Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
April 16, 2009
5. Agencies, Programs, People –
New coalition emerges in state water debate
The Capitol Weekly
Environmental groups sue California over water bank
The
Layoffs, cuts force delays In Coastal Commission permits
The Capitol Weekly
San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors wants to have greater say in future of the Delta
The
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
New coalition emerges in state water debate
The Capitol Weekly – 4/16/09
By John Howard
Dozens of public water agencies -- including some who were foes in California's historic battles over water -- are coming together to push their common interests. In some cases, those include protecting traditional water rights and advocating for such hot-button projects as reservoirs, environmental safeguards, improved levees, even a canal along the edge of the Delta east of
By its own count, the Public Water Coalition, loosely formed last fall, includes more than 300 water suppliers, state and federal public districts, contractors and others. The new group – it's so new that some even in the water and environmental communities have not heard of it -- includes "the largest water management regions of California, whose public water agencies serve the vast majority of the state's population and most of its irrigated lands," according to the coalition's official position paper, which was released Feb. 18.
The coalition reflects the frustration of water agencies who see their problems of supply, conveyance and storage mounting.
"What you're seeing right now is that water agencies are saying, 'We can't rely on state agencies to fix it. We need to take a more active approach. If it means paying out of our own pockets, we need to do that," said Thad Bettner of the Glenn Colusa Irrigation District.
"We need to be more proactive because the water system is just not working. From a
Supporters include the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the Friant Water Authority and San Joaquin River Group Authority, the Northern California Water Association and the Association of California Water Agencies, among others. Between them, the entities and their overlapping membership provide water to about 25 million Californians.
The PWC isn't a lobbying arm or a trade association or an executive organization or a professional advocacy group. It doesn't have any staff members or headquarters or office space. Above all, it's not the state or federal government, although representatives of both are involved.
Yet, it's real. And it reflects a growing belief among water professionals throughout
"It's a different kind of animal, it's more of a discussion group. It's sort of a virtual organization," said Byron Buck, a Sacramento-based consultant for Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the closest thing to a spokesman for the group. "It's really a way to have an elevated dialogue, to establish board positions and to talk each other through senior management."
"Fundamentally, we have plenty of water in storage, but the bridge is out. We can't move water across the Delta anymore," Buck said.
Four basic tenets are emerging from the coalition, although not everyone agrees with all of them.
One is to move more water through or around the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta by constructing some form of conveyance, such as a
Another is to improve the levees in the Delta, strengthening them against seismic risks. About two-thirds of
A third is to improve water storage, which includes construction of new reservoirs and expansion of groundwater storage.
A fourth is to protect
Not surprisingly, not everybody within the professional water community is pleased with those goals, and some are holding back from the coalition.
"The state and federal governments are short of water, and they are trying to make deliveries and trying to balance all this on the back of the water quality in the Delta," said Jerry Robinson of the Stockton-based South Delta Water Agency, a public entity that has sued to block a proposed canal that would move water from the Delta and send it southward. The canal is part of a larger conservation plan that would combine the two goals of water delivery and habitat conservation for the Delta.
The Legislature approved a
The coalition was prompted in part by the governor's Delta Vision report, which identified shortcomings in
The problems – the need to move more water from the far north to the south, the need for wildlife protections in the Delta, the obstacles to building new storage, the lack of money, California's growing and thirsty population, loss of Colorado River water – have been identified before, and often, over the years.
But what's different now is a growing sense among public water agencies that more unites them than divides them. And there is a belief that little will be accomplished at the state level unless the local agencies force the debate.
Should there be "dual conveyance – a canal and improved levees? Should there be new gates and barriers along the western edge of the Delta to block the incursion of salt water? Should there be new storage, underground or surface? What about recycling and conservation? And in the background are the court decisions forcing reductions in pumping in order to protect species.
It's all on the table.
Key lawmakers and the governor favor $10 billion to $15 billion worth of renovation, construction and environmental projects, which would depend on voter approval and would be paid –at least in part – by the people who get the most benefit from the projects.
There is no consensus on the projects, much less the funding, which means the PWC – like virtually every other entity that has sought to resolve
"It's really a voluntary coming-together of interests. It recognizes not only the issues of the Delta, but also other issues as well, such as the ability to move water around, and to do that, you need conveyance," said Ron Jacobsma, executive director of the Friant Water Users Authority.
And the question of how any new water system would be managed is a critical concern. Who's in charge?
"Most folks would not support reopening the water-rights issue in this state. We could spend decades trying to recreate the water rights system in the state of
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=xwszniq6vn17as
Environmental groups sue California over water bank
The
By Matt Weiser
A coalition of environmental groups on Tuesday sued the state for allegedly failing to study the environmental consequences of a new drought water bank that could end up tapping huge amounts of
The Butte Environmental Council, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and California Water Impact Network filed suit in Alameda Superior Court against the state Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. They want the court to order an environmental impact report on the water plan and, if necessary, to halt any planned water transfers until the study is completed.
Under terms of the water bank, up to 600,000 acre-feet of water could be transferred from
But environmental groups fear this will dry up well water supplies essential to other farmers and homeowners, especially on the east side of the Sacramento Valley. They worry it could also drop water tables enough to dry up waterways essential to the last remaining wild salmon runs in the valley, such as in Butte Creek.
"I think the state's ignoring those impacts," said Barbara Vlamis, executive director of the Butte Environmental Council. "It's very alarming."
DWR officials declined to comment on the suit, saying they haven't had time to study it yet.#
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1784346.html?mi_rss=Our%2520Region
Layoffs, cuts force delays In Coastal Commission permits
The Capitol Weekly – 4/16/09
MALIBU- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's move to slash more than $600,000 from the California Coastal Commission is causing it to delay permits by up to a year on certain projects and deny others outright because of time constraints and staff shortages.
Local officials and commissioners are concerned that the delays may tempt impatient project applicants to resort to unpermitted development.
"As a result of the budget shortfall and staffing cuts, the South Central Coast District office responsible for the Malibu area has been subject to significant cuts in its planning staff, and those cuts can result in potential delays of processing the city's LCP (Local Conservation Plan) amendments and new project applications," said Steve Hudson, Coastal Commission district manger of the South Central Coast District.
The delays, however, will impact residents and developers more than they will the city.
"We don't have that many projects that go to the Coastal Commission," City Manager Jim Thorsen said recently.
"Those that do are LCP amendments and processing requirements. We can wait until they make decision on those."
Malibu City Councilmember John Sibert last week said that the LCP, a set of ground rules for coastal development and protection of coastal resources in
The City of
Of the six pending amendment requests that remain, four call for the rezoning of residential properties, one seeks to change the wording in the LCP to allow adjacent developable land parcels to be transferred to public entities, and another requests the addition of definitions for natural and manufactured slopes and for the rainy season to clarify general development standards.
All plans for new
The commission has been applying its one-time, one-year extensions to numerous project applications, but it has also denied others simply because of time constraints and staff shortages.
Sarah Christy, the Coastal Commission's legislative director in
"Permits and appeals take months and months longer than they should," Christy said Friday in a telephone interview. "The reality is that if we can't get the work done within the [60-90 day] time frame, we have to deny the permit because we can't do the work. In many cases it's a perfectly good project we approve of, but we can't do so without staff."
Shortage affects enforcement of unpermitted development.
The staffing shortage has also forced the commission to lose a number of its enforcement officials who monitor unpermitted development.
"We have over 1,300 backlogged enforcement cases that would take over 100 years to clear at the current pace of resolution," Christy said, adding that unpermitted development is unenforced in at least 25 percent of the
"That [unpermitted development] is always a problem," Sibert said. "There's always been a bootlegging issue in
"The trouble is, the size of our staff compared to 13,000 city residents make it difficult to know what's going on," he added.
Before Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the final 2008-2009 fiscal year budget in September, he used his line item veto to reduce the Coastal Commission's general fund budget allocation by $617,000 (approximately five percent).
Based in part on recommendations from the Legislative Analyst Office, Legislative Budget Subcommittee and the Department of Finance, the commission increased permit and filing fees beginning in March 2007.
Though the commission received $524,000 from increased permit fee revenues to cover some operating expenses, it continues to have inadequate funds to cover operating costs and replace aging equipment.
"Our office equipment is so old, they've stopped making replacement parts for some of them," Christy said. "There have been months we've run out of paper. We recently upgraded our computers with hand-me-downs from the Department of Fish and Game, a department known to be starved. But their computers were an upgrade for us."
Cost reductions by the Coastal Commission that will remain in effect through the 2008-2009 fiscal year include the termination of all limited-term staff, 19 layoffs (with 27 more in the upcoming six months), a "Leave Without Pay" program in which more than 70 staff members have pledged over $218,000 (704 staff days) of leave without pay to reduce staff layoffs, and elimination of essentially all training (including legally required training).
The commission has also reduced the number of staff that travels to meetings throughout the state, and has reduced all public hearings to a maximum of three days per month. #
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=xwt2n4dp7kxg4r
San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors wants to have greater say in future of the Delta
The
By Ross Farrow
Concerned about the possibility that
In the resolution, the Board of Supervisors requests $900 million for water storage and conveyance, groundwater recharge and flood control projects in the Mokelumne, Calaveras and Stanislaus river watersheds. The county wants another $51 million for emergency levee maintenance efforts.
The bigger issue is to increase water supply through groundwater recharge and the construction of new dams, said county Supervisor Larry Ruhstaller, who has been representing the county on Delta water issues this year.
Ruhstaller criticized Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature for trying to fast-track a plan to send Delta water to the southern
"There are so many cooks trying to cook this broth," Ruhstaller said in an interview Wednesday. "God help us. (The state is) trying to cook it on high. They're not letting it simmer."
State Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, said in an interview this week that the Legislature is beginning to submit bills about the Delta because Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration believes it has the ability to build the canal without legislative or voter approval.
"They are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars drawing plans now," Wolk said. "The contractors are paying for it. It will probably go to court over the authority to build it."
In other action
· The San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors approved plans to reroof the
· The board reappointed Joe Petersen, of
The resolution adopted Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors also includes several facets of the Delta's future and water supply in general. They include:
· A Delta plan based on preserving existing water rights and priorities.
· Repairing levees.
· A conservancy supporting local agriculture, tourism, economic sustainability, recreation and local government control.
· Appointing one county supervisor each from San Joaquin,
In addition to the Board of Supervisors showing its desire to sink its teeth into the peripheral canal proposal, two bills designed to protect Northern California interests were approved by a 7-3 vote of the state senate's Natural Resources and Water Committee on Tuesday, and a lawsuit was filed by the Central and South Delta water agencies to protect Delta interests.
The Delta bills that Wolk sponsored would create a seven-member council to approve the Delta Stewardship Plan, require the appointment of a Delta science and engineering board and protect the habitat, agriculture, recreation, public access, tourism, economic vitality and historical and cultural resources in the Delta.
One of the bills, SB 457, has been assigned to the Senate Local Government Committee, while SB 458 has been sent to the Senate Appropriations Committee.#
http://www.lodinews.com/articles/2009/04/16/news/5_supes_090416.txt
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
No comments:
Post a Comment