Plumbing problems

It’s the dawn of a crucial era in California water politics. For decades, officials have known that the vast system of pumps and pipelines that pushes 60% of the state’s water supply through the environmentally sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is not sustainable, but they’ve lacked the will and the political muscle to effect change. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to overcome the inertia before he leaves office in 2009. He has made repairing the delta and securing the state’s future water supply his pet projects.

The governor deserves an immense measure of credit and gratitude for this. But legislators should be skeptical of the $9-billion bond he’s pushing as a “comprehensive upgrade to California’s water infrastructure.” As they work on a compromise during the special legislative session, they must insist on a more sensible way forward.

Both proposals under consideration -- the governor’s and a $5.4-billion plan from Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) -- provide funds for improving the delta’s ecosystem, for continued levee repair and for other regional water projects. Both also acknowledge that California may want to build a peripheral canal to carry water around the delta into Central and Southern California. In the past, the idea of a peripheral canal (or “conveyance,” as the governor euphemistically calls it) has been political kryptonite. Today, however, there’s growing acceptance that it offers the best means for balancing the delta’s environmental needs and the thirst of a growing state.

Neither Schwarzenegger’s nor Perata’s bond would pay for the construction of a peripheral canal. That would fall to the localities using the water it would transport. But Schwarzenegger’s bill does require the state to implement conveyance improvements. This seems premature, as no one knows yet what those improvements might entail. (Perata’s bill supports improvements too but does not mandate them.)

Also troubling, a whopping $5.1 billion of Schwarzenegger’s bond would pay for three dam projects in Central and Northern California. We didn’t like this idea when it was a $2-billion set-aside for two dams in this spring’s ill-fated Senate Bill 59, and we don’t like it now either. The projects may offer statewide benefits, depending on how the delta is (or isn’t) re-engineered and how climate change affects California’s hydrology. But a complete and carefully considered delta plan must come first.

Schwarzenegger understands how important it is to move the conversation about California’s water reliability forward -- and he’s done a commendable job thus far. The peripheral canal should be part of the discussion, and the discussion should be a priority in 2008. But the governor does not need $5.1 billion for dams on the February ballot to maintain momentum. And he should not commit the state to massive plumbing projects until they’re more clearly defined. He and his opponents must begin talking about a peripheral canal’s potential benefits and pitfalls, in straightforward terms that Californians can comprehend. Ordinary citizens, after all, are the ones who’ll have to vote on it.