Major Water Project Leads Bond Issues

Combatants in California’s historic water wars have laid aside their weapons and today talk of cooperation for everyone’s mutual benefit.

But the peace plan they have forged comes at a price, and once again the builders of tomorrow’s aqueducts are appealing directly to the public for help.

Proposition 204 on the November ballot asks voter approval of $995 million in bonds, in part to finance scattered water treatment and recycling projects, but mostly to benefit the single great centerpiece of the state’s water supply system.

A total of $600 million from Proposition 204 would become the “down payment” on finally mending the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a vast, overworked network of converging waterways encompassing 738,000 acres northeast of San Francisco.

Also on the ballot are two other bond measures. Proposition 205 proposes raising $700 million to build new county juvenile and adult jails. And Proposition 206 seeks $400 million for veteran home loans.

No sustained opposition has surfaced to any of the three bond measures. Those signing the opposition statement to Proposition 204 in the official ballot pamphlet includes Gail Lightfoot, chairwoman of the Libertarian Party of California, who questions the motives of those backing delta improvement and criticizes additions to California’s bonded indebtedness.

In past fights over water, rivalries have broken out between north and south, city and farmland, water brokers and environmentalists.

Invariably, the struggle came down to how to apportion water moving through the all-important delta, one of the world’s largest waterworks.

Fed by two big rivers, the Sacramento and the San Joaquin, the delta supplies drinking water for 20 million residents, mostly in Southern California, irrigates 4.5 million acres of farmland, and protects and nourishes--inadequately, all sides agree--hundreds of fish and wildlife varieties that live in or move through the delta.

Besides all that, the force of delta waters must remain strong enough to hold back ocean waters pushing upriver from San Francisco Bay.

The last polarizing clash over delta resources came in 1982. Then there was a statewide vote to build a peripheral canal, aimed at creating a more dependable source of southbound water.

Pitting north vs. south, the canal would have diverted water headed into the murky delta, thus depleting its supply there, and channeled the flow directly to a southbound aqueduct.

Voters rejected it, leaving a new legacy of bitterness among rivals for delta water.

Keenly aware of these pitfalls, the backers of Proposition 204, though again focusing on the delta area, have been careful to avoid conflict.

For example, no part of Proposition 204 money would go to building peripheral canals, although a scaled down version is one alternative for the future. Nor are there proposals to create more dams on California rivers, a concern of environmentalists.

As a result, it’s hard to find a Proposition 204 opponent who has a major stake in the state’s water future.

At a news media briefing in Sacramento last week, former water war foes representing farmers, environmentalists and the Metropolitan Water District sat side by side explaining common goals.

Six years ago, said Timothy H. Quinn, an MWD deputy general manager, all warring parties “realized we needed to work in a balanced way” to rehabilitate the delta.

Tom Graff, a senior attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund, and Daniel G. Nelson, representing Central Valley farm interests, concurred.

Since then, the state and federal governments have agreed on a formal accord and formed a joint federal-state task force to find solutions to a variety of looming problems.

Proposition 204 is intended to pay the start-up bills on what eventually could be $4 billion to $8 billion worth of delta repairs and associated fixes to connecting streams, rivers and reservoirs.

Already, withdrawals of delta water for shipment south have been curtailed somewhat to protect delta aquatic life. Much of Proposition 204’s money likewise would improve fish and wildlife breeding grounds.

But the plans call for a critical balancing act over water.

The California Department of Water Resources estimates that, in average rainfall years, the state will soon run short of meeting annual demands by 3 million to 5 million acre feet, or enough water to serve about 6 million to 8 million homes a year.

In drought years beyond 2000, the department predicts a shortage of up to 8 million acre feet.

The only reason there is no shortage now is that California is benefiting from two wetter-than-average years in a row, a spokesman said.

But water experts say that it would be simplistic to assume that a catastrophic loss of water automatically awaits California when the next drought hits.

Current water conservation planning focusing on the delta will lessen the shortage somewhat, officials said.

The coalition rallying around Proposition 204 also includes Gov. Pete Wilson, who last week dangled another carrot before voters.

Congress recently approved an initial $430 million in federal money for environmental restoration to the delta.

But the authorization is conditional, Wilson said, “and the condition is that the voters of California return the courtesy by approving Proposition 204.”

Of the other two bond measures on the November ballot:

* Proposition 205, backers say, is needed to keep offenders behind bars. Now, because of overcrowding, they said, only a fraction of jail inmates serve full sentences.

Last year, more than 21,000 county jail inmates per month statewide were released early because there was no room in the jails to hold them.

Counties willing to pledge 25% in matching funds would apply for the bond money.

Lightfoot, of the Libertarian Party, opposes Proposition 205, saying California should not take on the additional bond debt.

(Bond rating agencies in New York said they would not be concerned if the three propositions pass. The effect on state credit is assessed when the bonds are issued, not when they are approved, the bond dealers said.)

* Passage of Proposition 206 would continue providing loans for veterans who saw wartime service, a 75-year-old program to give vets a break on home purchases. Qualifying veterans pay a fixed 7% interest on their state-provided home loans.

Opposition arguments by, among others, Joseph Miller, a retired Air Force officer from Sacramento, say the state program is duplicative of federal benefits and is unnecessary.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Bond Measures at a Glance

There are three bond measures on the November ballot. Here are overviews of each.

Proposition 204

* What it would do: Allow $995 million in bond financing for flood control, water recycling and treatment of public water sources. Most of the money would be used to make a “down payment” on major repairs to the state water supply system centered in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

****

Proposition 205

* What it would do: Provide $700 million in bond financing for adult and juvenile jails.

****

Proposition 206

* What it would do: Authorize $400 million in bonds to continue state-administered home loans for war veterans.