PD Editorial: Yes on 1: Protecting a vital resource

Proposition 1, a $7.5 billion bond act on the Nov. 4 ballot, won’t produce any water.

And it won’t provide relief from the current drought, unless, heaven forbid, it grinds on for several more years.

Here’s what Proposition 1 would do: finance efforts to safeguard California’s existing water supplies by, among other things, cleaning up polluted groundwater basins, restoring watersheds and expanding recycling programs.

A key goal is to better position water purveyors to meet competing demands for a finite resource in a state that’s projected to grow from 38.5 million residents today to 50 million residents by 2050.

Proposition 1 isn’t perfect. It’s not the measure we would have drafted. But it’s a big improvement over the $11.1 billion leviathan it replaced, and it reflects compromises made by urban, agricultural and environmental stakeholders to finally get a water bond before the voters.

Proposition 1 includes:

• $2.7 billion for surface water storage, meaning dams and reservoirs.

• $1.5 billion for watershed restoration projects.

• $900 million for groundwater cleanup and monitoring.

• $810 million allocated on a regional basis for water projects, including more than $90 million for the North Coast and San Francisco Bay regions.

• $725 million for water recycling projects, including desalination.

• $295 million to repair and improve levees in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

• $260 million each for wastewater treatment projects in small communities and water supply projects in disadvantaged communities.

Much of the money would be awarded on a competitive basis, and Sonoma County water managers are confident that they can obtain bond funding for ongoing projects including watershed restoration on Dry Creek, which will enhance delivery of water from Lake Sonoma.

“In terms of unmet needs on the North Coast and in Sonoma County, it’s important,” said Rohnert Park Councilman Jake Mackenzie, who is active in a coalition of small and mid-size counties that worked together to secure funding from previous water bonds.

Over the past decade, Sonoma County Water Agency officials say, bond funds helped with a variety of projects and programs, including upgrades to Graton’s wastewater treatment plant, a major water recycling project in Santa Rosa, seismic safety improvements to the region’s water delivery system, removal of sediment and invasive species from the Russian River and other area streams, a groundwater recharge project along Copeland Creek and drought-relief measures such as replacement of toilets, showerheads and faucets with more efficient fixtures.

Without bond funding, local officials say, those costs would fall largely on ratepayers.

Where Proposition 1 falls short is its huge appropriation for dams and reservoirs, which are enormously expensive and hugely inefficient, with as much as a quarter of the water lost to evaporation. Among the projects most likely to be funded is the Temperance Flat Dam east of Fresno, which has been on the drawing board for decades but has never penciled out financially.

Another is the Sites Reservoir in Glenn County, which would divert water from the Sacramento River for subsequent transfer to the Central Valley, where growers have converted thousands of acres to orchards that must be irrigated even in a drought. The growing demand for water creates pressure to boost diversions from the Trinity River – water that would otherwise feed North Coast salmon fisheries and assist the communities that rely on fishing.

California’s water wars will continue with or without Proposition 1. But without the bond, it will become much more difficult to deliver water quality and supply projects here in Sonoma County. So, on balance, The Press Democrat recommends a yes vote on Proposition 1.