Water-The Third Rail Part XL Vote NO on Prop One

Thanks to the UT editorial staff for finally publishing an opposing view of
the State Water Bond initiative Prop One. Marco Gonzalez’’ logic In support
of his no vote gives southern CA voters the truth about why they should join
him in voting no.

Here is some insight why all voters should send this bond
issue to the garbage bin. A legislative observer told me this: “”you know
it’s funny, I sat in on a staff meeting in Sacramento where they discussed
this bill and none of it seemed to matter much. I was told that those for
the bill wanted to take it off the ballot because they didn’t think it would
ever pass a popular vote …. and those against the bill wanted to put it on
and let it die”.” Nothing for the on-going drought and precious little for
San Diego.

As Gonzalez says, Proposition One is classic “”pork”–”—a waste of
taxpayer funds. VOTE NO.

Thomas Wornham, chair of the San Diego County Water Authority’s (SDCWA)
board of directors provided the affirmative comments in a piece that is
laced with smoke and mirrors. It is pure political-speak. For example he
leads in the second paragraph with… “”Three years of drought have driven home
the need for new investments in our most precious natural resource……..””, as if
any funds in the $7.5 billion bond issue would have anything to do with the
current drought! Not a dime is allocated for alleviating it.

Then Wornham makes the misleading statement in the fourth paragraph where he
says the SDCWA” has reduced our dependence on water supplies from the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta” citing the Carlsbad desal plant as an
example. The devil is in the details, and the detail is Carlsbad when it is
up and running will supply just seven percent of the over 500,000 acre-feet
of water needed in San Diego County. According to SDCWA’s own website, any
potable recycling of wastewater is decades away. The little water that
Carlsbad will provide will not even keep up with San Diego County’s
population growth.

Further into the article, Mr. Wornham admits the funds for San Diego from
the bond issue would come from COMPETITIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES (emphasis
added). Translated that means every water agency in the state will be
lobbying for a very small pot of money, and the best grant writers with the
most political clout will win. But he then goes on to lay them out as if the
SDCWA had already secured the funds.

In a prior blog I highlighted the balkanization of the water districts in
California that has blocked real water resource development. At a meeting in
Los Angeles several months ago, one of the speakers admitted we have met the
enemy and it is us. All of the major water purveyors were there.

Repeating another blog, “So the legislators in Sacramento marched up the
hill, declared victory with the passing of the $7.5 Billion water bond so it
will be on the ballot in November. Then they marched back down the hill
doing high fives for all of the great bipartisanship shown”

Vote NO on Proposition One. Send Sacramento the message to stop playing fast
and loose with our most precious resource and actually provide the people of
California with a legitimate bond issue that will address this drought and
all future droughts.

Milt Burgess