[Water_news] 5. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, PEOPLE - 10/16/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

October 16, 2008

 

5. Agencies, Programs, People –

 

 

Opinion:

My View: Delta Vision: Facing facts about California water

Sacramento Bee

 

Bay Point could get tapped with higher water bills again

Contra Costa Times

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

Opinion:

My View: Delta Vision: Facing facts about California water

Sacramento Bee – 10/16/08

By Phil Isenberg

 

Phil Isenberg is Chair of the Governor’s Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force. He has also served as Mayor of Sacramento and spent 14 years in California’s Assembly.

 

Let's start with some facts:

The water supply in California is static; it is not growing. Individual use of water has moderated slightly in California in recent years, but more people, businesses and farms means more water is required. We do not appear to be taking conservation seriously.

 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem is in serious decline, as is the complex water delivery system that runs through the Delta.

Improving the Delta ecosystem is a legally required condition of improving the water delivery system in California.

 

The current system of governing water in California – letting more than 220 government agencies, federal, state and local, independently operate in the Delta – just does not work and needs to be changed.

 

Few of us think about these things when we turn on the tap and watch the water flow.

 

But as President John Adams said many years ago, "facts are stubborn things." The current drought is not good news, but it could be beneficial if it forces us to face up to our problems. We have to.

 

The Delta is the source of much of California's water – a vast network of sloughs, wetlands and islands that supplies at least some of the drinking water to two-thirds of the state's residents.

 

In 2007, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger established the Delta Vision Task Force and told us to develop a vision for sustainable management of the Delta and a strategic plan to implement that vision. He told us that we were an independent body, and he wished to receive our independent recommendations. We have spent the last 20 months holding hearings, reading, thinking and debating ways to meet the governor's challenge.

 

Today and Friday, the task force will meet in West Sacramento to complete its recommendations for the strategic plan. While our recommendations are as complex as the problems of water and the environment in California, they flow from seven overarching goals that should be state policy:

 

• Legally acknowledge the co-equal status of restoring the Delta ecosystem and creating a more reliable water supply for California. Yes, these can occasionally be in conflict, but using the 'beneficial use/no wasting' language of our constitution and the long-established public trust doctrine will allow us to resolve any conflicts.

• Recognize and enhance the unique cultural, recreational and agricultural values of the Delta. Apply for designation of the Delta as a federal natural heritage area, and designate the Delta as a state recreation area. Establish and fund a Delta Investment Fund to promote appropriate recreation, tourism and other uses, but adopt land-use rules that make sure urban development does not occur on flood-threatened lands.

• Restore the Delta ecosystem as the heart of a healthy estuary. Put approximately 100,000 acres of land in the Delta into protected status by the year 2100 in order to achieve the goals of Delta Vision.

• Promote water conservation, efficiency and sustainable use. Whatever else is done, there is no dispute that conservation must be undertaken by every user of water in California. If voluntary efforts are not successful, then mandatory measures are needed, and they must be coupled with increased water recycling.

• Build facilities to improve the existing water conveyance system and expand statewide storage, and operate both to achieve the co-equal goal. Over the next decade or two, the state must have new water storage, above and below ground, and must also build new Delta water conveyance facilities. The task force prefers the "dual conveyance" approach, where water is transported both through and around the Delta.

• Reduce risks to people, property and state interests in the Delta by effective emergency preparedness, appropriate land uses and strategic investments. People and property located in much of the Delta are exposed to great risks from flooding, sea-level rise and earthquakes. Increased protection must be provided, but new growth should be discouraged in areas subject to extraordinary risk.

• Establish a new governance structure with adequate authority, responsibility, accountability, scientific support and funding. The task force recommends a five-person statewide commission appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate. The commission would oversee actions of various state and federal agencies in the Delta. The full details of our proposals can be found at www.deltavision.ca.gov.

 

Is this easy to do? Not at all. We have over 150 years of habits and laws that have led to the current situation.

Unfortunately, the habit of asserting regional or economic interests cannot solve our statewide problems. Delta Vision is based on the premise that California can progress when we act boldly and recognize that all of us live in one state, with a common future.#

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1317793.html

 

Judge, Autry air debate at luncheon

Fresno Bee – 10/15/08

By John Ellis / The Fresno Bee

 

 

Fresno Mayor Alan Autry and U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger took their long-running feud outside the courtroom Wednesday, with each man giving wildly different interpretations of the law in a lively and contentious debate.

 

Autry called judicial precedent a myth. He cited the Declaration of Independence -- not the U.S. Constitution -- as the supreme law of the land. He said federal judges are always free to interpret the law.

 

Said Wanger: "I am astounded by what I just heard."

 

As the exchanges grew more pointed and edgy, Autry said to Wanger: "I'm glad there's no gavel in your hand, because now it's my time."

What brought the men together Wednesday was a pair of recent cases presided over by Wanger.

 

The veteran jurist described the legal basis for his recent controversial decisions involving the tiny delta smelt -- rulings that cut water deliveries to west side farmers -- as well as a settlement he approved in which Fresno agreed to pay $2.3 million to compensate the homeless for the city's destruction of their property.

 

Autry has been openly critical of both decisions. Over the past two years, Wanger has expressed irritation at some of the mayor's comments, including one, during the homeless case, in which he told the judge to "enter the real world and find out the real truth."

 

In June, Wanger even summoned Autry to his courtroom, where he essentially forced the mayor to retract complaints about the homeless settlement -- an agreement the city had negotiated and Autry had approved.

 

Wednesday's debate, at a monthly luncheon for judges and lawyers, was the latest salvo in this ongoing exchange.

The central point of Autry's argument was the "myth" that once judicial precedent is set, it can't be overturned.

 

Autry maintains it can. He cited, among others, Brown v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court's historic school-desegregation ruling. He compared it to the high court's 1896 ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson, which accepted segregated institutions for black people as long as they were equal to those for white people.

Those two Supreme Court rulings, he argued, show that the law can change and be interpreted with the passage of time.

Based on that, Autry suggested that Wanger was free to interpret the law in the smelt and homeless cases.

 

The Endangered Species Act, which was central to the smelt case, was passed 35 years ago, Autry said, when the state had 18 million people. The state now has 38 million people.

 

That, he said, gives Wanger the right to interpret the law for today -- and issue a ruling that protected humans and not fish.

 

He related this to his interpretation of a legal concept known as "judicial notice," which he said "lets a judge use common sense -- and thank goodness for that."

But Wanger said that if he did as Autry suggested, he would be branded an activist judge.

 

Judicial notice can only be invoked if there is no controversy, Wanger said. He then quipped: "You and I didn't go to the same law school." Autry didn't go to law school at all. He has a physical education degree from University of the Pacific.

 

Wanger said he must follow the law and legal precedents set by the Supreme Court. If parties disagree, they can appeal.

 

The Declaration of Independence is a "magnificent document," Wanger said, but it is "not the supreme law. That is the Constitution."

 

Though both men spoke warmly of each other, there was clearly an edginess that emerged as the lunch hour wore on.

 

At one point, Autry said he had "the highest regard for Judge Wanger. That's why I'm so hoppin' mad."

 

Wanger, in turn, urged Autry to "avoid hyperbole" and "not to oversimplify."

 

While Wanger spent much of his time speaking of the law, Autry went political at times.

 

He suggested the central piece of the homeless ruling -- that the city save belongings seized during raids on homeless encampments -- would require the city to save a drug needle used by someone suffering from AIDS. And a child could pick it up, he said.

 

Autry also said the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped represent the homeless, "ripped the city off," fleeced the homeless and then left in a "limo."

Many of those in attendance -- largely from the city's legal community -- believed Wanger made the better argument.

Carl Faller, a former assistant U.S. attorney who is now in private practice, said a district judge such as Wanger is bound to follow precedent set by the Supreme Court, and to do as Autry suggested would be "a violation of his role." #

http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/940527.html

 

Bay Point could get tapped with higher water bills again

Contra Costa Times – 10/16/08

By Paul Burgarino, East County Times

 

Bay Point residents may soon have to reach deeper into their pockets to pay monthly water bills if they want fluoridated water.

 

As a condition of allowing Golden State Water Co. to raise water rates by 6.18 percent to improve service quality earlier this year, the state Public Utilities Commission stipulated that the private water supplier must submit a plan to fluoridate Bay Point's water.

 

A Sept. 29 letter to the PUC described how much it would cost for fluoridation and to reduce chlorine byproducts known as trihalomethanes — the other issue raised during community meetings last year — along with a possible way to recover the costs. Company officials say the two issues are intertwined, and it would cost more in the long run to handle them separately.

 

The two options recommended by Golden State could raise water rates by 22 percent or 29 percent. The public has 20 days from the letter date to comment on the fluoride proposal, though the county plans to file an extension.

 

Currently, the county's Health Services Department is crafting a response to the letter, including input from Supervisor Federal Glover, whose district includes Bay Point.

 

Issues that will be addressed in the response by county Health Director Dr. William Walker include whether Golden State's advice letter was appropriate because it went beyond discussing fluoridation in mentioning trihalomethane improvements, as well as whether ratepayers should bear such high costs compared with the water company, said Michael Kent, the county's environmental hazards ombudsman.

 

Kerrie Evans, policy analyst with the PUC, said Wednesday she had not received comments about the letter.

 

"If the community has complaints about the proposal, now is the time," she said.

 

Once the comment period expires, the PUC will consider whether Golden State's request is reasonable. The proposal can be granted, partially accepted or rejected, Evans said, adding that there is no time frame for this analysis.

 

Bay Point residents pay the most for water in central and eastern Contra Costa, even though a third of its residents live below the poverty line, county health officials said. They also say Bay Point has the worst water quality in East County.

 

The options considered by Golden State are fluoridating the water itself or purchasing treated water from the Contra Costa Water District on a full-time basis, said John Dewey, Golden State's community education manager.

 

The fluoridation option would increase the bill for a typical user from $79.74 per month to $102.54, or an increase of 29 percent, according to the Golden State plan. Purchasing treated water from the Contra Costa Water District would raise that bill to $97.22, a 22 percent increase.

 

Earlier this year, Golden State entered into a temporary agreement with the water district to purchase additional treated water while Golden State sought a permanent solution to lowering trihalomethanes. Trihalomethanes are a hazardous byproduct of the water-treatment process that studies have linked to higher rates of miscarriage and cancer risk.

 

The option of tapping into Contra Costa Water District's supply at Randall-Bold Water Treatment Plant in Oakley is more cost-efficient than retrofitting the Hill Street Water Treatment Plant in Bay Point, Dewey said.

 

Golden State would continue to operate its own wells and distribute the water with this option, Dewey said.

 

Water rates in Bay Point are higher than those of neighboring communities, company officials have said, because the company's approximately 5,000 customers there must bear all facilities and operating costs. Bay Point is the only community in the Contra Costa Water District served by a private, investor-owned supplier.

Golden State will be happy to meet with those interested in discussing the plan, Dewey said, adding that the proposal would be looked at thoroughly by the PUC. #

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_10729033?nclick_check=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://listhost2.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.