Veto washes out key California water bill
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 3, 2008 at 1:35 pmFrom the California Progress Report, this commentary by Mark Schlosberg, California director of the Food and Water Watch:
With California in the midst of a drought and many communities experiencing water rationing, it is increasingly important for our elected officials to take concrete steps to ensure the continued vitality of our water resources. In this context, Governor Schwarzenegger’s recent veto of AB 2275 (Fuentes, D-Los Angeles) is particularly disturbing.
AB 2275, which passed the legislature with broad support, was a simple and straightforward piece of legislation. It would have merely required the public disclosure of how much California water is being bottled by water bottling companies. This information is important for policy makers at the state and local level to evaluate the impact of bottling operations on local water supplies and make decisions about how our precious water resources are allocated.
This is especially important in California, where there are more than 100 bottling facilities. While the amount of water that is bottled is small in relation to the total amount of fresh water used by Californians, the extraction of water for bottling can have dramatic effects on the local environment and particular watersheds.
Read more from the California Progress Report by clicking here.
Governor kills port smog-fighting bill, signs into law sprawl and water supply measures
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 1, 2008 at 7:46 amFrom the Los Angeles Times:
California embarked Tuesday on a sweeping effort to curb suburban sprawl by rewarding communities that build homes and workplaces closer together to reduce pollution that contributes to global warming. However, a multibillion-dollar proposal to curb air pollution near the state’s ports was rejected by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who concluded that the related cargo fees would harm an already suffering economy.
The state’s water crisis also attracted his attention Tuesday as he approved $842 million to boost the water supply and bolster endangered levees.
The three environment-related measures were in the spotlight as Schwarzenegger finished work on this year’s legislation before a midnight deadline. In 2008, Schwarzenegger has signed 771 bills and vetoed 415.
Read more from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here. To find out specific information about the water-related legislation Governor Schwarzenegger signed yesterday, click here.
Governor Schwarzenegger signs legislation to improve water supply reliability and conservation
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 30, 2008 at 2:36 pm
From the Office of the Governor, this press release:
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed SBx2 1 by Senator Pro Tempore Don Perata (D-San Francisco), which appropriates $842 million in funding from two initiatives passed by voters in 2006 - Proposition 84 and Proposition 1E. While these funds will help water agencies address the current statewide drought and provide a first step toward investing in water supply reliability, a much more comprehensive plan is needed in order to update California’s water system, which urgently needs increased storage, improved conveyance, a restored and better protected Delta ecosystem and greater water conservation. The Governor also signed four additional bills that will help address our state’s water crisis and further increase water conservation.
“This funding is a band-aid measure that will help water agencies improve their conservation efforts in the face of the state’s current drought but will not solve our long-term water supply problems, which require a more comprehensive solution to ensure that California has the water it needs to keep our environment and economy healthy,” Governor Schwarzenegger said. “I encourage each and every Californian to look at ways to reduce their water usage whenever possible, and this package of legislation will further aid in those conservation efforts which are so critical to California’s water supply right now.”
SBx2 1 also includes $200 million to help stabilize the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta, help prevent catastrophic failure of the Delta’s levees and accommodate pumping restrictions mandated by a federal court ruling. Additionally, the legislation provides $100 million to help clean up ground water basins in Southern California.
In a signing message on the bill, the Governor expressed disappointment that it provides $200 million less than his proposed January 2008 budget, and because more than $580 million in funding was taken out of his budget and placed into a special session bill, money that would have been available immediately will not be available until March 2009.
In addition to SBx2 1, the Governor has also signed the following bills:
AB 2882 by Assemblymember Lois Wolk (D-Davis) encouraging public water agencies throughout the state to adopt conservation rate structures that reward consumers who conserve water. Current state law authorizes water agencies to promote conservation using rate structures; however, some agencies are concerned that such structures may not meet the requirements of Proposition 218, a state law enacted by voters in 1996 to restrict the use of revenue tools such as water rates to finance local services. This legislation clarifies the allocation-based rate structures and establishes standards that protect consumers by ensuring a lower base rate for those who conserve water and requiring that higher rates for use in excess of the base rate do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the water service.
AB 3030 by Assemblymember Julia Brownley (D-Santa Monica) clarifies the procedures a local public water district is able to employ when faced with an increase in wholesale water rates. Ultimately, the bill will allow these agencies to respond to rate increases more quickly and efficiently by allowing for automatic adjustments corresponding to changes in the wholesale cost of water.
AB 2356 by Assemblyman Juan Arambula (D-Fresno) will help low-income rural communities avoid a cash-flow crisis by giving the State Water Resources Control Board the authority to disburse up to twenty-five percent of a wastewater infrastructure grant to a disadvantaged community in advance of costs incurred to help them pay their contractors.
SB 27 by Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) requires the Office of Emergency Services to establish an interagency “Multi-Hazard Coordination Task Force” to develop an emergency response strategy for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
While these bills signed by the Governor will help further the state’s conservation efforts and make some incremental improvements to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, they represent only one component of the comprehensive package that is needed to upgrade California’s water infrastructure. The Governor continues to urge legislators to pass a comprehensive water plan that can go before California voters.
In July, he and Senator Dianne Feinstein proposed a compromise plan to the legislature to update California’s water system and put the state on the path toward restoring the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, expanding water supplies and promoting conservation efforts
The $9.3 billion bond proposal that the Governor and Senator Feinstein have proposed includes the following elements from all stakeholders and is a compromise approach that will move California toward a reliable water future:
- Increased water storage to ensure our water supply is more reliable year-to-year and we’re able to capture excess water in wet years to use in dry years
- Improved water conveyance to reduce water shortages
- Restored Delta ecosystem to allow California to take control of its own water systems
- Increased conservation and tools to use water more efficiently
Find out more about Governor Schwarzenegger’s stance on California’s water issues by clicking here.
Nov. 4th Election: ‘The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly’: the ugly being no water measure; Jeff Kightlinger of MWD comments
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 30, 2008 at 8:34 amFrom the California Planning Report, an article about three bond projects, one good, one bad, and one UGLY - ugly because it didn’t happen - the water bond. Jeff Kightlinger from Metropolitan Water District comments:
The UGLY (No Water Bond)
This summer, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senator Dianne Feinstein proposed a compromise plan to update California’s water system by increasing storage, improving conveyance, protecting the Delta’s ecosystem, and promoting water conservation. Given such bipartisan recognition of a water crisis and the need for an immediate solution, why isn’t there a state water bond on the November 4th ballot?
Jeff Kightlinger, General Manager MWD: The proposal from the governor and Senator Feinstein was a very good proposal. It was balanced and fair. There were also a number of legislative proposals that were quite similar in scope that had some tweaks and changes, but by and large, they were similar. Logic would have said we should be able to get together and find a consensus on one of these bonds. There were a number of reasons we didn’t. One of those reasons was the budget impasse. It became hard to work on water in addition to the budget. The fact that we couldn’t put together a budget until 70 or 80 days late had a definite impact on the water bond.
Another major reason was that some felt it was premature. We know we have a water crisis and a need for water infrastructure; we know we need a water bond and we need the financing for those water projects. However, the governor had launched the Delta Vision project, which is due to come out with a report in October 2008. I think there was some reluctance to put together a bond that was going to deal with Delta issues and move it forward when the Delta Vision’s final report hasn’t yet been released.
Read more from Jeff Kightlinger in the California Progress Report by clicking here.
Q&A: Governor’s top water exec, Lester Snow, is hot for $10 billion bond
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 29, 2008 at 9:02 am
From the Sacramento Bee:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a drought emergency this summer, and he is negotiating with Sen. Dianne Feinstein and state lawmakers on a $10 billion bond for water storage and conservation.
In the midst of it all is Lester Snow, 57, who has served since 2004 as Schwarzenegger’s director of the Department of Water Resources. The aptly named Snow, a Democrat, previously led the California Bay-Delta Authority, then Cal-Fed, and the San Diego County Water Authority.
Q: Where do things stand on water bond negotiations?
A: I believe some good progress was made late in the session within the Assembly Democratic and Republican caucuses based on the (Schwarzenegger-Feinstein) draft. There’s very little question, especially given the water circumstances now, about getting the bond before voters in the most expeditious way, whether it’s a bond bill at the beginning of session or an initiative.
Read more of this Q&A with Lester Snow from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Editorial: A key bill to help in Delta disaster; Governor should sign measure to make funds available now
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 25, 2008 at 7:05 am
From the Sacramento Bee, this editorial:
More than 1,100 miles of levees curve through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta – a set of fortifications that is comparable in length to one-fourth of the Great Wall of China.
Unlike the Great Wall, however, most of the Delta’s levees are built on unstable, peat-filled soil. Many have foundations below sea level. If an earthquake were to strike this region, numerous levees could crumble at once, allowing salt water to rush into an estuary that provides drinking water for 22 million people in California.
Geologists say it’s not a matter of if such a disaster will occur. The question is when it will happen. That means the state can’t just make long-term plans for coping with temblors and sea level rise in the Delta. It also needs a short-term plan for a disaster that could happen tomorrow.
During this session of the Legislature, lawmakers passed Senate Bill X2 1, a bill that would allocate nearly $821 million in bond funds that voters approved through Propositions 84 and 1E and previous bond measures. About one-sixth of this money – $135 million – would go to safeguarding the Delta’s most vulnerable levees and financing an emergency response. One big need is for the state Department of Water Resources to stockpile adequate rock and store it in key locations, so contractors can quickly respond and repair a levee breech.
Authored by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, SB X2 1 would fund a range of projects – some with less urgency than Delta levee protection. Overall, however, it’s a bill the governor should sign.
Read the rest of this editorial from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
House bans diverting water from Great Lakes
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 24, 2008 at 5:33 amFrom the New York Times:
The House approved a bill Tuesday to protect the vast body of fresh water in the Great Lakes region by prohibiting almost any diversion of it to places outside the lakes’ basin and requiring the eight states bordering the lakes to follow new conservation standards.
The vote was 390 to 25 in favor of the bill, which has already been passed by the Senate and is expected to be signed by President Bush.
The measure, the Great Lakes Compact, was negotiated by the eight states. A decade in the making, it is intended to ease longstanding fears that states outside the region, or even other countries, could tap into the lakes, possibly deplete them and do long-term damage to their basin’s natural environment and economy.
Together, the five Great Lakes account for 20 percent of the world’s supply of fresh surface water, and an estimated 40 million people get their water from the lakes’ basin. Scientists and environmental advocates who backed the legislation said they considered the lakes not a regional resource but a national one, whose health and integrity, they said, are in the entire country’s interest.
Read more from the New York Times by clicking here.
Bill to be introducted in Washington DC that would suspend Endangered Species Act at Delta pumping plants during droughts
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 17, 2008 at 3:15 pmFrom the News-Tribune, Tacoma:
California Republican George Radanovich wants to suspend one of the nation’s premier environmental laws in order to increase water pumping out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
In a long-shot bill being introduced Thursday, Radanovich proposes to exempt two Delta-area pumping plants from the Environmental Species Act during designated droughts. Farmers would gain irrigation water - essentially, at the expense of fish. “This is all about preparation,” Radanovich said Wednesday. “It gives (us) a means to turn the pumps on and store up water.”
If enacted, Radanovich’s bill would dramatically shift the flow of water during times of drought. It effectively would override a Fresno, Calif.-based federal judge’s decisions designed to protect species including the Delta smelt.
Realistically, the new bill is unlikely to be enacted any time soon. “I will support George’s effort, but I don’t think it has much chance of passage,” said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Calif. “The reality is, I don’t think it will have much hope.”
Read the rest of this story from the News-Tribune by clicking here.
Water bond difference must be solved, says commentary
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 13, 2008 at 6:45 amFrom the Salinas Californian, this commentary, written by Assemblywoman Anna M. Caballero (D-Salinas), who gives a rundown of the negotiations regarding the water bond:
We spent many hours negotiating with our Republican colleagues. A key difference was the Republicans’ insistence that funding for new storage facilities be continuously appropriated, rather than appropriated annually by the Legislature following the oversight budget hearings that apply to all other programs. While some members of the Democratic caucus were willing to support funding for dams, a $3 billion blank check was too far for most Democratic legislators to support. We worked hard on a compromise position but unfortunately, the clock ran out before we were able to reach a final agreement in this legislative session.
Regrettably, we will not have a water bond on the November ballot. But I am encouraged that we were able to make progress in bridging historical differences on water policy. The Legislature is still in an extraordinary session called by the governor because of the water crisis. We need to continue our discussion through the fall to be ready with a solution as soon as possible.
Read the entire commentary from the Salinas Californian by clicking here.
Bill for water fixes stuck in legislative limbo
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 13, 2008 at 6:39 amFrom the San Jose Mercury News:
With all the attention on the diminishing statewide water supply and grim forecasts that drought could worsen substantially next year, one might think policymakers would move quickly to spend money already approved by voters to work on the problem.
Think again.
Widely supported legislation needed to spend $820 million in available bond funds is stuck in limbo, the victim of power politics, a budget stalemate and bad timing. The bill would release some of the $7 billion in remaining bond money that has already been approved by voters to fix statewide water supply problems. It has the support of major water agencies and some of their frequent adversaries — major environmental groups.
It contains about $30 million to help pay for the Contra Costa Water District’s new intake, which will help the district draw cleaner water from the Delta, and more than $100 million to prepare for levee breaks and shore up levees that protect pipes that deliver water to the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s 1.3 million customers. It also contains funding to link supply systems so that water can be better moved around and to clean up polluted groundwater in Southern California.
Water officials say many of those projects could be done quickly and could even help if this winter is dry enough to turn a mild drought into a severe one. “The sooner that bill is signed, the sooner work can commence on all of these fixes,” said Randy Kanouse, the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s lobbyist.
Read more from the San Jose Mercury News by clicking here.
Denial will not solve water woes, says editorial: Crises often spawn “solutions” with drastic consequences for those with the least political power. And doesn’t that sound like us [Nor. Cal].?
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 12, 2008 at 6:33 amFrom the Chico Enterprise-Record, this editorial, which compares the budget deficit to the state’s water situation:
We’re spending more than we’re taking in, as a look at Lake Oroville will attest.
The reason this is scary is that inaction on water pushes the state toward a crisis. If something isn’t done — and it’s probably too late by now anyway — there won’t be enough water for most of the residents in the state. There will need to drastic changes in urban residents’ lifestyles. There will need to be damaging changes to the economies of the farming counties south of the delta.
Up here north of the delta, we’d probably be fine. In places like the Paradise ridge with its dicey water supplies, there’ll be some hardships. Farmers with weaker water rights will have to cut back. But for most of the Sacramento Valley, life would go on just fine, except for one thing.
Crises often spawn “solutions” with drastic consequences for those with the least political power. And doesn’t that sound like us?
Read the rest of this editorial from the Chico Enterprise Record by clicking here.
Commentary: California must continue to seek solutions to water crisis
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 10, 2008 at 6:46 amFrom the California Farm Bureau Federation:
Anyone who’s planted a new orchard knows that it can take years for a tree to bear fruit. And anyone who has worked on legislation knows that it often takes years for a good idea to bear fruit, too.
That’s why Farm Bureau has worked so consistently, for so many years, pursuing reliable water supplies for California. That’s why we will continue to work on this important issue for the remainder of this year, next year–and the following year, and the year after that if we have to–until our state has a comprehensive solution to its water problems.
We moved closer to a solution this year than we have in a long time. For that, we can thank Gov. Schwarzenegger, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, state Sen. Dave Cogdill and others in the Legislature who worked long and hard to create a water bond package that would address California’s needs.
Farm Bureau worked with all of them to make sure that any comprehensive water package included the elements we considered most important. We didn’t agree with everything that was discussed but we stayed involved because our members have so much at stake.
Ultimately, the clock ran out. Despite the best efforts of the governor, Sen. Feinstein, Sen. Cogdill and other leaders who recognize the problem, it looks like another year will pass without the water solution California needs so urgently.
Schwarzenegger uses manufactured drought to push water bond
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 6, 2008 at 7:20 am
From Dan Bacher:
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his relentless desire to destroy the imperiled California Delta and its ecosystem, yesterday used the manufactured “drought” as his excuse to push for his outrageously expensive $9.3 billion water bond.
Nowhere in his statement following the Department of Water Resources’ Drought Summit held Thursday in Sacramento did he mention the real reason for the current “drought” - the draining of Shasta, Folsom, Oroville and other California reservoirs over the past two years to serve the needs of subsidized corporate agribusiness on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley.
At the meeting, members of the Schwarzenegger Administration and federal and local water officials “discussed the current drought and ways to alleviate the effects of ongoing dry conditions,” according to the Governor’s office. The Department of Water Resources also announced the creation of the 2009 Drought Water Bank, which will purchase water from “willing sellers” and transfer it to water agencies that are at risk of experiencing water shortages next year due to drought conditions.
“California’s drought is impacting our economy, our agriculture and our families, and an end to these dry conditions is nowhere in sight,” Schwarzenegger said. “We are facing the potential for another dry year in 2009, which is why my Administration is actively planning for an ongoing drought and working to alleviate the effects of the state’s dry conditions. The Water Bank program will help by providing water to communities who need it most.”
From the Delta to the Colorado: Michael George opines on California’s water policy deadlock
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 3, 2008 at 5:57 amFrom The Planning Report:
With a crowded and controversial November ballot looming and no end in sight to the state’s budget woes, California’s water crisis has seemingly become a casualty of difficult political times. With the political deadlock on water issues in mind, MIR sought the candid view of Michael George, executive vice president of Golden State Water Company, one of the leading water management companies in California, and a long-time participant in water policy debate and action. The following response reflects his personal observations and, he cautions, those which are too candid should not be held against his employer.
As the California budget stalemate drags on and as political attention turns to the conventions and presidential campaigns, now is a good time to assess the prospects for desperately needed progress on our state’s impending water crisis. From my perspective, the budget, the political process, and the water crisis have become dangerously—and perhaps hopelessly—intertwined.
First, it is important for California—and Southern California in particular—to realize that a water crisis is upon us, with little time left for practical and effective reaction. All of our sources of imported water are under pressure, from growing demand, the need for environmental restoration, regulatory and legal gridlock, and long-term inattention to our infrastructure. Based on new limitations on importing water from the Colorado River and from Northern California through the Delta, Southern California must emphasize more stringent and intelligent conservation as well as improved management of local resources (particularly native groundwater and institutional arrangements). However, without real solutions to the challenges to our imported supplies, Southern California’s economy, life-style, and vibrancy are at risk.
Second, crafting solutions to our imported water challenges requires not only good planning but also courageous, far-reaching, and non-partisan leadership in Sacramento—just at the time that political courage, a long-term perspective on problems, and willingness to reach across the aisle to find solutions have become no-shows in the capital. Each of the three branches of government has a role to play on water issues, and none of them is currently doing so constructively or consistently. …
Read more from The Planning Report by clicking here.
Friends of the River opposes ‘compromise’ water bond
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 1, 2008 at 6:52 amFrom IndyBay.org, this press release from Friends of the River:
Friends of the River today announced its opposition to new water bond legislation – AB8xx – touted by its authors as a compromise between various legislative factions that have been debating the merits, content, and amount of a water bond for more than two years.
“AB8xx may represent a political compromise,” stated Steve Evans, Conservation Director of Friends of the River, “But it is bad for California’s environment and it will be bad for the California taxpayer.”
The proposed $9.8 billion bond was introduced by Assemblymembers Jared Huffman, Anna Caballero, and Lois Wolk. Some California Legislators are demanding that a water bond be placed on the November ballot as a condition of their approval of the state’s long-delayed budget, which have driven rumors that there is a budget/water bond deal in the works.
“It’s never a good idea to push through controversial legislation that will require the taxpayers to borrow billions of dollars while the Legislature struggles with a multi-billion budget deficit in the last days of the session,” said Evans. “This almost always results in the generation of poor public policy,” he noted.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates the total cost of the $9.8 billion bond to be more than $19 billion over 30 years and will require an increased debt payment by the taxpayers of $700 million annually. The state already has an annual debt payment of nearly $12 billion.
The LAO’s findings prompted Evans to question why the Legislature is considering a multi-billion dollar water bond when the state is deeply in debt, approval of a budget is weeks overdue, the California economy is in recession, and California taxpayers are struggling to make ends meet.
Read the rest of this press release at IndyBay.org by clicking here.
Assembly OKs water bill despite lack of a budget
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 30, 2008 at 1:35 pmFrom the Woodland Daily Democrat:
Acting Thursday, during a special legislative session on water, the State Assembly approved a proposal to spend prior voter approved bonds on urgently-needed water storage, reliability, and conservation efforts. Senate Bill 1xx by Senate Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, appropriates about $820 million in funds from bonds including Proposition 84 and Proposition 1E, which voters passed in 2006.
Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, D-Davis, chairwoman of the Assembly’s Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee and Special Committee on Water, presented the bill on the Assembly floor.
“This measure is a first step to providing Californians throughout the state with a safe, reliable, long-term water supply,” she said. “It is essential that we allocate these funds immediately in response to the state’s most urgent needs.”
SB 1xx makes a number of appropriations, most significantly $325 million to help stabilize the Sacramento San Joaquin Bay Delta, which supplies roughly two-thirds of the state with drinking water, and is the heart of California’s water and agricultural system.
Read more from the Woodland Daily Democrat by clicking here.
Bad bonds and good legislation: special committee on water gets an earful
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 30, 2008 at 1:20 pmFrom the California Progress Report:
On Tuesday, the Assembly Special Committee on Water passed two strong water bills to the Assembly Floor and also heard testimony from many parties who have serious concerns about proposals to place a nearly $10 billion water bond on the November ballot.
The committee’s first order of business was to pass SBX2 1 (Perata), which appropriates existing bond funds for much needed ecosystem restoration, water quality, and water supply reliability projects, and ABX2 7 (Wolk) , which ensures water planning and management will incorporate existing information on the impacts of climate change to water resources. SBX2 1 subsequently passed off of the Assembly Floor on Thursday and ABX2 7 is scheduled to be heard on the Assembly Floor on Friday. Both of these bills have garnered broad support and are priority bills for the environmental community.
The committee then turned its attention to an informational hearing on the Assembly water bond proposal, ABX2 8, and the bond proposed by Governor Schwarzenegger and U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. Both these proposals would provide over $9 billion in bond funds. Both include $3 billion for highly controversial water storage projects including new dams. The informational hearing consisted of several panels of stakeholders giving their input on the water proposals.
Read more from the California Progress Report by clicking here.
Let’s hope the politicians’ mouths run dry before the state does, says editorial
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 29, 2008 at 7:47 amFrom the Modesto Bee:
How long have Sacramento’s politicians been arguing over a water bond? A year? A decade? Or does it just feel like forever?
As the politicians go round and round without budging, it’s only natural to come full circle. And so we have. A couple of months ago, Gov. Schwarzenegger proposed a $9.3 billion water bond — his second try for such a bond in two years. On Aug. 15, Assembly Democrats proposed a $9.8 billion water bond, their second try in two years.
After looking at the two very similar ideas, it’s clear we’ve been here before. And the same issue that kept our elected officials from getting a bond onto the ballot in 2007 is likely to kill it again in 2008.
The sticking point is the same this year as last year: allocation of funds, with Democrats wanting an ‘annual allocation’ (meaning every year, the legislature must approve the funds), and Republicans wanting only regulatory oversight on spending once the project is approved.
Read the full text of this editorial from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
Editorial: How dry we are! Let’s act like it, too
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 29, 2008 at 7:36 amFrom the Sacramento Bee:
The exposed stumps and shoreline of Folsom Lake tell the story this year. With reservoir levels so low, Californians can’t afford to waste a drop. Conservation has to be part of a multi-pronged strategy to stretch supplies and survive droughts.
To that end, Assemblyman John Laird is trying to pass a bill that would require a 20 percent reduction in urban per-capita water usage by 2020. Cities and counties would have flexibility in how to reach this target, but they could no longer casually water their sidewalks, as occurs almost every day in Sacramento, Los Angeles and other cities.
Laird’s legislation, AB 2175, has passed the Assembly but is in trouble in the Senate. Its survival could depend on two local senators – Mike Machado of Linden and Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento.
Read more of this editorial from the Sacramento Bee by clicking here.
Assembly Democrats prevail on water bill
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 29, 2008 at 7:33 amFrom the Los Angeles Times:
In a heated debate Thursday, Assembly Republicans and Democrats agreed that California needs more reliable water supplies. But Republicans voted against spending $820 million from voter-approved water bonds because, they said, Democrats had not consulted them and too much of the money was dedicated to studies instead of construction.
“I’m studied out,” said Assemblyman Joel Anderson (R-San Diego). “What my constituents want is brick and mortar.”
But the dominant Democrats overrode Republicans’ objections and passed a bill to spend $820 million from four water bonds. The money would go toward preparing for an earthquake in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, from which most of the state’s drinking and irrigation water is pumped; finding supplies for rural communities with contaminated aquifers; and projects around the state for conservation, recycling and groundwater cleanup.
“This is about putting to work money the voters want us to put to work,” said Assemblywoman Lori Saldana (D-San Diego).
Read more from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.
More coverage from the California Chronicle:
Today, during a special legislative session on water, the State Assembly approved a proposal to spend prior voter approved bonds on urgently-needed water storage, reliability, and conservation efforts. Senate Bill 1xx by Senate President pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) appropriates approximately $820 million in funds from bonds including Proposition 84 and Proposition 1E, which voters passed in 2006.
“This week, during a hearing of the Special Committee on Water, Californians from throughout the state whose livelihoods depend on adequate water supply urged the state to step up and take the necessary steps to provide for this state´s water needs. Today, the Assembly responded by passing SB 1xx, which allocates funds desperately needed to provide relief from the current drought, help stabilize the failing Sacramento San Joaquin Bay Delta, and invest in water supply quality and reliability,” said Assemblywoman Lois Wolk (D-Davis), chair of the Assembly´s Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee and Special Committee on Water, who presented the bill on the Assembly floor.
“This measure is a first step to providing Californians throughout the state with a safe, reliable, long-term water supply. It is essential that we allocate these funds immediately in response to the state´s most urgent needs,” she said.
More from the California Chronicle by clicking here.