Prop. 218 reform critical to saving water

With his atomic breath and terrifying tail, Godzilla has laid waste to many a city. While the destructive monster is the stuff of celluloid myth, a very real force of nature is poised to wreak havoc on California cities this winter: the so-called Godzilla El Niño.

If intense rains come, local governments will have to contend with floods, mudslides and aging water pipes, all in the midst of our historic drought that has ravaged the environment, economy and communities. Thankfully, Gov. Jerry Brown might come to the rescue.

Brown has indicated support for water management policies that allow local agencies to better prepare for the rains and flooding associated with El Niño, and provide more equity in Californians’ access to water. In signing AB 401, which authorized a plan to assist low-income Californians with their water bills, Brown identified Proposition 218 as “the biggest impediment” to establishing such programs locally, and an obstacle to local water management. We couldn’t agree more. Prop. 218, passed in 1996, requires voter approval of many local taxes and fees. It can also limit agencies’ ability to charge more than the basic costs to provide services. While it all sounds reasonable, these provisions have hindered effective water management — resulting in more pollution — and have left many communities without access to clean water.

Having to go to the ballot box to safeguard something as vital as water presents tremendous challenges for cash-strapped cities. Proposition 218’s authors recognized this and exempted drinking water and sewer services from the most burdensome Prop. 218 requirements. Unfortunately, stormwater did not receive the same exemptions.

Prop. 218 has resulted in deferred maintenance to our storm drain system and flood channels, leaving many unprepared for flooding. It also has limited our ability to capture rainwater as a water source. An NRDC study found that capturing runoff in Southern California and the Bay Area could increase water supplies by as much as 630,000 acre-feet each year, roughly the amount of water used by the city of Los Angeles annually.

Prop. 218 also prevents municipalities from creating incentives to conserve by setting lower water rates for water-thrifty residents and higher rates for water hogs. If agencies had more latitude to tier rates, residents would think twice about water gluttony, or at least would be forced to pay a high price for wasting it.

The East Bay Municipal Utility District recently released a list of water wasters that revealed one using 12,578 gallons per day, 50 times more than the average user. At the same time, some Central Valley communities have run out of water. Lower-income communities represent some of the most effective conservationists, studies show — yet Prop. 218 makes it difficult to reward them.

There is a straightforward solution. We need to update the definition of water services exempted from certain Prop. 218 requirements to include stormwater capture, water quality improvements and flood protection. We also need to allow for tiered-rate structures and provide low-income users with lower rates.

This common-sense approach is backed by environmental groups, business consortiums, water agencies, local governments and community activists.

Because Prop. 218 is codified in the California Constitution, the reforms require a constitutional amendment. This necessitates a challenging two-thirds vote in the Legislature or a costly signature-gathering campaign for a public vote. Brown can help win this battle by getting Prop. 218 reform on the ballot. He needs to take political leadership to help remedy the ills outlined in his AB 401 statement and put this matter on the ballot without forcing an expensive petition drive.