Schwarzenegger & Feinstein convene closed-door conference to work on a bipartisan water bond package
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 22, 2008 at 7:06 amFrom the Visalia Times-Delta:
Saying the “window of opportunity is on us now,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein met Thursday with the governor, legislative leaders and water officials to restart a stalled bid to put a multibillion dollar water bond on the November ballot. “I think the resolution of the meeting is that the group is going to sit down together, Republicans and Democrats, and go through what has been done up to date, make the necessary changes and put together a legislative solution,” Feinstein, a California Democrat, said.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he invited Feinstein to the meeting in his office after the effort last year, which included a special session, failed primarily because of differences over new dams, including one at Temperance Flat on the San Joaquin River. “As you know, our negotiations stopped in November,” Schwarzenegger said. “They got stuck, so it was great for the senator to rekindle it again.”Feinstein said it is important to act this year because the next likely ballot for a water bond is 2012. A governor’s race in 2010 means that’s “probably not the best time to go” for such a bond, she said. “So the window of opportunity is on us now,” she said.
The Chamber of Commerce & others have filed with the state to put an $11.7 billion water infrastructure bond on the November ballot, but a chamber spokesperson said they prefer a legislative solution, and would make a decision on whether to begin collecting signatures in the upcoming weeks. Read the rest of the Visalia Times Delta story here.
Many who attended feel that it is ‘now or never’ for a water bond; next opportunity would likely be in 2010 - which would coincide with the governor’s race - “probably not the best way to go”, Feinstein noted. Brokering a compromise won’t be easy, and dams are the sticking point. From the Stockton’s RecordNet.com:
Supporters of a water supply bond that includes money to build new dams - possibly on the San Joaquin River near Fresno or along the Sacramento River near Colusa - have plans to put an initiative on the ballot this fall.
Environmentalists and their allies among the Democrats say building costly new reservoirs isn’t a wise use of scare taxpayer dollars because the state can secure far more water through stiffer conservation efforts and underground water storage.
Farmers and their allies among the Republicans say with climate change coming, more of the crucial Sierra Nevada snowpack will fall as rain instead of snow, making new reservoirs necessary to catch that runoff.
Feinstein, who has stepped up as broker in this long-running drama, shares much, but not all, of that view: “We have to be able to store some water in wet years to save for dry years … you may or may not need dams.”
Outgoing Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, who attended Thursday’s meeting, is teaming up with the environmental community to oppose the dam proposal with a series of radio and TV ads that began running this week. Stockton businessman Dean Cortopassi is a major funder of the anti-dam campaign, in no small part because it contains provisions that could lead to a Peripheral Canal around the Delta. Cortopassi has contributed $250,000 to the effort.
To read the full text of the story from Stockton’s RecordNet.com, click here.
Dams are not the only sticking point: how to finance them has also been hotly debated. From the Environmental News Service:
The California Legislature has been unable to agree on a water bond, due to conflicting views on the use of taxpayer funds for dam projects. Some legislators have demanded that billions of public dollars be granted to specific dam projects with little legislative oversight. Others, including Senate President pro Tem Don Perata, have insisted that bond funds should be allocated to the most competitive water supply projects, and that the Legislature should retain the authority to appropriate funding each year.
In December, the California Chamber of Commerce the Chamber submitted four versions of a water bond ballot initiative to the attorney general, each totaling about $11.7 billion, and each including over $3 billion for construction of dams.
Opponents of new taxes who do not see the need for water infrastructure say that if any of these initiatives is approved, California’s taxpayers would be committed to paying over $700 million in tax dollars per year to cover this new debt.
But despite differences of opinion, everyone at the meeting agreed that after two years of wrangling over water, this election year is the time to put a water bond on the ballot. The governor said, “We went around the table and we asked each and every one, do you really feel in your gut that you want to get this done, and this is important? And they all said yes, with great enthusiasm.”
The group plans to meet again in about two weeks. For the full text of the story from the Environmental News Service, click here.
Comments
Leave a Reply