states that less than 10% of water would be captured for irrigation at the nearby Arroyo Seco Golf Course in South Pasadena. According to a frequently-asked-questions document, the golf course “has an existing, historic irrigation system that captures water runoff” and this project would “upgrade and modernize this legacy system to meet current water quality and conservation standards.”
Currently, the Arroyo Seco Water Reuse project is in the public comment review period for an environmental impact report (EIR). This is the result of a settlement from a July 2024 lawsuit by local organizer Clara Solis that argued for a higher level of review from the city’s previous mitigated negative declaration.
Pasadena’s project manager Christina Monde said the city faces increased pressure because of the state mandate, including incurring potential fees from the LA Regional Water Quality Control Board.
“We were out of compliance for the dry weather bacteria flow since September of 2023. The fine that the board can levy is $10,000 a day for every day you’re out of compliance,” Monde said in an interview. “The good thing is if you are actively pursuing a project and the board sees that you’re trying, they will typically give you a leeway because to do these projects is an unfunded mandate.”
A total of $14.6 million dollars of funding was secured from a program under the California Department of Parks and Recreation; LA County’s Safe, Clean Water Program, also known as Measure W; and local return dollars from both cities.
According to the EIR, the city of Pasadena consulted with the Kizh nation in April 2025 for mitigation measures in the event of the discovery of tribal cultural objects or human remains.
Andrew Salas, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation’s hereditary chief, called for “full avoidance” of the project’s location — once a historic village named Hahamongna. With the tribe’s substantial evidence, the area has a “high probability of encountering ancestral human remains,” according to his letter to Pasadena in June 2025.
“I feel that all we are in these consultations that are mandated by law by the state of California — all we are is a check box,” Salas said in an interview last week. “However, when [the city is] provided substantial evidence, they avoid it, they ignore it.”
At Monday’s rally, Los Angeles City Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, representing Council District 14 in Boyle Heights, Downtown LA and parts of northeast LA, discussed Resolution 26-0777, which she proposed in late May opposing Pasadena’s project.
“To the cities of Pasadena and South Pasadena, my message is simple: go back to the drawing board,” Councilmember Jurado said. “It’s time to abandon this project as proposed and come back with a process worthy of the communities you’re asking to partner with.”
While the project mostly utilizes land in Pasadena and South Pasadena, the project proposes the use of 0.5 acres of L.A. park land at San Pascual Park. If passed by the LA City Council, Jurado’s resolution would declare the park as a “public open space asset, inviolate and in perpetuity” with no industrial infrastructure use.
Rally organizers listed over 20 organizations opposing the project, including the neighborhood councils of Arroyo Seco, Eagle Rock, Highland Park, Lincoln Heights and Los Feliz.
According to a response from a public records request by Pasadena Star-News, at least 150 public comments from residents were received by the city of Pasadena as of June 23, with a majority in opposition to the project.
Monday’s coalition of residents urged for an extension to the public comment period, support for Councilmember Jurado’s resolution and to explore other solutions such as more nature-based alternatives and targeting the sources of pollution.
Councilmember Jurado’s resolution is up for a vote by the L.A. City Council at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, July 1; residents can attend in-person at L.A. City Hall or watch online. The public comment period for the Arroyo Seco Water Reuse project’s EIR closes on Thursday, July 2.
Camelia Heins is a correspondent with the Southern California News Group.