Gov. Newsom must mop up Brown’s water mess

By Jonas Minton, Special to The Sacramento Bee
February 5, 2019

Despite many high priority issues on his plate, one of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s first tests will be how he deals with California’s water challenges and opportunities. Unfortunately, in the last days of his term Gov. Jerry Brown made a bad bargain with the Trump administration and special interests. It’s yet another mess for the new governor to mop up.

During his last month, Brown quietly signed an agreement with the Trump administration to transfer water from Southern California and portions of the Bay Area to corporate farms in the San Joaquin Valley. In return, the Trump administration dropped its threatened opposition to Brown’s legacy project — the massive tunnels that would divert water from the San Francisco Bay Delta. This was done with no public notice, hearing or environmental analysis.

Scientists have concluded that the effects of this closed-door deal are likely to cause the extinction of multiple California fish species. As a result, there are already over 20 lawsuits from water districts, farmers and environmentalists.

The deal helps saddle taxpayers and water users with billions of dollars of debt for tunnels whose costs estimates have already soared from $3 billion to $19.9 billion, not including interest. And that’s the estimate before securing right-of-ways or turning any shovels.

This massive debt would limit the state’s financial ability to ensure that disadvantaged communities get safe drinking water. The basic human right to water for hundreds of thousands of Californians would be kept in the back of the line behind Brown’s vanity tunnels project.

Now, the Trump administration and water special interests are pushing the new governor to go further and gut water quality protections for the Bay Delta and the state’s rivers from north of Redding all the way south to Bakersfield. After years of scientific study and countless hours of public input, the State Water Resources Control Board is poised to adopt standards that would protect these waters for all beneficial uses, including drinking, bathing, businesses, farming and the environment.

This requires careful balancing because water is not unlimited. Yet water special interests are now pressuring Gov. Newsom to replace the leadership on this state board that has maintained this careful balance.

Modern technology — including water recycling, stormwater capture, groundwater cleanup and improved water use efficiency —means Californians should continue to receive reliable supplies of highest quality water. In fact, many progressive water districts are already prudently investing in these 21st century solutions to provide reliable supplies of safe water to their customers.

No doubt Gov. Newsom would prefer to focus on other issues before having to deal with the water mess he inherited. However, the next two months will be critical for making key appointments and decisions.

At his inauguration, Gov. Newsom’s son, Dutch, symbolized our new governor’s tremendous responsibility to the future. Will he create a legacy of sustainable water management for all uses? Or will he preside over the extinction of species?

Click here to view article at sacbee.com.


The twin tunnels would take water from the Sacramento River and transport it under the Delta. See which islands and rivers they would cross. [By 

 

Jonas Minton is senior water policy advisor at the Planning and Conservation League and former deputy director at the California Department of Water Resources.

Trump’s nonsense tweets on water and wildfires are dangerous

As if water and wildfire policies in the West weren’t contentious enough, President Trump decided to toss confused and ill-conceived tweets into the mix over the past few days, reigniting fights over water and land use in California.

“California wildfires are being magnified & made so much worse by the bad environmental laws which aren’t allowing massive amount of readily available water to be properly utilized,” Trump said in a tweet Sunday. He was back at it again Monday morning, decrying water that is “foolishly being diverted into the Pacific Ocean.”

This is unmitigated nonsense and dangerous thinking, especially at a time when severe wildfires are sweeping over the state, more than 1,000 homes have been destroyed, the death toll is rising and more than 10,000 firefighters are risking their lives battling the flames.

There’s no shortage of water to fight these fires. Indeed, water is one of the least useful tools for containing them. Firefighters build fire breaks, use chemical fire retardant to try to limit the spread and mostly work to protect infrastructure and lives by containing the extent of the fires. As Daniel Berlant, assistant deputy director of California’s fire agency, noted: “We have plenty of water to fight these wildfires.”

Unsurprisingly, the president’s comments completely ignore the role of human-caused climate change as a growing factor in the extreme fires that the nation is now experiencing. Climate change is worsening long-term drought conditions, adding dry vegetation to fuel the fires and increasing the temperatures and extreme weather that accelerate their spread and intensity. A century of forest fire suppression and inappropriate expansion of communities into high-risk fire areas have also contributed to the rising human and economic costs of wildland fires.

It is always difficult to know what this president knows and doesn’t know, and what his intentions are when he makes false or confusing comments about current events. But part of his thinking here seems to have been to throw a bone to his California base. Conservatives in the state would love to squeeze out even more water for California’s irrigated agriculture by rolling back the few environmental protections in place to help endangered salmon, provide water for the few remaining wetlands that support critical bird migrations, and maintain water quality for coastal cities.

But there’s little water to be had. The water that does reach the Pacific Ocean is only what’s left over after the rest of it has been diverted to California’s farms and cities. The Colorado River is completely consumed by the United States and Mexico and disappears long before it reaches its delta. The San Joaquin River has been dried up for long stretches. California’s groundwater is so badly managed and over-pumped that lands in the Central Valley are sinking, damaging roads, buildings and, ironically, irrigation water canals. Any new diversion of water from the state’s rivers will come out of someone else’s supply.

There is another way forward. Farms and cities are taking steps toward more sustainable water policies every day. New technologies, including smart irrigation systems, monitor soil moisture and crop needs and provide the right amount of water at the right time, permitting farmers to grow more food with less water.

The efficiency of washing machines, dishwashers, toilets, faucets, shower heads and other residential and industrial water-using technologies is improving. Better water-pricing strategies are providing incentives to trade water among users and cut wasteful uses. Homeowners are replacing grass lawns with drought-resistant gardens. Incremental steps are being taken to help protect and restore fisheries and natural ecosystems devastated by earlier uninformed water policies throughout the West. And new unconventional sources of supply such as high-quality recycled water and stormwater are being tapped. The good news? Total water use in the West — and nationwide — is dropping, even as populations and our economies continue to grow.

New thinking about wildfire and forest management also has a crucial role to play in reducing the threat that extreme fires pose. Efforts are needed to thin undergrowth and reduce fuel loads in our forests. Strategic tree-cutting can limit the spread and intensity of wildfires. And we must slow uncontrolled suburban development in high fire-risk areas.

Our fire and water challenges are worsened by climate change. Because the world has waited so long to respond to warnings from the scientific community, we must now work to cut the emissions of greenhouse gases that are driving worse — and accelerating — climate changes while we also tackle efforts to adapt to climate impacts we can no longer avoid.

Smart solutions to our water problems are out there. Smart solutions to the threat of California wildfires and the growing threat of climate change are out there. But they’re not helped by ill-informed, politically divisive comments from the president.

Peter Gleick is a hydroclimatologist, co-founder of the nonprofit Pacific Institute and member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

CLICK HERE to view the article online.

Watchdogs Sue Metropolitan Water District Over Delta Tunnel Financing

From Mavens Notebook, Sept. 10, 2018:

Food & Water Watch and Center for Food Safety served a lawsuit today to challenge the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s approval of $11 billion to fund the twin Delta Tunnels. The groups claim MWD’s financing violates the taxpayer protection provisions of California’s Constitution, enacted by voters in Propositions 26 and 13. MWD’s decision to pay for most of the massive tunnels project, while receiving only part of the project’s water, would result in its ratepayers and taxpayers unconstitutionally subsidizing out-of-district water users, including corporate agribusiness in Kern County.

“Not only is Metropolitan’s plan to spend $11 billion on the Delta tunnels a colossal waste of public money, it is also illegal,” said Brenna Norton, senior organizer with Food & Water Watch. “Metropolitan’s financing blatantly violates Proposition 26 by sticking southern Californians with the majority of the costs, while the most of the water water would go to corporate agribusinesses.”   READ MORE

How you can stop Sacramento from raising your water rates and property taxes

By Susan Shelley | Los Angeles Daily News
Published August 29, 2018 at 11:26 am

On Thursday, August 30, at 8:00 a.m., an obscure committee in Sacramento will hold an informational hearing that will commit you, your children and your grandchildren to paying higher rates and higher property taxes to cover the cost of the proposed boondoggle known as WaterFix.

Under state law, the Department of Water Resources can finalize a long-term contract for water from the State Water Project through a unique process that doesn’t require a vote of the Legislature or any legislative committee. The DWR simply sends over a copy of the contract, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee holds an informational hearing, and 60 days later, the contract can be finalized.

In this case, the DWR wants to extend contracts for water from the State Water Project all the way to the year 2085.

Why? Because a massive capital investment is needed to pay for the WaterFix twin-tunnel project, estimated to cost $17 billion. The money will be borrowed from Wall Street investors by selling long-term bonds, and the state’s contract for supplying water has to be extended far enough into the future so that the rates paid by water customers can be promised as security. The higher the level of borrowing, the longer the contract has to run to make the math work.

Unless that hearing on Thursday is postponed, the 2085 contract extension will be finalized before Gov. Jerry Brown leaves office, committing the next governor and the next three generations of Californians to pay the debt.  Read More

Can this be stopped?

  • Call Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon at 916-319-2063.
  • Call Senate Pro Tem Toni Atkins at 916-651-4039.
  • Call Committee Chair Holly Mitchell at 916-651-4030.

Tell them the extension of the State Water Project contracts to finance WaterFix must wait until the next governor takes office, or at least until the contracts are completely written. Urge them to call off the Thursday morning hearing of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee.

You can find the names and contact information for your own state representatives at
findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov. Call them, too.

Susan Shelley is a columnist for the Southern California News Group.
Susan@SusanShelley.com. Twitter: @Susan_Shelley

Pay Up, Shut Up

From California Water Impact Network —
Click here to view full article and links to other stories and documents.

Brown Administration Plan Would Force Homeowners to Pay for Unneeded Water  Project

As the old adage has it, “You pays your money and you takes your choice.” Except when there is no choice — then you just pay. That’s the situation now facing California property owners, who recently learned that they may be burdened by unlimited new property taxes to finance a public works boondoggle that will provide no palpable benefits to rank and file citizens.

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is an initiative by the Brown administration that has nothing to do with conservation. It calls for construction of two massive subterranean tunnels through the heart of the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta to deliver water to San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and southern California urban water districts. Final cost with interest and anticipated overruns: $67 billion or more.  Read More

The Water Crises Aren’t Coming—They’re Here

By Alec Wilkinson, Esquire Magazine, 8.23.18

For eons, the earth has had the same amount of water—no more, no less. What the ancient Romans used for crops and Nefertiti drank? It’s the same stuff we bathe with. Yet with more than seven billion people on the planet, experts now worry we’re running out of usable water. The symptoms are here: multiyear droughts, large-scale crop failures, a major city—Cape Town—on the verge of going dry, increasing outbreaks of violence, fears of full-scale water wars. The big question: How do we keep the H20 flowing?  READ MORE: The Water Crises Are Here – Esquire Sep2018

Marching on: Nonprofit notches another win in long battle to protect North State water

By 
March 8, 2018

Eight years ago, Barbara Vlamis launched AquAlliance, a Chico-based nonprofit that, according to its website, “formed to challenge threats to the hydrologic health of the northern Sacramento River watershed.”

Vlamis, who’d spent the previous 17 years as executive director of the Butte Environmental Council, opened the doors Jan. 5, 2010. She closed them on Jan. 6.

No, AquAlliance didn’t fold in 24 hours. Quite the opposite: She found herself with more work than she could handle.

In those first 24 hours, Vlamis learned that the federal Bureau of Reclamation had just released an environmental review for a two-year water transfer—the process by which rights-holders to surface water (such as Sacramento River flow) can sell that water, with the option to meet their own needs via groundwater (underground flow, pumped through wells). She had just 10 days to submit comments.

“We blasted them,” Vlamis told the CN&R this week. “We found an attorney who would take this case on, pro bono, and we sued them. And, in this case, this is where the bureau finally acknowledged they have to do more robust environmental review.”

Apparently not “robust” enough: AquAlliance has sued the Bureau of Reclamation again over environmental-impact reporting, this time for a 10-year water transfer. That suit also names the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority— designated as the state’s lead agency for the proceedings. (Vlamis said her team challenged that designation in court, and lost.)

AquAlliance rallied the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and Delta water districts as lawsuit partners. They filed in May 2015; their case went to District Court Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill in Fresno.

Last month, O’Neill released a 133-page ruling mostly in favor of AquAlliance, essentially ordering the bureau and water agency to beef up their review. Deeming the environmental reports “at least in some part unlawful,” the judge set a March 16 deadline for response.

Erin Curtis, the bureau’s Mid-Pacific Region spokeswoman, told the CN&R that “we are planning to come back to the judge with our plan of how we will address the issues identified with the [environmental review].” Jon Rubin, interim executive director of the water authority, did not respond to a request for comment.

Vlamis’ concern about water transfers traces to 1994. Districts in the North State had been selling surface water and substituting ground water—“pretty much off the radar of everybody,” she said. That year, the volume reached over 100,000 acre-feet from southern Butte County districts and rice farmers.

Whether from drought or the additional tapping, if not both, groundwater levels dropped. North Valley orchards felt the impact first, then homes with shallower wells.

Vlamis refers to those water transfers as “the big experiment that didn’t work” because of the collateral impacts. People adversely affected approached her, while with BEC. Farmers remain staunch supporters, now backing her work with AquAlliance.

The original two-year transfer she fought never took place. The plan drew local outcry, with 200 people packing the Chico Masonic Lodge for a public meeting (see “Water worries,” Newslines, Jan. 13, 2011). Looking back, Vlamis called the turnout “a dynamic expression of this region’s upset.”

The 10-year transfer plan spurred action because she and AquAlliance partners felt the environmental review fell short in disclosure, analysis and mitigation. In other words, the bureau and water agency did not offer enough specific information on impacts and how to offset impacts, primarily in three regards: climate change, groundwater and the giant garter snake.

Should the agencies appeal O’Neill’s ruling, Vlamis said she and her lawsuit allies already have half the funds needed; they’ll raise the other half.

“What does this [litigation] mean and do for people of the North State? It slows this nefarious process down,” she said, “and it will force the agencies to face what we’ve literally been trying to tell them since 1994; that you can’t extract massive amounts of water from some place and not hurt other people and the environment.”

Read original article online at newsreview.com.

Minute by minute: What if Oroville Dam’s spillway had failed one year ago?

2.12.18: On the anniversary of the Oroville Dam disaster, Sacramento Valley citizens of all political stripes have retained a deep distrust of the California Department of Water Resources. This article from the Sacramento Bee describes the scenario that came close to occurring on the night of Feb. 12, 2017 when the “emergency spillway” began to crumble, threatening the people of Oroville with a deadly 30’ wall of debris-laden flood water. Read the full article here.

Significant Legal Win for North State: 10-Year Water Transfer Program Failed Analysis and Disclosure

The federal district court in Fresno issued a strong order February 15, 2018 supporting many of the claims made by AquAlliance and co-plaintiff partners. The lawsuit was filed in May 2015 against the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and San Luis Delta Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) over their inadequate disclosure, avoidance of impacts, and mitigation of major water transfers from the Sacramento Valley through the Delta to the San Joaquin Valley.

AquAlliance Executive Director Barbara Vlamis stated, “AquAlliance is elated that the court found in favor of many of our legal arguments that seek to protect the communities, environment, and groundwater dependent farmers in the Sacramento Valley as well as Delta farmers and fish. This ruling exposes the danger posed by the 10-Year Water Transfer Program’s water-grab that would benefit agricultural interests with junior water rights growing permanent crops in a desert.”

Click link to read:

Final verdict on Oroville Dam: ‘Long-term systemic failure’ by the state, regulators

January 5, 2018
By Dale Kasler & Ryan Sabalow
dkasler@sacbee.com

The forensic team investigating the February emergency at Oroville Dam blasted the California Department of Water Resources on Friday, saying the dam’s owner and operator did a poor job of designing, building and maintaining the structure and neglected safety while focusing on the “water delivery needs” of its customers to the south.

Citing a “long-term systemic failure” by both DWR and federal regulators, the group of independent investigators released its final report Friday on the nearly catastrophic fracture in the dam’s main flood-control spillway in early February, which eventually forced the evacuation of 188,000 downstream residents.

Click link to view: