[Water_news] 2. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: SUPPLY - 8/1/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment 

 

August 1, 2008

 

2. Supply –

 

 

 

Solano's cities oppose water conservation bill

The Vacaville Reporter- 7/31/08

By Melissa Murphy

 

A legislative bill geared toward conserving water in all California cities has many Solano County city leaders up in arms.

 

Several cities, including Vacaville and Fairfield, are opposing the proposed Assembly Bill 2175, saying that it goes way beyond seeking to conserve water.

 

Benicia and Vallejo also are against the bill.

 

The authors of the bill, Assembly members John Laird and Mike Feuer, seek to ensure that California manages its water resources as efficiently as possible, thereby stretching state and local water and energy supplies, reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, reducing costs, and protecting the Bay/Delta and other aquatic ecosystems.

 

In order to do that, the bill - which also lists Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, D-Solano, as a co-author - requires the state to achieve a 20 percent reduction in urban per capita water use in California by Dec. 31, 2020.

 

The bill also would require the state to reduce per capita use by at least 5 percent on or before Dec. 31, 2012, and by 10 percent on or before Dec. 31, 2015.

 

This could have ghastly effects on the cities in Solano County according to Vacaville Mayor Len Augustine.

 

"There is no doubt about it, it will affect business," he said. "Vacaville has already been diligent to find water sources and save."

 

Genentech and businesses interested in locating to Vacaville will be greatly impacted by the new bill, city officials said.

 

Augustine described the proposed bill as a "one-size-fits-all" approach to conserving water in California.

 

The Solano County Water Agency also is opposing AB 2175. David Okita, the agency's general manager, explained that each city will be evaluated on how much the state expects it to conserve per capita.

 

He said that even if the city doesn't see a lot of residential growth, but sees industrial growth, the city's per capita use will increase and would cause the city to have to find more ways to conserve. If a city grows, it will have to decide how to compensate for the water conservation, Okita said.

 

"The bill discriminates against cities that have industry," Okita added, pointing to the Valero refinery in Benicia as an example. "Several cities are good about water use, but the bill assumes everyone is doing bad."

 

Rick Wood, assistant director of Fairfield's Public Works Department, agreed.

 

"Climate differs from place to place, some cities have water, some don't," he said. "Why would the cities with water suffer and have to conserve even more?"

 

A letter from the city of Fairfield to Wolk said the city opposes the bill because it, "Penalizes Fairfield for the good fortune, good location and good planning that has led us to have adequate, reliable water supplies and deprives us of the economic advantages afforded by the Solano Project and other water supplies ..."

 

Augustine said that although the bill is labeled as "water conservation," it's really a land use issue.

 

Vacaville supports cost effective water conservation and a free market based system with water use fees where warranted.

 

However, the Vacaville City Council unanimously agreed that AB 2175 is a "state mandate that sets arbitrary quotas and diminishes local control."

 

"The bill really is onerous," Augustine said. "It's a knee-jerk reaction to conserve water."

 

He added that the bill is oversimplified and will cost the cities already conserving water more money in the long run.

 

Vacaville also is sending an opposition letter to the legislature and the state.

 

Wolk did not return calls for comment on the bill which is set for a hearing in the State Senate Appropriations Committee next week.#

http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_10054518