California is perched on the brink of a water-supply disaster, state water agency leaders say, unless Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger puts his political muscle behind a 12-step plan created by water agencies across the state.

Leaders of the Association of California Water Agencies said since former Gov. Pat Brown spearheaded building the massive State Water Project more than 30 years ago, the state has abandoned its responsibility to help find, pay for and deliver water —— leaving it instead to water agencies, ratepayers and voters.

Today, they said, the state's two main water supplies —— the Colorado River and the State Water Project, which delivers water from water-rich Northern California to rain-poor Southern California and is threatened by eroding levees like the ones that flooded devastated New Orleans —— are under siege and could suffer catastrophic cutbacks at any time.

And, they said, the state's regulatory roadblocks delay the development of alternative water supplies, such as using recycled wastewater for irrigation and building plants to turn seawater into drinking water.

Southern California's main water supplier, the massive Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, says it has enough water-supply storage to make sure the region has plenty of water.

But its stores still must be replenished by the Colorado River and State Water Project. If their supplies are slashed, Southern California could find itself facing mandatory water cutbacks and shortages that could threaten its economy.

More cash, less interference

The nonprofit association's 45-page-long plan is a mixture of polite demands for more cash, political leadership from the state, and less regulatory interference, including:

• A couple billion dollars in cash to protect the State Water Project. Specifically, they want funding to restore the fragile Bay-Delta near San Francisco, the key to delivering water through the State Water Project to Northern and Southern California. More than 1,100 miles of century-old levees in the Bay-Delta are crumbling, and their failure caused by earthquake or flood could suddenly cut Southern California off from 62 percent of its total water supply, either by tainting the supply with seawater or by shutting down the delta completely.

In June 2004, a single Bay-Delta levee —— the Jones Tract —— inexplicably crumbled, swamping 12,000 acres of farmland 12 feet deep. It took state water officials seven months and nearly $100 million to fix. Fortunately for Southern California, the levee failure came after the region had already taken all of its State Water Project deliveries and did not interfere with water supplies. But officials say an earthquake or other disaster could shut down the entire delta —— in addition to flooding farms and freeways running through it —— and leave Southern California to get by on stored water supplies.

A scientific study released in 2004 said the state would have to spend $1 billion just to bring the Bay-Delta up to basic standards. Association officials said fixing the Bay-Delta's problems would cost "at least" $2 billion.

• At least $3 billion more to raise more dams, pipelines and reservoirs for storage —— big-ticket infrastructure that has slowed to a trickle in recent decades because of environmental concerns.

• Leadership to tackle sensitive issues, including revisiting the politically incendiary "peripheral canal" idea —— a plan to circumvent the State Water Project's fragile Bay-Delta by building a canal around it —— that Northern California voters soundly rejected in the 1980s.

• And less interference in the form of fewer health and environmental regulations to impede recycling and seawater desalination.

Banking on the governor

The association's plan was actually completed in May. But association officials stumped for it last month in a North County Times editorial board meeting, weeks after the Public Policy Institute of California predicted the state's water demands will increase by 40 percent over the next 25 years.

The Association of California Water Agencies represents roughly 440 water agencies statewide that deliver 90 percent of the water Californians use annually.

Meeting with editors were Steve Hall and Jerry Gladbach, the association's executive director and president, respectively; Gary Arant, chairman of the association's communication committee and the longtime general manager of the Valley Center Municipal Water District; and Bill Jacoby of the San Diego County Water Authority.

They said they are "working the governor and business leaders hard" to support their 12-step plan.

"The governor is our No. 1 audience," Hall said. "And we think we can interest him in it because he's concerned (about water) and he's concerned about his legacy. He wants to be the latter-day Pat Brown."

Hall and others said that agencies and water ratepayers should not be left without government help in paying for massive water infrastructure that supports a trillion-dollar state economy.

"The state has a responsibility here," he said, "and they've walked away from it without bothering to tell anybody."

Big plans

Specifically, the association's plan calls for Schwarzenegger and the state to, among other things:

• Build more storage, not only underground by way of injection wells, but more dams, pipelines and reservoirs.

The plan suggests starting with completing studies and beginning construction to raise Shasta Dam, which could cost nearly $500 million; build a massive reservoir capable of holding more than 600 billion gallons of water in Sacramento Valley, which could cost $1.3 billion to $2.3 billion; quintuple the size of Contra Costa County's Los Vaqueros reservoir and create more reservoir storage on the San Joaquin River in Sacramento Valley, which could cost $1.2 billion.

The report says those projects could add 4.5 million acre-feet of storage to keep faucets around the state flowing in emergencies or droughts. One acre-foot is enough water to sustain two households for a year.

Gerald Johns, deputy director of the state's Department of Water Resources, said the projects are being studied, but that it was unlikely that legislators have the money to build those projects, considering state deficits.

• Create an independent state commission to oversee how to fix the fragile Bay-Delta. Hall and others said the commission should look at all answers, even resurrecting the touchy peripheral canal idea.

"We are sure of this," Hall said. "Maintaining the status quo of the delta is not sustainable. It will fail, and probably catastrophically. We have to do pretty radical heart surgery on the heart of our water supply."

• Keep and politically support the state's Colorado River Board, which represents California's interests on the river and is fighting to make sure other Western states do not further cut California's already-diminished supply of river water.

For decades, California has used more than its allotted share of the river, but the state agreed to cut that use two years ago in a historic deal with six other Western states. Schwarzenegger, meanwhile, proposed killing the river board last year as part of a massive reorganization of state government.

• End what Hall called "schizophrenic" mixed messages about whether local and regional water agencies should chase recycled water projects and building seawater desalination plants. Hall and Arant said state water officials provide grants to create recycling projects, but the state health department too tightly restricts where recycled water can be used.

The San Diego County Water Authority is especially concerned about desalination, Jacoby said. The agency and a private company hope to build a plant in Carlsbad that could turn 80 million gallons of seawater a day into drinking water.

But the California Coastal Commission released a report in 2004 saying it was concerned that seawater desalination could create even more population growth —— an allegation water officials reject —— and could harm the sea's ecology.

"We're very concerned about the Coastal Commission and the restrictions they'd put on us as we move forward," Jacoby said.

Leadership

While association officials are courting Schwarzenegger's support, some said they were skeptical.

"The state is afraid," Arant said, "politically afraid, to take a leadership role in water."

Arant specifically criticized the state Department of Water Resources' 2005 update of its water plan that looks at water supplies through 2030. That plan said people and agencies principally needed to find more ways to conserve water and use it more efficiently.

Arant and association officials said people needed to conserve, but they won't be able to conserve enough to keep up with water demands fueled by population growth.

Jacoby said water agencies have already "done all the easy stuff" over the last 15 years when it comes to indoor conservation, by pushing low-flow shower heads, toilets and washing machines.

Southern California water agencies are now starting to gently push for a more difficult sell —— outdoor water conservation, which will require a "culture shift" away from big lawns and thirsty, exotic gardens in favor of xeriscaping and native California plants that require less water.

Gerald Johns, the deputy director of the state water department, objected to the characterization that the state had abandoned its water responsibilities, noting that his department manages the State Water Project.

But he acknowledged the state hasn't been in the business of building dams, reservoirs and other infrastructure outside of maintaining the State Water Project.

And, he said, disconnected state agencies have delivered mixed messages on recycled water and desalination.

Arant, meanwhile, said the state needs to step forward.

"We expect the state to at least take a policy position that 'Yes, there should be enough water for the state,' " he said. "And 'We'll help the local and regional governments do it. We're not going to pay for all of it. But we'll at least get out of the way and let you (water agencies) do it.' "

Contact staff writer Gig Conaughton at (760) 739-6696 or gconaughton@nctimes.com.