Jerry Brown, lawmakers propose $1.1 billion drought relief bill amid increasing tension

With California trudging into its fourth dry year, Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders on Thursday announced $1.1 billion in emergency funding for flood protection and drought relief.

The vast majority of the money – all but about $30 million – was already included in Brown’s January budget proposal, and the measure is similar to a bill package lawmakers approved last year.

But tension over the drought runs higher today than it did then, when Brown first declared a drought emergency and urged Californians to reduce water consumption by 20 percent. This year, California recorded its driest-ever January, and state regulators on Tuesday ordered water agencies to limit the number of days each week customers can water their lawns.

Brown, who said last month that he was reluctant to impose mandatory water restrictions, suggested Thursday that he is open to more stringent measures.

“I’m not going to second-guess (state water regulators), but I would share your urgency that we step it up in the weeks and months ahead,” the Democratic governor said at a news conference at the Capitol.

Brown said, “If this drought continues, we’ll crank it down and it will get extremely challenging for people in California.”

The Legislature is expected to hold votes next week on the drought package, whose passage will allow spending immediately – months before the July 1 start of the next budget year.

The measure includes $272.7 million in water recycling and drinking water quality programs funded by Proposition 1, the water bond voters approved last year.

But the majority of the funding – $660 million – comes from water and flood-prevention bonds voters approved nearly a decade ago, in 2006.

Brown said, “The fact is, these projects take a long time.”

Outside the Capitol, patience appears to be waning.

According to a February Field Poll, 94 percent of California voters consider the drought situation in California “serious,” with nearly 70 percent calling it “extremely serious.” Public support for water rationing, though still just more than one-third of voters, has grown in the past year.

“I think, for the public, an increasingly large proportion is becoming alarmed,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the poll. “The governor is taking actions which I think make him at least appear to the public that he’s attending to the problem.”

Contributing to the public’s growing concern was a widely circulated editorial in the Los Angeles Times last week in which Jay Famiglietti, senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said the state was at risk of running out of water altogether.

“Right now the state has only about one year of water supply left in its reservoirs, and our strategic backup supply, groundwater, is rapidly disappearing,” Famiglietti wrote. “California has no contingency plan for a persistent drought like this one (let alone a 20-plus-year mega-drought), except, apparently, staying in emergency mode and praying for rain.”

Speaking at the Capitol, Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León said the one-year water supply estimate and the lack of water this year “is creating a renewed sense of urgency.”

He said the drought package “is just the first round” in the Legislature’s effort to address the drought and that “we have much work to do.”

The water bond voters approved last year includes $2.7 billion for storage projects such as dams and reservoirs. Brown said “these are big projects, and I’m certainly looking very carefully at how we can get more storage as quickly as possible.”

Republican lawmakers have been more insistent, seizing on the drought to criticize the lack of water infrastructure investments in the past, as well as the current pace of project approvals.

“I’m calling on the state water agencies, on state government to get projects out of the red tape, to get them moving because they’ve been hung up for decades,” said Assembly Republican leader Kristin Olsen of Riverbank.

Nevertheless, Olsen and Bob Huff, the Republican Senate leader, stood with Brown and Democratic lawmakers for the drought package’s announcement.

Last year’s version was approved by the Legislature with nearly unanimous support, as is expected for this drought package.

Though Republican lawmakers appeared to have no hand in crafting the measure – having only been made aware of it shortly before the announcement – Brown said the Republicans’ support was evidence “we’re doing well.”

He dismissed the timing of their involvement as a “narrative that’s not particularly interesting.”

Still, it made for awkward stagecraft.

After first planning to address reporters after the news conference Thursday, Republican leaders changed course at the last minute to appear with Brown and the Democratic legislative leaders.

Republicans attended their first meetings on the plan Wednesday, and the governor contacted Olsen on Thursday morning, Olsen spokeswoman Amanda Fulkerson said.

She declined to elaborate further on Republicans’ role in discussions.

“I’ll let the governor’s remarks stand for themselves,” Fulkerson said.


DROUGHT RELIEF

Here is how most of the proposed drought funds will be spent:

$660 million for flood management planning and infrastructure improvements, including levee work.

$272.7 million for drinking water quality, water recycling and desalination projects.

$24 million for emergency food aid for people, such as farm workers, out of work due to drought.


Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article15381434.html#storylink=cpy

Water Bond Initiative of 2014

Proposition 1, a measure formerly known as Proposition 43, the Water Bond, is slated to be on the November 4, 2014 ballot in California as a legislatively-referred bond act.  A "bond" means security of any kind, including money, given to ensure performance of an obligation arising under an enactment, a license, a permit, a contract or another similar obligation, and includes the terms under which the security may be realized (Source: http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96030_01). The measure, upon voter approval, would enact the Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012.

More specifically, Proposition 1 will:

• Authorizes $11.14 billion in general obligation bonds for state water supply infrastructure projects, including surface and groundwater storage, ecosystem and watershed protection and restoration, and Bay-Delta Estuary sustainability.
• Appropriate money from the General Fund to pay off bonds.
• Require certain projects to provide matching funds from non-state sources in order to receive bond funds.

As many California residents may already know, our state has been undergoing a severe drought for the past several years. Reservoirs are low, groundwater basins and ecosystems are stressed, water quality is impaired, and wildfire risks are extremely high. Three consecutive dry years have pushed California’s water system to its limits and exposed vulnerabilities that must be addressed now if we are to avoid even more dire challenges in the coming years.

Signs of California’s severe water challenges include:

• Drinking water shortages and mandatory rationing in some areas
• Impaired water quality and contaminated groundwater basins
• Water cutbacks to family farms
• Lost farm jobs and reduced economic activity
• Extreme wildfire danger
• Increased food prices

In order to prevent a future where these water challenges continue, the passage of Proposition 1 will help California prepare for droughts, ensure reliable water for farms, clean contamination of water resources, protect against the collapse of our water system in an earthquake, repair the Delta, one of the most important ecosystems on the West Coast, create jobs now by fixing vital infrastructure, and protect taxpayers with strong fiscal safeguards.

Water is essential—we must act now to protect our economy and quality of life. Proposition 43 will be the solution we need to combat drought and create a more resilient water system for California.

For more information on the Water Bond ballot initiative, please visit: http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_43,_Water_Bond_(2014)

California water bond: Support for the latest $7 billion plan builds as deadline looms to OK it

SACRAMENTO -- Powerful voices in California's water wars pledged their support Tuesday for a $7 billion state water bond that lawmakers must pass before Wednesday's midnight deadline if they hope to see it on the November ballot.

The California Farm Bureau Federation and Los Angeles County's Metropolitan Water District had hoped for at least $3 billion in the bond for construction of dams, reservoirs and other storage projects.

But with time running out, they called on lawmakers from both parties to support a package crafted over the weekend by Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic legislative leaders with $2.5 billion for water storage.

"With California experiencing an unprecedented drought on the heels of two dry years, the most important issue on the November ballot is the passage of a water bond," said Paul Wenger, president of the Farm Bureau, the state's largest farm association, whose members have been crippled by the lengthening drought.

Some business and water district leaders saw the bond proposal as a "workable framework" that respects the state's fiscal limitations while acknowledging the need for an array of water projects, including groundwater cleanup and river habitat restoration.

Wenger compared Brown's commitment to increasing the state's water storage capacity to that of his father, former Gov. Pat Brown, who built the enormous network of dams, reservoirs and canals in the 1960s that the state depends on today to move water from north to south.

"It is an absolute necessity that the greatest single component of this bond be dedicated to water storage, something that has been sorely absent in the last five water bonds that have been passed by voters since 1996," Wenger said. "We applaud Gov. Brown."

Still, if Brown and his Democratic allies hope to meet the deadline to replace the bloated, unpopular water bond originally scheduled for the November ballot, they must work feverishly over the next 24 hours to address lingering concerns that threaten to scuttle a deal, Capitol observers say.

Senate Republicans and Central Valley Democrats want more money dedicated to water storage projects, while legislators who represent towns near the San Joaquin River Delta are seeking stronger safeguards to block bond money from being spent on Brown's controversial plan to build twin tunnels beneath the Delta to siphon water south.

Assemblyman Henry Perea, D-Fresno, is actively negotiating with Brown for more than $2.5 billion for water storage. Even a little more will be essential to "landing this plane," he said.

"This is a good first step, but we'll need to do a little better than that to get Central Valley support for this bond," Perea said. "It's a concern I have that others from the region, both Democrats and Republicans, share."

Splitting from the Farm Bureau's position, some agricultural groups, including ones that represent citrus, rice and table grape growers, are also pressing for more water storage funding.

"Where we differ from some of our colleagues in agriculture," said Joel Nelson, president of California Citrus Mutual, "is that they're willing to take a chance.

"We want more guarantees that we're going to create more water and make it available to those tho need it."

via: http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_26325189/california-water-bond-support-latest-7-billion-plan

Dianne Feinstein recasts California water bill

In a move designed to lure Republican support, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein has introduced a revised California water bill that could move lawmakers closer to meaningful negotiation.

The new bill drops spending proposals that had been included in the original California water bill introduced by Feinstein and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer on Feb. 11. The $300 million in spending, in turn, had stuck in the craw of some Senate Republicans.

"It was a problem on the Republican side," Feinstein acknowledged at a Senate subcommittee hearing Wednesday.

By cutting the bill's costs, and tweaking other elements, Feinstein hopes the bill reintroduced this week can secure the 60 Senate votes needed to avoid going through the standard committee review.

Speedier Senate consideration under what's called Rule 14, in turn, is designed to pass something that can form the basis of a compromise with a far different California water bill passed in early February by the Republican-controlled House.

The redrawn Senate bill mandates that federal agencies operate California water projects with "maximum flexibility" to boost irrigation deliveries, among other provisions. It also takes a number of technical steps, some going beyond California, but unlike the House bill it does not specifically authorize big new water projects and it leaves intact the current San Joaquin River restoration program.

PHOTO: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., left, talks with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2013.Associated Press/ Evan Vucci.

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/feinstein-recasts-california-water-bill.html#storylink=cpy