California can spend more after the disaster strikes; or repair at a fraction of cost

Monitor, patch, watch, paint the crack and then continue to monitor. This is the fundamental problem with California’s failing water infrastructure.

Earlier this year, nearly 200,000 residents witnessed firsthand how this failed government approach impacts their daily lives. After the gated spillway at Oroville Dam collapsed and a subsequent failure of the emergency spillway, our communities were evacuated fearing that a wall of water was coming our way.

My review of inspection reports shows a pattern of monitoring, delayed action and patchwork maintenance up at the Oroville Dam, even painting cracks to see how much they would grow.

This is not the first time the strategy of “monitor” has endangered the Yuba-Sutter community. In 1986, a levee failure in Yuba County destroyed nearly 3,000 buildings and killed two residents. After years of litigation, the state of California was found liable for the levee failure and paid out $464 million in damages to Linda and Olivehurst residents.

The Paterno v. State of California case held the state responsible for the integrity of the Central Valley flood control system. According to the Department of Water Resources, this includes 1,600 miles of levees that protect more than half a million people, two million acres of farmland and approximately 200,000 structures with an estimated value of nearly $50 billion.

In these recent storms, levees throughout the state were significantly damaged. These “critical repair sites” need to be addressed before the next storm season. Considering this and the Paterno decision, you would think the state would make these repairs a top priority. Think again.

Out of the $111 million this year’s budget has proposed for flood control, very little of it would be available to conduct critical repair work. Most of the funding in this proposal is set aside for the Delta and can only be spent on ecosystem improvements and multibenefit capital projects. In sum, what the governor and Capitol Democrats have proposed is woefully inadequate.

Yes, improvements have been made to our levees in the last several years with Proposition 1E bond money passed by the voters. But the reality is many miles of the state’s levee system remain in a precarious position.

Like painting the Golden Gate Bridge, the job is never finished. It requires an annual commitment of funds to provide for needed repairs and maintenance.

Which is why state Sen. Jim Nielsen and I fought so hard this year to secure $100 million in state general fund dollars for immediate levee repair work. We simply cannot wait to fix the critical sites, like the one in a levee protecting Yuba City and its near 70,000 residents.

Sadly, Democrats on the budget conference committee voted down our funding ask without any discussion. Apparently their priorities do not include the lives of millions living in our region. I guess the plan is to “monitor” the damaged levees and hope they don’t fail in the next storm season.

I struggle with not wanting to be an alarmist, but the truth is that this situation is a ticking time bomb. Most of our “improved” levees performed well this flood season. But others are in rough shape.

The way I see it the state has two options: We can either monitor, watch, patch and then spend exponentially more after disaster strikes. Or we can identify, prioritize and repair for a fraction of the cost. For me, the choice is easy.

But unfortunately, the ruling party down in Sacramento doesn’t see it that way. They’ve chosen to roll the dice and hope that the monitoring culture can get us through the next storm season.