Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
October 11, 2007
5. Agencies, Programs, People
WATER POLICY:
Schwarzenegger making last-ditch effort to put water bond on ballot; Deal in works as deadline nears - Stockton Record
Editorial: Why can't these guys reach a water deal? -
RIVER
Editorial: Cardoza's flood-protection ideas should get support in Congress -
Sierra resources subject of summit - Modesto Bee
WATER POLICY:
Schwarzenegger making last-ditch effort to put water bond on ballot; Deal in works as deadline nears
By Hank
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and several key lawmakers - including Sen. Michael Machado, D-Linden - have been huddling nonstop since Senate leader Don Perata's water storage bond proposal failed Tuesday afternoon. The latest effort is a last-ditch attempt to find a compromise in time for the February ballot.
"I think we are very close to a deal," Schwarzenegger said during a Wednesday morning bill-signing event. "As you know, yesterday it blew up, but I think this is just part of the rhythm of this Capitol. They always have to blow things up first before they go and get things done."
The deadline for putting a measure on the February ballot is Tuesday, which means whatever deal emerges must be done quickly.
Once Schwarzenegger and the Senate negotiators agree, then Perata must call the Senate into session to vote on it. If it passes, it will head to the Assembly, which has not been as deeply involved in the negotiations.
Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez have divided the work on this fall's special session: Perata is tackling water storage, while Nuñez is handling health care.
Schwarzenegger officials acknowledge that with a subject as touchy as building a new dam, getting something past the Assembly in time could prove difficult.
What is emerging from the talks over the past two days is this:
Republicans will abandon their demand to earmark money for specific dams in
Key to this is that the operation of any new dam will be geared toward providing fresh water for the Delta, upon which 25 million Californians rely on for their drinking water.
A federal judge has ordered the giant pumps near
Fixing both problems requires that the Delta get more water, and Department of Water Resources chief Lester Snow argues that the reservoirs in Colusa and Fresno could supply it without curtailing supply for either Southern California or the farmers in the Valley.
It is unclear whether the environmental community buys into this argument or if Fresno-area Republicans will accept seeing "their" dam left unnamed in the bond.
Meanwhile, Perata and Machado have started the work to put the version of Perata's bond that failed Tuesday on the November 2008 ballot. Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, has plans to do the same with his version of a water bond.
But dueling initiative propositions have a poor success rate with the voters, and all sides want to avoid what may well be mutually assured destruction at the ballot box.
"We have to make every effort possible that we do things together, because that's what creates the strength," Schwarzenegger said. "So one party alone cannot do it, and the other party alone cannot do it." #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/A_NEWS/710110328
Editorial: Why can't these guys reach a water deal?
This is the week for Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, Gov. Schwarzenegger and Sen. Dave Cogdill to stop playing games with
Perata and Cogdill both have proposed bond measures to raise billions for fixing the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and creating more reliable drinking supplies for 25 million Californians. They share the same goals and some of the same solutions. And so far, they've shared the same fate -- failure to gain passage after two weeks of a special session called by the governor.
By Wednesday, it appeared several key players were ready to throw in the towel. That's not good enough.
Cogdill made two dams the critical components of his plan. But many environmentalists hate the thought.
What should be even more odious is the thought of a delta catastrophe. Some of the levees that channel water through the delta are a century old and subject to failure. An earthquake could turn them to jelly, creating massive lakes and shutting off supplies to the Bay Area and
Already, the delta's ability to simultaneously sustain its ecosystem and supply water to millions is failing. In August, a federal judge ordered a 30 percent reduction in pumping from the delta to save the delta smelt. Another judge could order further reductions after considering the effects of pumping on migrating salmon.
Many who rely on the delta are taking dramatic steps. For instance, the city of
The two contentious dams are part of a comprehensive water strategy -- which should be the main thrust of any water bond. A dam at Temperance Flat would help restore the
Cogdill's plan -- which the governor supports -- would put $9.1 billion toward the dams and some delta restoration.
Perata's competing plan would cost $6.8 billion and provide funds to local jurisdictions for groundwater banking, conservation and, perhaps, some additional surface storage. It, too, would help restore the delta.
With such similar goals, there appears to be ample room to negotiate. And behind the scenes, that's happening.
But for negotiations to work, there needs to be a willingness to compromise. Last week, senate Republicans drew a line in the legislative sandbox, saying any bond that did not include their dams was dead in the water. But Cogdill's bill was defeated in committee. Tuesday, Perata's bill -- without a guarantee for dams -- died in committee when no Republicans voted to move it forward.
Perata declared defeat and said he would try to qualify his plan for the February ballot, where it would likely go head-to-head with Cogdill's plan. Competing plans would split the vote and guarantee defeat for both.
Wednesday morning, Perata met with the governor -- who later issued a lengthy letter detailing the importance of fixing
We hope so. The state hasn't built a major water project in 30 years. If these three key players allow this opportunity to be lost, it could take decades for another to come along.
Or, it could take a catastrophe. #
http://www.modbee.com/opinion/story/90269.html
RIVERISLANDS PROJECT:
By Anna Kaplan, staff writer
LATHROP - Susan Dell'Osso thought she would be overseeing the building of luxury riverside homes by now. But with area home prices dropping, Dell'Osso, the perennial face behind the controversial, superlevee-reinforced
The delay means one more year of waiting added to a project whose 15-year history has included proposals for theme parks, environmental lawsuits, a ballot measure and major flooding. It also means less immediate revenue for the rapidly growing city of
"We're all ready to go. Our levees are certified, our sewer is on standby, but the market's just not there," Dell'Osso said.
In the meantime, the Walnut Creek-based Cambray Group Inc. development company is taking its time building infrastructure, streets and lakes. Grading on the project began in 2006.
If home prices go up by April,
"The last thing I want to do is flood the market with homes that people don't want to buy," Dell'Osso said. "Thankfully, we have the luxury of holding off."
Cambray has invested more than $100 million in the project. It was first pitched as
The floods of 1997 swamped the area, bolstering critics' claims. When the developers abandoned the theme park plan and renamed the
The smaller and less expensive the homes, however, the less money the city of
"Obviously, if we have less money, then we have less money to spend on things that residents might like to see, like improved parks and the teen center. We're still moving forward, just not at the pace that we originally wanted," Sayles said.
The city has cut back on the funds it will spend on improvements to
If the city had continued growing as it did two years ago, Lathrop could have had a boost of up to $1.5 million in the 2007-08 fiscal year, according to city data.
In 2005, Lathrop approved 921 building permits for residential units. So far in 2007, there have been 197 permits, according to numbers from the Construction Industry Research Board, which tracks the
In the meantime, homes are costing less and becoming harder to sell.
"There are less buyers, because it's more difficult to get a loan because the lenders have tightened up the rules; there are people holding back to see if prices are going to get lower; and there is more inventory on the market," said Nancy Mitchell, a Realtor with Coldwell Banker Crossroads in Lathrop.
There are 264 active listings for resale homes in Lathrop, and the homes' average stay on the market is 78 days, she said.
"When things were really slamming, a home could be sold before a sign even got in the yard," Mitchell added.
The average price of a Lathrop home today is $410,000, and sellers unload houses for an average of 94 percent of their original listed prices, she said.
Despite the dropping costs and the waiting game, both Mitchell and Dell'Osso are optimistic about the future of the Lathrop housing market.
"There's no place to grow in the Bay Area or
Timeline:
April 1996: Lathrop’s City Council approves a development agreement and annexation application for what is then known as
January 1997: Much of the southern end of the county including Lathrop and portions of
May 2000: After years of critics taking shots at Califia developer Norman Jarrett’s dreams and struggling through two separate lawsuits filed by The Sierra Club, Jarrett admits he can’t find investors and asks to build the homes first in hopes of attracting investors. Califia is looking more and more like a regular housing development in a flood plain.
November 2000: After several court challenges Measure D, a proposal to let Califia’s developers build homes first and theme parks later narrowly passes.
September 2001: One month after dreamweaver Norman Jarrett Retires, Califia developers, now known as Walnut Creek-based Cambray Group Inc., announce they are dropping plans for theme parks altogether and changing the project’s name to
April 2002: Cambray details plans to build a superlevee that could reach 300 feet wide as a way to protect the development and silence critics still concerned about building homes in a flood plain.
December 2003: Cambray settles seven years of litigation with The Sierra Club, which had tried to stop the developer from turning prime farmland into a housing development. The developer agreed to fund an $8.2 million trust governed by an independent board that would seek to preserve farmland in
November 2005: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requires Cambray to conduct an in-depth environmental study because of the project’s massiveness, delaying the project by at least 18 months.
April 2006: The Federal Emergency Management Agency issues a letter that 900 acres of land surrounded by
August 2006: Cambray begins to turn dirt on
April 2007:
October 2007: Project Manager Dell’Osso announces the development will delay building homes on the land for a year in response to the county’s struggling housing market. #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/A_NEWS/710110335
Editorial: Cardoza's flood-protection ideas should get support in Congress
U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, is being pragmatic.
That's why he's added an amendment to federal flood-insurance legislation that could save Valley homeowners millions of dollars - particularly residents of Lathrop and southwest Stockton.
Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, also voted for the provision that was approved by the House of Representatives in September.
The issue now is being debated in the Senate, where support is less certain, partly because there's no one willing to be its advocate.
President Bush has said he would veto the legislation because wind damage has been added to the federally subsidized flood-insurance program.
The legislation, part of an overhaul of the National Flood Insurance Program, mandates that levees must be certified and flood maps updated.
That will impact thousands of
Few areas are more vulnerable than new Lathrop neighborhoods west of Interstate 5 that are protected by a levee known as RD17.
The uncertainty is frustrating.
Speculation is that RD17 won't be certified, forcing property owners to pay more for insurance and Lathrop officials to work with builders in upgrading the levee.
"Tell us how to fix the levee," said Lathrop mayor Kristy Sayles. "Tell us, instead of shutting down the city. The development west of I-5 has been 15 years in the planning. There are millions of dollars of infrastructure in the ground."
Sayles has asked Federal Emergency Management Agency and state water officials to provide an indication of what needs to be done and a timetable for doing it.
So far, only Cardoza seems to be listening.
As similar legislation is being debated in the U.S. Senate, Sayles had hoped Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would support it. It's unlikely.
"She doesn't want to talk about flood insurance," said Sayles.
Cardoza's amendment would ease the burden on homeowners by cutting the insurance increase in half - allowing a 50 percent reduction for the first five years.
Typically, such insurance costs about $400 a year for every $100,000 of coverage.
Like
Suddenly imposing additional flood insurance costs could force more homeowners out of the market. Where would they go?
Cardoza is trying to help. Feinstein and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., should join him.
Housing in Lathrop has moved west of Interstate 5, and the city's population will continue to grow.
The pragmatic thing right now is to help protect Valley residents from excessively costly flood protection insurance by providing a period of transition as they adjust to higher tax rates. #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/A_OPINION01/710110320/-1/A_OPINION
Sierra resources subject of summit
Three top state officials will take part in a summit Friday in
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
No comments:
Post a Comment