Sonoma County could drop big water project
Published: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 at 3:01 p.m.
Last Modified: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 at 3:01 p.m.
In a major reversal of government water policy that could potentially restrict future growth in Sonoma County, the county Water Agency is abandoning efforts to secure state approval for drawing more water out of the Russian River.
Water Agency officials told county supervisors Tuesday that a pipeline from Lake Sonoma is too expensive and probably unrealistic given federal constraints governing protection of endangered fish on Dry Creek.
Although the state allows the Water Agency to divert up to 75,000 acre feet from the Russian River for 600,000 customers in Sonoma and northern Marin counties, the Water Agency has since 1990 pursued a series of projects aimed at increasing the allotment to 101,000 acre feet. Last year, the agency delivered 55,000 acre feet.
Last December, the Water Agency released a 23-pound, 3,000-page draft environmental review that proposed a $430 million project including a 24-mile pipeline from Lake Sonoma to the Wohler Bridge pumps on the Russian River, bypassing federal restrictions on Dry Creek.
The Water Agency’s change of heart was greeted with shock by council members from Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Petaluma and Windsor. Their long-term plans had assumed more water would come from the network of pipelines, reservoirs, pumping stations and fish habitat restoration under study for almost two decades.
Several council members told supervisors that their General Plans may need revision to ensure they don’t allow more projects than future water supplies can sustain.
Santa Rosa Mayor Susan Gorin said scaling back long-term water supplies challenges “the very underpinnings of our General Plan....They were built on the assumption that we would have more water.”
Petaluma Mayor Pam Torliatt noted the council’s pro-environment majority raised objections in 1999 and “we were torn up in the newspaper and criticized to no end when we called it paper water.” She also acknowledged that future limits on water use could limit business expansion and hamper job creation.
“This is a mammoth series of actions,” said Rohnert Park councilman Jake Mackenzie, who chairs an advisory committee of governments that contract with the Water Agency.
At a minimum, city building regulations may need revision to include measures encouraging low water usage such as low flow toilets and appliances and discouraging lawns.
Leaders of several environmental groups welcomed the news that the water project they had opposed for two decades could be coming to an end.
“I am glad to see the Water Agency staff has recognized that the state is serious,” said David Keller, the Bay Area director of the Friends of the Eel River who has been a dogged critic of the project.
A parade of other environmentalists told supervisors the project should have been dropped long ago.
“Most of the environmentalists applaud this new direction and are feeling quite good about it,” said Brenda Adelman, director of the Russian River Watershed Committee.
But business interests expressed concern.
Sue Nelson, chief operating officer of the Greater Santa Rosa Chamber of Commerce, said the business community was taken by surprise and wanted time to analyze how limited water supplies might affect business development in the future.
“The business community wants this postponed,” Nelson said.
The change in direction comes after the Water Agency has spent about $6 million on two environmental impact studies for what’s officially known as the “Water Supply, Transmission and Reliability Project.”
Agency assistant general manager Grant Davis said administrators and engineers concluded that “in the past three years, major changes in conditions have occurred which make it infeasible and impractical for the agency to carry out the water project.”
He cited a federal regulatory order reducing flow into the Russian River from the Potter Valley project, new federal regulations restricting use of Dry Creek to convey water from Warm Springs Dam, and increased capital project costs that ratepayers may find unaffordable.
“It is a change of direction and a change in policy for the Sonoma County Water Agency,” Davis said.
After holding public hearings and taking public comment on the draft environmental report, agency officials concluded the project faced too many insurmountable hurdles.
“A number of comments expressed confusion...pertaining to on-going water supply challenges and questioned the wisdom of moving forward with a future project prior to resolving issues related to existing supplies,” according to a staff report by Erica Phelps, the Water Agency’s environmental resources coordinator.
Supervisors set Sept. 15 for a hearing on the Water Agency proposal, after heeding pleas from city officials that they needed time to study the change in water policy.
All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Comments are currently unavailable on this article