The state proposal to make dramatic changes to the "hub" of California's water system, Boxall writes, "calls for habitat restoration and the construction of two enormous
tunnels to divert water from the Sacramento River and carry it under the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to southbound pumps."
The costs--as currently projected--and who will bear them seem clear. As the San Jose Mercury News reported last week, "About 68 percent of the new Delta plan would be covered by water users through higher rates, while about 15 percent would come from taxpayers by way of two future water bonds, including one set for 2014."
Really, the 68-percent and 15-percent figures should be added together since they point to the same pocket. Which means that the ratepayer/taxpayer should expect to end up footing almost 85 percent of that $25 billion bill--if there aren't any cost overruns.
And, according to critics of the project, urban water users--that would be most people in the state--should expect to bear a bigger percentage of the costs than has been projected. That's because agriculture won't be able to afford its share.
"They're irrational costs for a subset of San Joaquin Valley farmers
to bear," said Jeffrey Michael, director of the Business Forecasting
Center at the University of the Pacific in Stockton. "Urban users
are going to pay much more for this than they've been told and the usual
cost overruns will just make the problems worse."
Perhaps the most interesting note in the Mercury News story was the suggestion that Gov. Jerry Brown may be suffering from "administration envy" and entertaining "hopes of going down in history as prolific as his governor father in creating lasting, visible signs of his political craftsmanship on California's landscape."
Clearly, it's not just questions of policy that get addressed when policy is debated and made.
--
Useful links
- California plan to overhaul water system hub to cost $25 billion (Los Angeles Times)
- Delta tunnels: Firmer cost estimates spelled out for Gov. Jerry Brown's water plan (San Jose Mercury News)
No comments:
Post a Comment