The closed-door negotiations over California’s water future between Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Legislative leaders include a plan to borrow $9.4 billion with voter approval - but use only half the funds through 2015 and the rest later.
About a third of the money, perhaps $3 billion, would be used to develop storage, but whether
by dams or groundwater storage has not yet been spelled
out.
There is no agreement on the finance piece of the water
proposal, but sources in both houses believe the political
leadership appeared closer on this section than on
other sections of the complex water puzzle.
Earlier, state Treasurer Bill Lockyer questioned the
wisdom of adding more bond indebtedness. “If we’re not careful, rising debt service payments soon will
consume more than 10 percent of General Fund revenues,” he noted. “The days of blithely heaping more and more debt burden
on the Gneral Fund are over – at least they should be.” He said improvements in the state’s water works should be financed mainly by users, not
the state’s General Fund, which is backed by all taxpayers.
At issue is a plan to overhaul California aging water
delivery system that would move more water from rain-rich northern California to mid-state farmers and the vast population centers of the
arid south. The plan would include environmental protections
for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta east of San Francisco and create
a new body called the Stewardship Council. Its seven
members -- including four gubernatorial appointees
would make critical decisions on water projects.
Potentially, the plan could lead to the construction
of two new reservoirs – thus far, however, they are not spelled out in the
proposed legislation and none are guaranteed -- and increase the water level of a third. Similarly,
the hotly contested building of a canal to move water
through or around the delta to the south is not specifically
spelled out in the latest negotiations but is included
in separate state planning.
If ultimately approved, the proposals would mark the
most significant water development in California since
voters approved the State Water Project a half-century ago.
The governor and legislative leaders said that they
were close to an agreement last year and earlier this
year, but negotiations collapsed as time ran out and
partisanship kicked in. Major players in the latest
political fight over water, including environmentalists
and an array of water agencies, say they have been
excluded from the Capitol negotiations, which have
been tightly held in the governor’s office.
The construction of billions of dollars in projects
has drawn fire from environmentalists, who contend
that too little attention is being directed at conservation,
groundwater storage, species protection, groundwater
monitoring and other issues. They questioned provisions
in the latest proposals, still under discussion, that
could lessen monitoring and lower the amount of
water set aside to protect wildlife.
The governor has called a special session on water,
but Capitol sources in both houses said it was unlikely
that lawmakers would be able to act this week, in part
because any newly drafted legislation reflecting the
deal would need to be in print and vetted.
A north-south, bipartisan agreement on water, a rarity in the
Capitol, is the culmination of months of negotiations
and a bitter, three-pronged fight between environmentalists, northern water
interests and the powerful public water districts of
the Central Valley and Southern California.
Despite legal hurdles, two reservoirs have figured
in the discussions. One is the 1.9 million acre-foot Sites Reservoir near Maxwell in Colusa County
in the Antelope Valley. The other is Temperance Flat
complex above Fresno, a $3.3 billion project that would store about 2 million acre-feet. A third reservoir, Los Vaqueros run by Contra
Costa water officials, could have its level raised.

