What They Are Not Saying...About the Comprehensive Water Deal?

The Legislature recently passed five pieces of legislation to address California’s water needs. Before careful examination, below are highlights of the comprehensive water deal worth noting:

SBX7 1

Under SBX7 1, a new powerful government agency directed by an unelected board – the Delta Stewardship Council – will be created. The seven appointed-member Council and its staff are granted enormous oversight powers to redesign the Delta and enforce its new plan. With its broad authority, the appointed members are faceless political appointments who are not accountable to the public but to the politicians who appoint them.

SBX7 1 also creates two additional bureaucracies – the Delta Conservancy and the Delta Independent Science Board, and expands the reach of a third – the Delta Protection Commission. The bill also creates a Delta Watermaster which will be charged with enforcing the state’s water board orders and permits, similar to the functions of a meter reader.

SBX7 2

SBX7 2 places an $11.14 billion bond – filled with pork – before the voters in November 2010. Experts estimate that once all bonds are sold, the state would be required to pay $801 million a year. According to the Department of Finance, in 2014 -15, almost 10 percent of the state’s income will pay for debt repayment, not for education or public safety.

SBX7 6

This legislation requires local water agencies to monitor and measure groundwater levels and report their data to the state. If local entities fail to comply, the state takes over. It is a critical step toward centralizing control of our groundwater basins, which currently are managed locally. Landowners may lose control of their groundwater property rights.

This measure places additional mandates on state resources. The bill does not address the staffing level needed to deal with the new responsibilities of various government entities.

SBX7 7

By December 31, 2020, some Californians living in urban areas will be required to cut back their water usage by 20 percent. Others, such as those living in the cities of Los Angeles, Santa Ana, and Long Beach – some of the state’s most populated cities – will face only 5% reductions or a complete exemption from these requirements. Residents of San Francisco and Monterey are completely exempted from any reduction under this legislation.

Under this program, the state is almost certain to fall short of its statewide 20% mandate. This could prompt the Legislature to increase the mandates on individual agencies even further in coming years.

While everyone acknowledges the need for greater conversation, it does come at a price that will be seen in the water rates for homeowners and businesses.

SBX7 8

Circumventing protocol in appropriating state funds, this measure makes available $546 million from Proposition 1E and 84 bond funds for regional water projects including Delta levee improvements, stormwater flood management projects and commencement of a Natural Communities Conservation Plan for the Delta

Bond funds appropriations should be debated and made during the budget discussions, not in the policy process.

This measure adds 25 new state positions at the State Water Resources Control Board and empowers them to adopt emergency regulations and issue significant fines. This measure increases water rights fees, which will raise water rates.

How will these new boards and staff positions be funded if voters reject the $11.1 Billion bond?

The four policy bills call for new boards and staff. These measures also call for many new mandates. How will the state pay for the growth in state jobs? With declining revenue, where will the money come from?

Transparency & Accessibility?

Both the Senate and the Assembly waived the process that provides for public participation and debate among lawmakers. The Legislature waived rule after rule. Both houses had to wait for amendments to get out of counsel and for bills to be mocked-up. In the Senate, policy committee chairs failed to insist upon these bills being referred to their committees and the Rules Committee failed to refer them to committees as required by the rules. It appears that the same was true in the Assembly.

In doing so, they abandoned transparency and accessibility.

The bond measure, for example, left the Senate floor with $9.99 Billion in projects. And it came back from the Assembly with $11.14 Billion in projects. What projects increased the cost? Where were the discussions on the merits of the projects? Isn’t a $1.15 Billion increase worth debatin

These are bills that were not subject to deadlines. There was no need to rush. Yet the Senate and the Assembly did.

It appears that the Governor is following suit. In 2003, standing at the California State Railroad Museum to discuss open government and political reform, the Governor said, “bills are passed in a rush, in the middle of the night. There is no such thing as democracy in the dark.”

Senator Dave Cox represents the residents of the First Senate District, which includes all or portions of Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Lassen, Placer, Plumas, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Sacramento and Sierra Counties. Contact his office at 916-651-4001, or via email at senator.cox@sen.ca.gov.