[Water_news] 1. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS - Top Items for 6/6/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation for DWR personnel of significant news articles and comment

 

June 6, 2007

 

1.  Top Items

 

Governor floats floodplain development curbs; Plan would limit building in high-risk areas until steps are taken for protection - Sacramento Bee

 

Editorial: Local liability for flood damage; By moderating Sacramento delta development, lawmakers could save everyone money in a flood - Los Angeles Times

 

 

Governor floats floodplain development curbs; Plan would limit building in high-risk areas until steps are taken for protection

Sacramento Bee - 6/6/07

By Deb Kollars, staff writer

 

In the eye-opening days after Hurricane Katrina, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger went up in a helicopter to survey swollen rivers, declared a levee emergency, and pushed for a historic bond package to raise nearly $5 billion for better flood protection.

 

Now, the Republican governor and his top water leaders are wading into some of the state's trickiest flood control waters:

 

possibly placing limits on new developments in high-risk areas until flood protection measures are in motion.

 

In a state where new houses and new Applebee's restaurants pop up on the landscape almost overnight, the proposal has created a buzz in the state Capitol.

 

"The critical and controversial issue has been land use," said Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, a Democrat from Davis who tried unsuccessfully last year to pass legislation that would have limited development in flood-prone areas.

 

"It's extremely significant the governor has chosen to engage in this conversation," she said. "It's a major step forward."

 

Over the past two weeks, administration officials have been floating a three-page flood management proposal among key legislators. It contains several provisions, including the controversial approach of new development limits in deep floodplains.

 

Specifically, the proposal suggests that new subdivisions could be approved in undeveloped high-risk areas of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys only if a community has a "reasonable plan" to achieve 200-year flood protection by 2022, or if new residential units are constructed 1 foot above the level of potential 200-year floodwaters.

 

The package of changes has been well enough received that talks are moving to a more formal level this week, aimed at working out the details, said Les Harder, deputy director for the department.

 

Adam Mendelsohn, the governor's communication director, stressed that Schwarzenegger has not signed off on individual aspects of the proposal, and does not want to shut down construction in the state. But he is encouraging conversation on all fronts.

 

"Everything is being debated," Mendelsohn said.

 

The document also proposes that cities and counties in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys be required to develop a strategy for providing 200-year flood protection by 2022 for existing properties. It would apply to development in deep floodplains (areas that would flood 3 or more feet) that are protected by levees maintained by the state.

 

The goal is to make sure that a Katrina-like disaster doesn't happen in the Central Valley, Harder said. Currently, many urban communities have just 100-year protection, which is considered the federal government's minimal standard. The state wants that safety margin to rise to at least 200-year protection for both existing and new properties.

 

"This is a flood control governor," Harder said of Schwarzenegger's direction. "He's made it a huge priority."

 

Lester Snow, director of water resources, said his department has been warning for several years of dire levee conditions and the need for flood protection to be considered when land-use decisions are made.

 

Last year, several bills in the Legislature tried to put the brakes on development in high-risk flood zones. They met with stiff opposition from the development industry and failed to pass. The governor's water resources staff worked with both the Senate and House on the bills, but "it wasn't apparent where we were on the issues," Snow said.

 

This year, Snow said, Schwarzenegger asked his staff to take the lead in forging a comprehensive flood control strategy. The three-page proposal was developed to launch discussions, Snow said.

 

"The governor would really like to see a compromise package this year," Snow said.

 

It will not be easy.

 

Many cities and counties, as well as the building industry, are reluctant to embrace measures that would place limits on construction. As just one example, late Tuesday, Assembly Bill 5, a bill by Wolk that would impose development limits in areas without adequate flood protection plans, was facing an uphill struggle for passage in the Assembly.

 

Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said it is critical for communities to start including flood concerns in land-use decisions.

 

"Flood protection must go hand in hand with development," said Steinberg, who is trying to help broker a compromise. He added that it is also important for state leaders to find ways to leverage the $5 billion in new bond funds because it could take three times that amount to make all the improvements needed in the state.

 

"Growth is inevitable," Steinberg said. "There will be future residents. It will take many billions of dollars to provide all the flood protection that is needed." #

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/207812.html

 

 

Editorial: Local liability for flood damage; By moderating Sacramento delta development, lawmakers could save everyone money in a flood

Los Angeles Times – 6/6/07

 

THE BUILDERS thronging permit counters in cities and counties around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta seldom leave disappointed. Local officials are only too happy to encourage sprawling development that will boost property tax revenues, even though much of the construction on low ground may be doomed by delta floodwaters. In the past, only crops were ruined when California's levee system failed. Today, a break in the aging levees would severely damage or even sweep away new subdivisions and retail centers. The cost from damage lawsuits would be in the billions of dollars.

But local governments have every incentive to continue handing out building permits like Halloween candy. They know that when the flood comes, the cost will be borne not by them but by the entire state. Los Angeles residents will be on the hook at least as much as residents of the flood-prone counties whose officials helped cause the problem in the first place.

Assemblyman Dave Jones (D-Sacramento) wants local governments to think twice before permitting development in floodplains. His Assembly Bill 70 would assure that cities and counties whose decisions lead to property damage claims pay at least some of the liability costs directly. That's good policy and deserves support.

It is noteworthy that this bill, which would protect Southern Californians at the expense of Central Valley decision-makers, comes from a former Sacramento City Council member. Jones saw firsthand how easy it is for cities in vulnerable areas to be tempted to shift the cost of their bad choices to others. He won few friends at home when he carried an even tougher bill last year. That attempt failed because of hard lobbying by the building industry, but to Jones' credit he is trying again.

Lawmakers statewide — and especially those in Southern California, far from the levees — ought to stand up to the builders this time. California needs more housing, but there are plenty of places to build that aren't subject to flooding from broken levees. Or, for that matter, prone to wildfires, mudslides and other disasters more familiar to residents here. And if those places don't happen to be the places where developers have already invested millions in speculative land buying, well, that's the way it goes.

Doing the bidding of developers may earn elected officials bigger campaign contributions than would doing what's best for the public, but the public pays the liability bills — and will be carefully noting which of their legislators vote against this measure.

 

So will we. #

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-flood6jun06,0,6179950.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail

#####