'If you keep kicking that can down the road, the problems don't get any easier'

By TIM HEARDEN

Capital Press

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Gov. Jerry Brown's recent hint that he'd consider delaying an $11.1 billion water bond set for the November ballot didn't please a leading proponent of plans to fix California's water system.

The governor indicated last month that a massive overhaul of the system could begin without the bond passing this year, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Leaving it off this time could give his $35 billion tax increase package a better chance of passing, the newspaper noted.

The water bond, which would pay for a wide variety of water management, conservation and storage projects, was approved by the Legislature in 2009 and has already been delayed once.

Timothy Quinn, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies, said he understands the governor's point of view but he would prefer to see some sort of funding measure go to voters this year.

"Obviously, whenever a governor whispers, it tends to come across at 120 decibels," Quinn told the Capital Press. "The governor's saying we need to look at all our options, and who could disagree with that? No decision has been made.

"My main concern is we have water supply reliability and water problems that need addressing," he said. "If you keep kicking that can down the road, the problems don't get any easier."

The water bond is a key funding component in a package of legislation that approved the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, under which a proposed peripheral canal system is being hotly debated.

The canal or tunnel would take water from the Sacramento River before it enters that Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and convey it south, theoretically minimizing the environmental impacts of Delta pumping. The plan also includes a comprehensive habitat conservation effort in the Delta region.

Many farmers and other residents of the region oppose the canal, fearing it could ruin their land. In the 1980s, voters overwhelmingly defeated a similar proposal.

Quinn said he understands that moving the bond vote to 2014 might improve its chances of passing. Some pundits have said the bond couldn't pass this year with the slow economy, although a Field Institute poll in December found voters overwhelmingly approve of spending money on water projects.

Quinn said he would be open to modifying the bond, although to do so would require another two-thirds vote of the Legislature.

"That was a very heavy lift (when it passed in 2009), and changing it with a two-thirds vote is going to be a heavy lift," he said. "We don't think the bond is that pork-laden."

Online

Association of California Water Agencies: http://www.acwa.com/