Pull the plug on state water ballot measure

Say this for Central Valley Republicans and Big Ag backers: When it comes to proposing water projects that benefit Central Valley farmers at the expense of urban users and the state’s fragile environment, they are as persistent as an annoying, leaky faucet.

The most glaring example is the ongoing and thus-far unsuccessful push for the SacramentoSan Joaquin River Delta tunnels, a water grab that has never come close to penciling out. And there was Proposition 3 in 2018, a proposed $8.9 billion water bond designed to spend public money to benefit the special interests that bankrolled the measure.

The latest scheme comes in the form of a proposed 2022 ballot measure that would require 2% of California’s general fund — about $4 billion a year — be set aside to fast-track water projects with limited environmental review. Locking in funding for a single issue for what likely would be decades is seldom a good idea because it ties the Legislature’s hands in lean years and doesn’t account for changing needs in the future.

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Office notes that the state’s agriculture sector uses about 31 million acre-feet of water every year. California’s urban population uses about 8 million acre-feet of water per year. Historically, California’s water projects have been paid primarily by those who generate the most benefit. But this proposal would flip the scales. It would use general fund tax dollars to primarily increase the water supply for the state’s wealthy Big Ag interests.

Californians deserve better. The state is experiencing its worst drought in recorded history. The water in the state’s reservoirs is dropping to alarming levels. Solving the long-term water challenges must be a top priority. But the proposed ballot measure is a terrible way to address the crisis.

Proponents need 997,132 signatures of registered voters by April 29 to qualify for the November 2022 statewide ballot. Californians should decline to sign the petitions.

Take a look at who makes up the steering committee for the More Water Now coalition backing the proposal or the legislators who have endorsed the initiative. They are a who’s who of Central Valley agriculture backers. Of the 27 state lawmakers signed on to it, the only Bay Area legislator supporting it is Assemblyman Tim Grayson, DConcord.

Then there are the environmental concerns.

The measure would streamline the review process for water projects. For those on the coast, for example, the California Coastal Commission would be required to make a decision within 90 days, and the commission could be overruled by the state’s Secretary for Natural Resources. The secretary’s office has generally had a pro-agriculture bent on environmental issues in recent years. Given that a primary focus of the initiative is building new dams and environmentally questionable desalination projects, this is no time to be gutting the state’s environmental laws.

Californians should pull the plug on the More Water Now proposal.

“Given that a primary focus of the initiative is building new dams and environmentally questionable desalination projects, this is no time to be gutting the state’s environmental laws.