State Water Project Called Reliable : Ventura: But the director of the Department of Water Resources says there are no guarantees during a drought.

The state’s top water official assured Ventura residents on Wednesday that the State Water Project offers a dependable supply of water, but said he could make no guarantees about how much water the city would get if it builds a pipeline to hook into the project.

“I think of the State Water Project as a very reliable supply,” said David Kennedy, director of the California Department of Water Resources in Sacramento. But no one could have foreseen the worst drought on record, he said.

In a meeting with Ventura residents, Kennedy acknowledged that the six-year drought has taken its toll on the agency that collects Northern California rainfall and Sierra snowpack runoff in reservoirs and ships the water southward.

Critically low reservoir levels have forced the state agency to deliver only a fraction of its promised quantity of water to some areas, he said, adding that the drought has compounded political frustrations of Northern Californians who resent their water being shipped southward.

Kennedy came to Ventura at the request of the Assn. of Water Agencies of Ventura County, a private nonprofit organization of groups that sell water to different parts of the county. The association wants Ventura to build a pipeline connecting the city to the State Water Project.

In November, city residents will vote on an advisory measure on whether the city should import water from Northern California or build a desalination plant that draws water from the ocean.

Although the City Council has reserved the right to make the final choice, a majority of council members have said they will abide by the voters’ wishes.

State water supporters and desalination advocates are mounting aggressive campaigns to win over the electorate.

Dana Weber Young, managing director of the Assn. of Water Agencies, said the purpose of Kennedy’s appearance was to “provide information and clear up misinformation relating to the state’s water system.”

Tim Downey, an environmental consultant who heads the group pushing for a desalination plant, said, “This will be the most important decision the city of Ventura will make for at least the next 50 years.”

Downey, the chairman of the Desal Water group, maintains that a desalination plant is a more reliable source than the state project. The drought has made the state project too unreliable, he said.

Several desalination plant supporters joined the meeting Wednesday night to question Kennedy about the reliability of the state project.

Kennedy said 1992 has become a “critically dry” year, permitting the State Water Project to deliver only about 25% to 50% of its promised allotments to various areas.

Last year, he said, the drought restricted the water project to only 45% of its promised allotments to agencies.

Kennedy recommended that cities develop other sources of water, such as ground water basins, to mix with the State Water Project. “If you have an opportunity to have a diverse supply, that’s the greatest reliability you’ve got,” Kennedy said.

Ventura now receives its water from a combination of sources, including the Lake Casitas reservoir, the Ventura River and ground water. One study has estimated that city wells could run dry by 2010 if an additional source of water is not found.

Steve Bennett, a member of Desal Water, said, “It’s understandable that Kennedy is proud of the system that he administers, and I’m glad that he admits the system has problems and he doesn’t know what the solutions are.”

Bennett said the desalination advocates agree with Kennedy about having a new water source for the city. “The question isn’t whether we need a new source, but which source is more reliable.”

Boyle Engineering Corp., the city’s consulting firm, estimated that it would cost about $30.4 million per year to build a desalination plant and that construction would last four to six years. The report also estimated that it would cost about $24.2 million per year to build a connecting pipeline, with construction lasting six to eight years.

Proponents on both sides are anticipating a heated campaign this fall, which worries city officials.

“I hope that the facts are represented on both sides, and that the people can fairly choose,” said Mayor Gregory L. Carson, who has not taken a public stand on the issue.

Carson said that the City Council would vote on the issue shortly after the November election. He added that he hoped voters would give council members “a clear mandate” on the issue.