North, South Agree on Delta Protection Bill

Prodded by the federal government, veteran adversaries of the North-versus-South water wars in the Legislature put aside some of their differences Tuesday and announced a major compromise to protect the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

Calling the agreement “historic,” they unveiled legislation that would earmark $120 million over the next 10 years to rehabilitate and maintain deteriorating levees in the delta, the key pool from which Southern California draws much of its water.

The 1,100 miles of levees, some constructed by Chinese laborers in the 1860s, provide channels for meandering waterways and protect scores of islands from flooding. But since 1980 at least 13 islands have been inundated by winter floods, some more than once.

For years, the mostly peat-dirt levees, maintained principally by local reclamation districts, have been deteriorating, due in large part to wind and wave erosion and certain farming practices. Virtually everyone agrees that if key embankments should give way, the quality of water in the delta would deteriorate badly and thousands of acres of agricultural land would be thrown out of production.

The agreement, involving both northern and southern legislators, environmentalists and water contractors such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, marked a rare case where the traditional combatants on the usually divisive water issue reached a compromise.

State Water Resources Director David Kennedy, who helped to write the compromise, was reported urging Gov. George Deukmejian to support the bill at its $120-million level. Deukmejian last year supported a similar measure that would have cost $100 million.

In addition, $50 million over the next 10 years would be spent for water quality improvement and extra protection for fish and wildlife in the delta, San Francisco Bay and the Salton Sea.

Has Chance of Passage

The legislation, which will be carried by Sen. Daniel E. Boatwright (D-Concord), who represents a chunk of the delta, appeared to be the only water bill with a relatively good chance at passage this year. Legislation on controversial major water development projects has been pigeonholed.

The measure also may be historic because of what it does not include: It neither authorizes nor denies construction of facilities that would route more surplus Northern California water to the south. On that always-controversial issue, the measure is silent.

Drafters of the bill noted that no compromise would have been reached if the legislation either authorized new water-export projects, as historically favored by the south, or rejected them, as traditionally insisted upon by the north and by environmental organizations.

Basically, the bill would increase state spending on levee maintenance and rehabilitation from a maximum $2 million a year to $12 million annually during the next decade.

Protection of Islands

Of that sum, $6 million would be spent on existing levee programs, while the balance would be earmarked specifically for special flood control projects on eight islands in the western part of the delta which help repel intrusion of salt water from San Francisco Bay.

If levees protecting those islands were to collapse, sea water could rush deep into the delta and thoroughly pollute the fresh water that is exported south in the California Aqueduct.

Announcing the agreement were the chairmen of the water committees, Sen. Ruben S. Ayala (D-Chino) and Assemblyman Jim Costa (D-Fresno), authors of the now-shelved water development bills; Sen. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove), who represents part of the scenic delta; Boatwright, and Corey Brown of the Planning and Conservation League, a major opponent of delta water development.

The federal government seemed to provide the impetus for compromise. For years, the federal Emergency Management Agency has warned that it would refuse to help finance delta levee reconstruction unless California made a bigger financial commitment.

Federal Contribution

Since 1980, the federal government has spent about $92 million for emergency repairs, said Roy Gorup, chief of emergency assistance in the agency’s San Francisco office. Meantime, the state has provided only about $24 million for emergency aid, while hard-pressed reclamation districts have spent even less.

Gorup conceded that the agency’s patience had all but run out, and he has warned the state repeatedly that it must contribute more for levee rehabilitation. “We attempted to put pressure on . . . to try to get additional support out of the state,” he said.

Boatwright agreed that federal pressure was a major influence. “No doubt about it,” he said.