Pass the Water Bill, Please

The saga of Senate Bill 221 shows that it is possible for a good idea to survive concerted attacks from special interests. Despite forecasts of its certain death this year, the measure, authored by Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), now is just one major step away from the desk of Gov. Gray Davis. This time it should pass and be signed into law.

Kuehl’s bill would require developers of large housing projects--500 units or more--to show that the homes would have the needed water. This is such a basic concept for mostly arid California it’s a wonder it hasn’t been the law for decades. But this is the third time Kuehl has carried the measure. Earlier, builders and allied interests defeated it.

The legislation’s foes would quibble over details. Kuehl and the bill’s sponsor, Randele Kanouse of the East Bay Municipal Utility District, would amend the measure. The builders would always find something else wrong.

Last week, however, Kuehl agreed to two rather minor amendments and the building lobby suddenly stopped saying no. The builders aren’t supporting the bill, but that doesn’t matter. The withdrawal of their formal opposition should give SB 221 the lift it needs this week to win Assembly passage.

There also have been reports that the governor’s office may be looking favorably on the bill. If Assembly members believe they can vote for SB 221 without being branded anti-business, they are far more likely to support it. In fact, no business executive would build a new plant without making sure it had an adequate water supply for the life of the facility. SB 221 is simply good business.

It’s curious that the major opposition now comes only from the Assn. of California Water Agencies, which represents 435 farming and urban water districts throughout the state. These are, after all, the agencies that will have to explain to their customers in a future drought why they have to let their gardens turn brown. The association claims that SB 221 “unfairly targets” the water distributors by making them help to decide whether there is enough water available to serve big developments. That should be their responsibility in the first place.

To its credit, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the giant wholesaler for some 17 million area residents, is not opposing SB 221. It might even have endorsed it if not for the shortsighted opposition of Met’s Orange County members.

All along, SB 221’s backers have been certain they could win passage next year--election year--if California has another dry winter and faces a severe drought. Far better, however, to pass it this year and have the bill in the lawbooks in 2002. Then lawmakers can campaign on their farsighted efforts.