Water politics get murkier

By: North County Times Opinion staff - | Thursday, October 4, 2007 9:19 PM PDT ∞

Our view: Special session on water unlikely to help slake San Diego County's thirst

If you were expecting the politicians in Sacramento to solve the state's water problems just because the governor called for a special session to address the issue, you're going to be disappointed.

It's been about three weeks since the governor ordered legislators to convene after their regular session ended to address two outstanding problems: water and health care. Thus far, of the two issues, water has gotten the most attention. Unfortunately, that's no indication that our elected leaders are actually getting much accomplished.

The governor has proposed a $9 billion bond. Nearly $5 billion would be used to expand or build reservoirs in Glenn, Contra Costa and Madera counties. An additional $2 billion would go toward fixing environmental problems in the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta. It's these problems, especially as they affect the endangered delta smelt, that have threatened to sharply curtail a significant source of San Diego County's water.

The Democrats have offered a much more modest proposal, more than $5 billion, that splits the money between local water districts (which can use it for their own water storage projects) and state efforts to restore and protect the delta.

Already, it's starting to look doubtful if a bond measure will make it to voters next year without some money for reservoirs. Assembly Republicans said Wednesday that they were "drawing a line in the sand" on that point.

That's more than just an idle threat. As with tax increases and the budget, bond measures need a two-thirds vote from legislators before they can be placed on the ballot. Just a few Republicans in either the Assembly or the Senate could kill any water bond.

Although funding for water storage projects is dealt with by both parties, one matter that neither plan brings up is funding for the so-called peripheral canal. Such a channel would allow water from the Sierra Nevadas to bypass the troubled delta region altogether and begin its long trek to water-deprived Southern Californians.

After pumps that send water from the delta south were temporarily shut down this spring, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger revived the canal idea, which had been dead since 1982 when voters rejected a state referendum authorizing the project . There was talk that the passage of time, and the tipping of the state's political power base in favor of Southern California, may have changed the political dynamics on the issue. To the contrary, environmental interests and regional rivalries remain as entrenched as ever.

Officials at the San Diego County Water Authority argue that without a peripheral canal, or something like it, the ideas being proposed by our elected officials don't do much to help San Diego County.

They also contend that because the reservoirs included in the governor's water bond package are in Northern California, they're not likely to be of much help to us. What's more, it's a bad idea to tie up so much of the available bond money on three specific projects to the exclusion of all others. One of those other projects that might benefit from extra bond money is the San Vicente dam in Lakeside.

Perhaps the bond proposals' greatest deficiency is that they both support a status quo approach to water distribution and use that is proving to be increasingly unsustainable. There is little talk of conservation. There's even less discussion about possible market-based alternatives that would provide the most effective incentives for responsible water use.

For instance, a program that increased the cost of water once a household hit a monthly or yearly limit would do more to curb water waste than any public relations campaign. Households that had water left over could sell it back to the water district for use by someone else or for storage.

Instead of providing clarity, the special session to deal with our state's very real water crisis is making the subject murkier than ever. It's likely that the state will do what it does best: kick the problem down the road just a little farther. We can't wait to see what they do with health care.