LOS ANGELES - As California's record-breaking drought continues, state lawmakers are pushing competing water bond measures to address the state's water supply woes.
While none of the measures would help with the current water crisis, supporters say they would help prevent any future ones by authorizing much-needed funds for many water projects and programs.
Lawmakers are in consensus that a water bond is urgently needed, but they continue to grapple over just how much to authorize and how to allocate funds. Currently, there are four water bond measures making their way through the legislature, ranging from $5 billion to $9 billion.
There already is a water bond on the Nov. 4 ballot, but all the new proposals would replace the $11 billion Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act.
That measure was originally scheduled to go on the 2010 ballot, but was postponed until 2012, and then postponed again until 2014.
Opponents of the measure have said the bond is too large, replete with earmarks and would fail to garner a majority of voters' support. However, the statewide drought has brought the water supply issue to light and may be the shot in the arm needed to grab voters' attention.
"As the state endures a record drought, it is clear protecting our water supply is an issue that Californians are following," Assemblymember Henry Perea, D-Fresno, said in a recent statement.
He said that a survey, conducted by J. Moore Methods for the California Issues Forum, found that 58% of likely voters would approve an $11 billion dollar state bond measure to increase and protect state and local water supplies.
"It is clear now that a majority of Californians understand a safe and reliable water supply is essential to growing our economy and getting people back to work," Perea said. "With our state experiencing a record drought and our economy still recovering from a deep recession, jobs throughout the state are in jeopardy if we don't invest in our water infrastructure."
The $11 billion bond measure was the product of a comprehensive legislative package crafted in 2009 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and lawmakers.
It included four policy bills and the $11 billion general obligation bond authorization to fund the state's aging water infrastructure and new projects to address the ecosystem and water supply issues.
About $4 billion would be allocated to local resources and development, $4 billion for ecosystem restoration, and $3 billion for the public benefits associated with new surface and groundwater storage projects.
Lawmakers in both the Senate and Assembly are pushing various bills to scale back and replace the existing $11 billion bond measure.
The furthest along is Assembly Bill 1331, introduced in February 2013 by Assemblymember Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood.
His Climate Change Response for Clean and Safe Drinking Water Act of 2014 would cut the measure down to $6.5 billion, which would include funding for clean and safe drinking water projects.
The Southern California lawmaker said his bill focuses on integrated regional water management and reduced reliance on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, among other priorities.
"AB 1331 is the product of an unprecedented effort to transparently craft a water bond that will not irresponsibly contribute to the state's debt obligations, fund projects and programs that are desperately needed to protect our clean and reliable water supply, and provide voters with a clean bond that does not contain special interest earmarked projects," Rendon said in an emailed statement.
The measure was developed by a working group consisting of Rendon, Perea, Assembly Speaker John Pérez, and six other Assembly members.
The process included 13 hearings throughout the state and the publication of a website documenting the progress of work on the bond proposal.
"Admittedly, nothing in the bond can address the immediate drought emergency," said Bill Wong, a spokesperson for Rendon. "However, failure to pass the 2009 bond arguably put us in the dire situation today by failing to address adequate conservation, recycle, and storage issues that could have allowed us to reserve more water in preparation for the drought this year."
He added that failure to pass a bond threatens many water programs and projects as funds from a 2006 water bond are expected to run out by 2015.
"California will always be one winter's rain away from drought," Rendon said. "Passage of AB 1331 will help better prepare California for future droughts and support the programs and projects that will contribute to a reliable statewide supply of fresh water."
Rendon's bill passed in the Assembly in May and is waiting for action in the Senate Natural Resources Committee. It will most likely be heard in late February or March, Wong said.
Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, has introduced similar legislation in the Senate — Senate Bill 848 — proposing a $6.7 billion water bond to replace the current ballot measure.
"Most of the bond is focused on the kinds of local projects that will increase the reliability of the existing water supply," Wolk said in an interview. "So it focuses heavily on conservation, on recycling, on cleaning out the existing dams that we have, and making better use of the existing water supplies that we have."
Her bill is a new version of SB 42, which she introduced in December 2012. To avoid a Jan. 31 legislative deadline for the old bill, Wolk introduced the new legislation at the request of the Senate Natural Resources and Water and Environmental Quality Committees.
SB 848 was introduced on Jan. 9, and was, at that time, identical to the most recent version of SB 42.
"Primarily it's a bond that focuses on being workable, achievable, and is realistic so that it can be approved by the voters," Wolk said. "That's our challenge."
SB 848 will be heard by the Senate Natural Resources and Water committee on Feb. 11, followed by the Senate Environmental Quality committee on Feb. 19.
Wolk and Rendon's proposals were joined by two new water bond bills that were introduced in January.
On Jan. 6 Assemblymember Dan Logue, R-Marysville, introduced AB 1445, which would replace the $11 billion water bond with a $5.8 billion water bond. All of the funds would be allocated toward the storage of ground and surface water.
On Jan. 29, Senators Anthony Cannella, R-Ceres, and Andy Vidak, R-Hanford, introduced SB 927. The bill would slightly pare down the $11 billion bond to $9.2 billion and focus on projects that are essential to move, store, or clean water.
"During our driest year on record, California must invest in increasing our water supply," Cannella said in a statement. "It was just four years ago when we faced a similar situation and, if we do not act this year, our problems will grow."
Specifically, the bond would include $3 billion for water storage, $2.5 billion to protect the Delta water supply, and $1 billion for clean drinking water, with $400 million for disadvantaged communities.
The Association of California Water Agencies, a statewide coalition of public water agencies, supports modifications to the current 2014 water bond package, though it does not support any specific legislation that has been proposed.
ACWA's nearly 440 public agency members are collectively responsible for 90% of the water delivered to cities, farms and businesses in the state.
"The ACWA board of directors has a very well-defined position on where staff should be looking for a water bond," said Executive Director Timothy Quinn. "None of the current proposals fit those criteria well enough that we would support them at the present time."
Some things the board is looking for in a water bond include avoiding earmarks that allocate funds for specific projects without a competitive process, rejecting statewide fees on water, and protecting current bond fund levels for public benefits of water storage projects, Delta ecosystem restoration, and assistance for disadvantaged communities.
Quinn said the association is working with the authors of the proposed water bond bills and hopes they can create one cohesive measure that can get passed by voters in November.
"Of course that's a hard thing to do, but we've done it before, and we can do it again," he said. "The drought is certainly helping. It's making everybody aware of how important it is that we all get along and move the ball forward."
Each of the bills still needs to pass the legislature and get a signature from the governor before making it to the November ballot.
Brown, who declared a drought emergency on Jan. 17 after California's driest year on record, has said the state needs to improve its water infrastructure, but has remained silent on whether he would support putting a water bond on the ballot this year.
