[Water_news] 5. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, PEOPLE - 9/25/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

September 25, 2007

 

5. Agencies, Programs, People

 

BAY AREA WATER RATES:

Increase in bills to boost Bay Area water supply; Customers to pay 40 percent more; public comments on SFPUC plans due Monday - Inside Bay Area

 

Agency considers raising water rates for next year - San Jose Mercury News

 

WATER POLICY PLANNING:

Guest Column: Securing Southern California's water future - North County Times

 

Editorial: A Pat Brown-wannabe needs broader support; Lawmakers must identify who will pay for water before asking voters for bonds - Sacramento Bee

 

BARSTOW FLOOD RULES:

City updates flood rules - Desert Dispatch (Barstow)

 

Suisun City to have waterways dredged - Fairfield Daily Republic

 

PROJECT FUNDING:

Water agency finds funding solution in certificates - Auburn Journal

 

 

BAY AREA WATER RATES:

Increase in bills to boost Bay Area water supply; Customers to pay 40 percent more; public comments on SFPUC plans due Monday

Inside Bay Area – 9/25/07

By Julia Scott, staff writer

 

Peninsula water customers will be paying dearly to ensure their access to water in the coming decades as the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission embarks on a $4.3 billion project to earthquake-proof its infrastructure.

 

Some of the money will go toward developing new sources of water to quench the thirst of the growing Bay Area population, which will demand 13 percent more water by 2030 than they do today.

 

Customers outside San Francisco who buy their drinking water from the SFPUC, including most residents of San Mateo, Santa Clara and Alameda counties, will see their water bills increase 40 percent on average as the agency charges more to pay for the improvements, according to officials at the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency.

 

But during a series of public meetings on the draft Hetch Hetchy water system improvement plan this month, conservationists argued that part of the costs for that water won't be worth it.

 

One of the project alternatives theSFPUC is considering would divert up to 25 million gallons per day from the upper Tuolomne River, which flows into the Hetch Hetchy reservoir. The Tuolomne already provides 85 percent of the water piped to Bay area customers.

 

Bill Young, conservation coordinator for the Loma Prieta chapter of the Sierra Club, said the water plan "basically encourages water waste instead of efficiency.

 

"While we support the PUC in its efforts to perform seismic upgrades, we oppose any projects that would divert water from the Tuolomne and other rivers in the watershed," said Young.

 

The SFPUC is seeking public comment on the water plan until Oct. 1. The commission will make a final decision on which aspects of the plan to adopt this spring.

 

Bay Area customers cumulatively use an average of 265 million gallons of water per day, with a projected demand of

300 million gallons per day by 2030. The heaviest growth will occur outside San Francisco, on the Peninsula and the East Bay, according to the agency.

 

The population explosion will be compounded by the fact that the Sierra Nevada snowpack is melting at an unprecedented rate due to global climate change, scientists say. They predict that half the snowpack could be gone by century's end, causing less water to fill up the reservoirs the Bay Area depends on.

 

To ensure systemwide supply over the next 25 years, the plan proposes to stabilize the seismic design of several reservoirs, add backup transmission pipelines where needed and increase the reserve potential of several major dams, including Crystal Springs reservoir.

 

To account for demand, officials currently favor a plan to develop 10 million gallons per day of water through conservation and water-recycling efforts within San Francisco, and divert 25 million gallons per day from the upper Tuolomne.

 

Other alternatives focus on the potential to develop a water desalination plant next to the ocean, or simply taking all the water from the Tuolomne without any local conservation efforts. Several proposals involve digging 10 new groundwater production wells in San Mateo County for use in drought years.

 

San Francisco has very few water-recycling projects in place, as compared with cities like Hayward, Redwood City and Palo Alto.

 

SFPUC spokesman Tony Winnicker defended his agency against charges that its goal of 10 million gallons per day is not sufficiently ambitious.

 

"It's not a limit — it's an amount that we believe can be reasonably achieved. It's conservative, certainly, but it's realistic. We want there to be more recycled water and more groundwater."

 

The Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency sided with the Sierra Club at a meeting last week, calling on the SFPUC to adopt a more aggressive conservation standard.

 

BAWSCA General Manager Art Jensen prefers a project alternative that would challenge the Peninsula and East Bay territories that are part of BAWSCA to conserve an additional five to 10 million gallons per day, and possibly more.

 

"If San Francisco makes water available (to our members) it doesn't mean everybody has to take it," said Jensen. "If they went forward with a plan to divert water from the Tuolumne River with no conservation, we would still conserve."

 

Among other possibilities, Jensen sees potential in working with the farmers out in the Central Valley to reduce their water use.

 

The two irrigation districts in the area divert much more water from the Tuolomne River than the SFPUC at present — fully 48 percent of the river goes toward watering their crops, as opposed to the 12 percent now funneled away by the SFPUC.

 

"We think we can avoid some of the diversions from the Tuolomne and maybe offset all of them by conserving water outside the Bay Area," said Jensen.

 

BAWSCA has already committed to achieving water savings of 23 million gallons per day by 2030, he added. But even with those conservation measures in place, cities across the Bay will come up short.  #

http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_6992634?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com

 

 

Agency considers raising water rates for next year

San Jose Mercury News – 9/25/07

By Meera Pal, staff writer

 

Faced with a decrease in water sales to local providers and a federally ordered reduction of water pumped from the Delta, the Zone 7 Water Agency is looking at increasing its wholesale water rates for 2008.

 

Zone 7, which delivers water to 200,000 customers in Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton, originally proposed an 8 percent increase, which its board of directors was expected to finalize and adopt at an Oct. 17 meeting.

 

Instead, the Pleasanton-based agency is calling an emergency meeting of its finance committee today to discuss new information that it would be selling less water next year to its retailers.

 

"A major source of revenue is from our cities and the water that they buy from us," said Tamara Baptista, senior staff analyst with Zone 7.

 

For the 2007-08 fiscal year, Baptista estimated that Zone 7 will take in $27.6 million in revenue. She is currently analyzing what that number will be next fiscal year.

 

Given the lower water sales and uncertainty with the state water program, Baptista estimates there could be a $1 million to $2 million decrease in revenue next year.

 

Each year, Zone 7's four water retailers -- Pleasanton, Livermore, the California Water Service Company and the Dublin San Ramon Services District -- submit separate five-year projections of their water needs. Updates are made annually.

 

Baptista wrote in a staff report to the board that water usage, weather patterns and development contribute to the amount of water actually delivered. She noted that water sales have been lower than estimated for the past two years.

 

Steve Cusenza, Pleasanton's utility planning manager, said that based on historical trends, the city will use less water in 2008 than previously projected.

 

"What we've seen over the past five years ... is somewhat of a leveling off of water use over a long-term period," Cusenza said.

 

"It's pretty consistent with the residential and commercial building tapering off in the city over the last few years."

 

The Dublin San Ramon Services District General Manager Bert Michalczyk echoed those thoughts, saying that growth has slowed down, resulting in lower-than-expected water needs.

 

He noted that 2008 projections were first made in 2003, when the real estate market was on a major upswing. Now, given the current real estate slump and recent trends, he can estimate lower 2008 needs.

 

Overall, Baptista is estimating a 6 percent decrease in water demand for 2008. She is currently analyzing the numbers and will present the finance committee with information on how that translates into revenue loss and perhaps a new water rate for 2008.

 

The agency relies on water sales revenue to fund operations and maintenance costs for providing a reliable water supply, as well as to subsidize capital improvement projects such as the startup costs for the Mocho Groundwater Demineralization Plant that will help reduce hardness of groundwater supplies.

 

According to the agency, a significant portion of the proposed increase is needed to pay the higher costs of importing water from the state.

 

Recently, the state was ordered to change its pumping operations in the Delta to protect the endangered Delta smelt. State water officials estimate that the court order could result in reducing water deliveries out of the Delta by 1 million acre-feet, or enough for 2 million households.

 

Almost 80 percent of Zone 7's water comes from the state water project, which pumps out of the Delta.  #

http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_6992815?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

 

 

WATER POLICY PLANNING:

Guest Column: Securing Southern California's water future

North County Times – 9/25/07

By Lester Snow, Director, Department of Water Resources

 

Last week, Gov. Schwarzenegger introduced a $9 billion water bond package to help address California's water crisis and ensure clean, safe water for generations to come. With our rapidly growing population, drought conditions in many parts of the state, a changing climate and an aging water system, now is the time for leadership and bold action.

The governor's plan allocates more than $5 billion to build new above- and below-ground surface storage. In addition to providing reliable water supplies, these facilities also address a broad range of public benefits including habitat and restoration needs, in-stream flows and river temperature requirements, flows to manage Delta salinity, management of the timing of diversions from and releases to rivers and streams, effective conjunctive use of surface and groundwater, and flood management.

 

The governor's plan also addresses the problems in the Delta head on and provides a foundation for improved water conveyance through or around the Delta. His plan will pave the way by providing funds for permitting, environmental review and other non-construction related hurdles. The governor recognizes the need for Delta improvements, including conveyance, and has never shied away from the topic. He also agrees with Southern California water officials that any package must be comprehensive and balanced. This is why his proposal includes storage, conveyance, ecosystem restoration and local conservation and water management programs. It's a flexible plan that's the right fit for a state with a wide variety of water demands.

 

California greatness is due, in part, to the vision of previous generations who built our statewide water system. But now that system needs an extreme makeover. The governor's plan will make investments to existing and new infrastructure that can help move water to where it is needed, and do so in a way that is more efficient and that protects our environment. This focus is particularly vital in the Delta, where there is an emerging consensus that we need to find new and better ways to protect the estuary and provide reliable water deliveries.

The governor's proposal also includes funding to expand water conservation programs and other local efforts such as desalination and water recycling to help meet California's water supply and quality needs well into the future.

The San Diego region is highly dependent on imported water, including deliveries from the Colorado River and the Delta. Additional funding from this plan will support a variety of water conservation and recycling efforts in the San Diego area, including upgrading existing wastewater treatment plants, promoting desalination and investing in the many proposed improvements to existing water systems in the region.

California needs a comprehensive water plan. The argument shouldn't be over which water management tools we will need in the future. California will need all of them. The focus should be on using every water management strategy properly to assure a vital economy, a healthy environment, and a high standard of living.

Making investments to have the right infrastructure and resource management programs in place can help ensure we have a flexible, long-term solution to California's water crisis.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/09/25/opinion/commentary/19_47_359_24_07.txt

 

 

Editorial: A Pat Brown-wannabe needs broader support; Lawmakers must identify who will pay for water before asking voters for bonds

Sacramento Bee – 9/25/07

 

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and key state lawmakers seem far apart on how to address California's immediate and long-term water challenges. And while it's admirable that they are finally focused on repairing the long-neglected Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, they'd be wise not to ask voters to approve a costly water bond as early as February, given the gulf that divides them.

 

Schwarzenegger last week upped the stakes by submitting a $9 billion water proposal to the Legislature's special session -- $3 billion more than he had previously floated. Most would be spent on three reservoirs -- Temperance Flat above Fresno, Sites in the upper Sacramento Valley and Los Vaqueros in the East Bay.

 

The scale of the governor's proposal is astounding. When former Gov. Pat Brown launched the State Water Project, he depended on a $1.75 billion bond approved by voters in 1960 (worth $11.7 billion in today's dollars). That investment helped launch the massive Lake Oroville and construction of the California Aqueduct, with water users eventually paying back more than 80 percent of the investment, including interest.

 

By contrast, Schwarzenegger is poised to spend nearly as much as Pat Brown to produce far less water, and with no beneficiaries signed up to repay their share. Assuming voters approve the $9 billion, the governor promises he will obtain commitments from water users before any public monies are spent. Yet taxpayers and voters are likely to be wary of such "trust us" arguments.

 

As the Orange County Register said in a critical editorial this month, the governor's plan "is to designate funds before beneficiaries have been identified, costs and benefits have been tallied, or the plans themselves have been finished."

 

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata thinks he has a better water plan. Perata proposes to spend roughly $5.5 billion, with most of that going to repair the Delta and pay a share of water projects chosen by individual regions. While a regional approach has some merit, the Senate's proposal has the feel of a package cobbled together to sidetrack the governor's less attractive plans.

 

Leaders such as Schwarzenegger and Perata need to realize they may get only one shot at seeking voter approval for water supplies. If they blow it, it could be several years before the state could plausibly ask taxpayers to invest in this form of infrastructure.

 

To ensure the widest possibly support, the governor and legislators should wait for the findings of the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force, which is expected this year to provide leaders with a clear set of strategies for moving water through the Delta, while protecting its ecosystem. If the governor and lawmakers want to help certain farm districts and cities, they need to nail down who would help pay for prospective water projects and whether those projects would generate water at the least possible cost.

 

Despite what some high priests of the water establishment say, a deliberate approach does not mean "a do- nothing" approach. The state already has tens of millions of water dollars available from water bond initiatives. State leaders should use the money to help the Delta and the state's larger water interests, instead of simply working to satisfy the high priests of the water trough. #

http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/396797.html

 

 

BARSTOW FLOOD RULES:

City updates flood rules

Desert Dispatch (Barstow) – 9/24/07

By Jason Smith, staff writer

 

BARSTOW — Barstow may be high and dry for now, but the city is preparing for the rains to come.

The city is in the process of updating its floodplain management ordinance to comply with state and federal standards in order to stay part of the federal flood insurance program. The new rules will increase the minimum distance that new construction projects in shallow floodplain areas must be built higher above the flood level.

City spokesman John Rader said the changes were required by the California Department of Water Resources after a review by the agency in 2006 and 11 deficiencies in the city’s current rules. The inspection also found 10 potential structure violations from buildings mostly located near the former Barstow Country Club and golf course.

Documents associated with Dept. of water resources inspection stated identified the Mojave river bed as a source of potential flood risk.

“It has the potential of carrying large discharges as a result of major storms, yet is a dry sand wash most of the time. This condition makes it a potentially dangerous source of flooding,” the documents state.

Barstow suffered its last major flood in January of 2005 when heavy rains caused the Mojave river to overflow its banks, causing $72,500 in damages to nearby properties, according to a report form the San Bernardino County Fire Department’s Office of Emergency Services.

According to John Rader, the changes will allow the city to continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, a federal initiative to provide subsidized flood insurance to private property holders.

“The city’s floodplain management program is designed to protect our residents personal and property safety even in the event of a 100-year flood,” he said.

A 100-year flood is a statistic that indicates the magnitude of flood which can be expected to occur about once a century on any given river, Rader said.

Frank Mansella, spokesman for California region of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said that although Barstow receives little rain it is still potentially at risk for flood.
“Whenever you get rains in the summertime, you could get alluvial flooding because the ground is so dry the water isn’t absorbed,” he said.

FEMA allows citizens in communities that participate in its floodplain management program to buy flood coverage.

“Flood is one of the most predominant and expensive disasters out there,” Mansella said.
According to documents from the California Department of Water Resources, 108 city residents have flood insurance policies.

Larry Jensen, meteorologist with the National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration said the primary season of concern for flooding in Barstow is during the summer season, “where you get very heavy rain over a short time period in a small area.”

He said that the season of concern usually ends in September and that September, October and December are considered the wettest months of the year for Barstow.

Jensen said that the forecast does not call for rain in the immediate future and that overall rain levels were low for the year. #

http://www.desertdispatch.com/news/flood_1530___article.html/city_barstow.html

 

 

Suisun City to have waterways dredged

Fairfield Daily Republic – 9/25/07

By Ian Thompson, staff writer

 

SUISUN CITY - Suisun City is gearing up to have the waterways in and around the city's marina and public boat launch area dredged some time next year.

Before that, the city also plans to work on nearby Pierce Island later in the fall before the island is used to take whatever spoils are dredged from the slough.

"We need to do some maintenance, disk the dying ponds and shore up the levies," said Community Services Department Director Mick Jessop.

The Suisun Harbor area was last dredged five years ago, as was part of Whispering Bay because the city and the assessment district that covers the homes along Whispering Bay combined their funds.

Suisun Harbor is dredged once every five to eight years depending on how much silt is deposited there from creeks that drain into the slough.

Siltation has become a concern near the south end of the docks on the harbor's east side, in the area just outside of Whispering Bay and near the public boat launch.

Suisun City is completing all the paperwork and collecting the permits required to bring in the Army Corps of Engineers to do the dredging, Jessop said.

Jessop is exploring working with Whispering Bay residents again so both parties can save on the cost of bringing in the dredging equipment and spend those savings on getting more areas dredged.

There may also be some dredging on the slough between the city limits and Hunters Cut.

The Army Corps of Engineers is looking at dredging the main channel some time next year, according to Jessop.

When Sheldon Gas brought in oil and gasoline via barges to Suisun City, the Army Corps of Engineers had dredged the channel often. After the barges stopped using the channel, the time between dredgings increased. #

http://local.dailyrepublic.net/story_localnews.php?a=news05.txt

 

 

PROJECT FUNDING:

Water agency finds funding solution in certificates

Auburn Journal – 9/24/07

By Gus Thomson, staff writer

 

The Placer County Water Agency has sold $33.6 million in certificates of participation -- a debt mechanism similar to a bond that will provide funding for water system improvements helping to meet the needs of new growth.

The debt funding -- which will provide $20 million for a major capital project in Ophir and $12 million for 11 projects upgrading existing systems -- were sold last Wednesday as tax-exempt certificates to private investors.

 

Agency Director of Financial Services Joseph Parker said Monday that over the 30-year period it will take to retire the debt, interest rates for the tax-exempt securities will range from 3.42 percent to 4.85 percent.

The agency will have to pay back a total of $61.16 million in principal and interest over that period.

The largest project paid for with the new debt taken on by the agency is expansion of the Auburn Ravine tunnel pump station.

A total of $20.3 million is being spent on the tunnel pump station project, with work already taking place.

 

Other large projects debt financing will pay for in the next three years include $1.5 million to relocate the Boardman Canal, near Auburn's Pacific Heights Apartments, a reservoir bypass in Rocklin's Clover Valley costing $2 million, installing a 36 inch raw-water supply line at the Auburn Water Treatment Plant ($2.1 million) and $500,000 for pipeline improvements for treated water in the Channel Hill area of Auburn. The water agency voted 5-0 in favor of issuing the certificates this past summer and found no opposition during a public hearing preceding the vote.

Director Mike Lee said that the work would provide valuable improvements.

"Some of our lines are 80 years old," he said. "We're not going to do the work with water rates -- we have to draw on those bonds."

Director Alex Ferreira said that the district started with an $80 million list of improvements that was pared down as it became more apparent that construction was slowing and the pace of hook-up fees being paid was slackening.

Certificates of participation have come under criticism from the Taxpayers League of Placer County watchdog group. Vice president Dan Sokol said that the organization is against certificates because they represent "an inequity in existing law."

 

Previous ballot measures have determined that voters in California don't want bond decisions made at the ballot box and certificates of participation can be considered a form of a bond, he said. He added that there are situations where the certificates should be issued to pay for projects that are deemed necessary for health or public safety reasons.

http://www.auburnjournal.com/articles/2007/09/25/news/top_stories/03wateragency25.txt?pg=1

DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost1.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.