|
|
 |
 |
GEORGE SKELTON
California's fragile water system is too important to risk on
slapdash fixes
|
Los
Angeles Times
October 8, 2007
SACRAMENTO
— It is hard to decide which outcome to root for in the
current Capitol water war: gridlock or grand compromise.
At times like this, one is reminded of that old line: "No
man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature
is in session."
Mark Twain or Will Rogers usually is credited with that
observation, but it was actually popularized by a New York
judge, Gideon J. Tucker, in an 1866 estate case.
It's timely now because the Legislature is in a snail-paced
special session trying to negotiate an epic plan to provide
more water storage and repair the leaky, creaky Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta.
Nobody's life or liberty is threatened, but plenty of property
and assets are -- including taxes that would be collected to
pay off the added state debt.
The biggest danger, however, is to the rare opportunity to
patch and expand California's rotting waterworks. If the
lawmakers act rashly, they could blow it politically and
policy-wise. Their plan might not sell to voters or, if it
does, not be the right fix for the sinking water system. That
could set the state back many years.
State Senate Leader Don Perata (D-Oakland) and Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger are determined to place a multibillion-dollar
water bond issue on the Feb. 5 presidential primary ballot.
But they're up against an Oct. 16 secretary of state's
deadline for working out a legislative deal.
It's not clear what their rush is. There also will be two
other statewide elections next year, in June and November.
"We don't do our best work when we're rushed," says
Assemblywoman Lois Wolk (D-Davis), who heads the Assembly
water committee. "If we're going to ask the people of
California to invest money, we ought to make certain it's a
good investment.
"I'm very skeptical we can do this in the next week.
Perhaps we could do it in a couple of months."
However, water is such a contentious issue -- fought over by
fiercely competing, righteous interests and regulated by
turf-protecting government entities -- that maybe Capitol
politicians should be encouraged to agree on whatever they
can, even if it means taking only an incremental step toward
fixing the fragile state water system.
Sen. Michael Machado (D-Linden), a lifelong San Joaquin County
farmer and the Senate's water expert, who supports Perata's
bond proposal, has grown cynical about the ability of all the
diverse factions to work cohesively for the common good.
"When you get a dozen agencies arguing over what should
be done in the delta," he says, "often the best
action we can get is inaction. What action they have taken in
the past has been contrary to what's in the delta's best
interest."
The delta estuary is California's main water hub, with giant
pumps feeding state and federal aqueducts that supply drinking
water for 24 million people and irrigation for 3 million
acres. It's in dire need of levee repairs for flood protection
and re-plumbing to make water deliveries more reliable.
Most urgent, it needs to become fish-friendly again. The delta
has evolved into a deathtrap for many species, from the tiny
smelt to popular salmon.
In August, a federal judge ordered protections for the
disappearing smelt -- "the canary in the coal mine"
-- that will turn off fish-chomping pumps in spring and
possibly cost Southern California a third of its delta water.
It's one reason Sacramento thinks voters may be willing to
spend more money on water facilities. Another is the prospect
of California heading into a prolonged drought. Also, there's
a growing public concern that global warming will reduce the
Sierra snowpack, resulting in more volatile runoff and
disastrous floods.
Schwarzenegger and Perata have sharply different views about
what should be done.
And, in a rarity, the Republican governor and Republican
legislators are on the same side.
Schwarzenegger is pushing a $9.1-billion bond that would
emphasize dam construction. There'd be $5.1 billion to build
two dams in Fresno and Colusa counties and to expand a third
in Contra Costa. Another $2.1 billion would go for groundwater
storage, local projects and ecological restorations.
Delta fix-ups would be allocated $1.9 billion. But none of it
could be used for a new, more reliable water-transfer system,
such as a delta bypass -- a "peripheral canal" --
that voters rejected 25 years ago. Any legislative decision on
water re-channeling must be delayed until next year when a
blue-ribbon commission appointed by Schwarzenegger makes its
recommendations.
Democrats oppose state dam building, although they're willing
to provide grants for local construction. The governor
proposes that the state pay for 50% of the dam costs.
Democrats argue that, historically, the state has paid for
only 4%, with water users footing the rest.
"The issue's not dams, it's who pays," says
Assemblyman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz), one of the negotiators.
"The governor's proposal is DOA," Machado asserts.
Perata is sponsoring a $6.8-billion bond -- increased by $1
billion on Friday -- that would provide $2 billion for local
water supply grants, including for dams. There'd also be $2.4
billion for the delta -- but nothing for a canal -- and $2.4
billion for water cleanup and reclamation.
Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines of Clovis drew
"a line in the sand" last week and declared: No
dams, no deal.
But despite the tough rhetoric, that seems to leave wiggle
room for a compromise using Perata's local grant idea.
"I'm willing to negotiate," says Sen. Dave Cogdill
of Modesto, the Republican water expert. "But our guys
are adamant this has to be real. We have to believe it will
result in construction of these [dams]. Republicans feel like
they've been duped too many times."
If the governor and lawmakers can agree on reservoirs and
reclamation, that could be worthwhile. But they should forget
the delta for now. Wait for the governor's blue-ribbon report.
Then offer the voters a complete remodeling plan, not some
vague sketch.
Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger should immediately sign a Perata
bill that has been sitting dormant on his desk. It would
appropriate $611 million in already-authorized bond money for
various water projects, including a few delta repairs.
During the current battle, we should be rooting for something
between gridlock and grandiose.
george.skelton@latimes.com
|
Copyright 1999-2007, California Coastal Coalition
Phone: (760) 944-3564
|
|
|
 |