Reject water board's blatantly deceptive term-limit measure
Voters in the Santa Clara Valley Water District should reject board members' costly, self-serving and deceptive ballot measure that would extend their terms in office.
Term limits have their drawbacks. But they are needed here. Members of the water board, responsible for providing water and flood control to 2 million people in Santa Clara County, seem to stay forever. Meanwhile, the problems that continue to surface are typical of entrenched leadership that has lost perspective.
That's why in 2009 we urged voters to approve the three-term limit for board members that began counting in 2010. Now that some members are reaching those limits, the board has conveniently placed a measure on the ballot to allow them another fouryear term.
Worse, the wording of Measure A on the June 7 ballot is specifically designed to confuse voters. Don't be fooled by this deceit. Vote no.
The official wording asks, “Shall the measure amending the Santa Clara Valley Water District Ordinance 11-01 to limit Board members to four successive terms be adopted?” It suggests that the measure is more restrictive than what's currently in place. In fact, it's just the opposite.
The deception is deliberate. The district's own polling predicted that 68% of voters would approve the ballot measure with the misleading language. But if told board members were already limited to three terms and asked whether they should be allowed a fourth term, 59% of voters would reject it.
Ballot deception doesn't get much sleazier than this.
But desperate board members are willing to resort to desperate actions. Tony Estremera, who has been on the seven-member board for 26 years, is about to reach his three-term limit. And Dick Santos, who has been on the board for 22 years, will be termed out in 2024. They and board members Gary Kremen and John Verela provided the majority to place Measure A on the ballot.
Board members Linda LeZotte, Nai Hsueh and Barbara Keegan voted against the move. LeZotte and Hsueh were so incensed by the deception that they signed the ballot argument urging a no vote. Kudos to them.
On top of the deception, the ballot measure will cost $3.2 million, money that could have been used, for example, to remove 1 million square feet of lawns under the district's voluntary turf replacement program. Or to relieve the burden of water rates that have been skyrocketing in recent years.
The costly, deceptive ballot measure is all too typical of the water district board's long history of failure.
For example, in 2019, the board voted to support the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta tunnels project, providing funding for some of the preliminary planning costs for a $19 billion boondoggle that wouldn't add a drop of water to California's supply and has never penciled out.
In 2017, Coyote Creek flooded South San Jose, forcing 14,000 people to evacuate and causing an estimated $100 million in damage. A May 2 trial date has been set for a lawsuit in which residents allege, among other things, that the water district was aware that debris and sediment blocked the flow of water through the creek channel but did little to prevent or reduce the damage it caused.
The board also has been slow to impose mandatory restrictions to conserve what's left of our limited water supply as the drought continues into a third year.
These aren't the sort of leaders who deserve a fourth term in office. Vote no on Measure A and send a message that Valley Water could benefit from new blood on its board.