Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

Our latest headlines

Want more? Dive into the archives.

About Us

David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.

About California Progress Report.

Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).

Books

California Flood News (And Why We Care)

By Gary A. Patton
Executive Director
Planning and Conservation League

What a difference a week makes!

Last week: no budget, and little progress on flood legislation
This week: a budget (hurrah!), and a flurry of activity on flood legislation

Is that light I see at the end of the tunnel?

The various pieces of flood legislation still alive in the state legislature are, at long last, MOVING! Flood bill authors and staff are working together on crafting a comprehensive flood management solution for California. PCL and other environmental groups spent all of Wednesday in meetings with some of the legislative staff working the flood bills, as well as with the Department of Water Resources and the staff in the office of the Speaker of the Assembly, Fabian Núñez.

We are hopeful that a strong package will be presented to the Legislature soon, a package that keeps the best of AB 5, AB 70, AB 156, AB 162, AB 1452, SB 5, and SB 17.

And now, we travel inside the mind of a typical reader to answer your subconscious questions and concerns.

[cue fog machine, haunting music...]

Reader: I get it that flood safety is important. But why is the Planning & Conservation League, an environmental group, so involved? Why six articles in a row about flood legislation? And how am I supposed to keep track of all those bill numbers?

PCL: Dear Reader, you raise several excellent questions.

First, let's talk about why PCL is so involved in flood legislation. Dear Mother Nature handles flood by sending the floodwater into natural floodplains. California, traditionally, has handled flood by sending the floodwater through unnaturally high and narrow river channels. These two approaches are inherently in conflict, and both sides lose. Nature loses because channelized rivers reduce riparian and floodplain habitat important for wildlife. California loses because the current levee-based system (besides being extremely expensive to maintain) cannot adequately protect existing properties, infrastructure, and, most importantly, people.

A system which restores some of the natural flood control features (e.g. setback levees which provide a rudimentary floodplain) and takes advantage of opportunities for temporary storage of floodwater (e.g. in flood bypasses), provides both better flood safety AND better habitat.

So, PCL cares about flood because doing flood well means doing good for the environment, as well as for public safety and the economy.

Now, you also asked why this is the 6th flood article in a row. This is the year for flood legislation. Similar legislative efforts failed last year, and we want all of you readers up to date and ready to jump into the fray if necessary.

Your final question was: How am I supposed to keep track of all the bill numbers? Well, the state of California provides lots of information on current and past legislation at www.leginfo.ca.gov. And feel free to contact PCL staff for more information.

[fog lifts, music fades...]

Okay, good to have you back.

All joking aside, the Legislature needs to address California's flood risk right away. We know that many existing levees provide inadequate protection. By refusing to act, the Legislature is, in effect, choosing to put people in harm's way.

Senator Steinberg's mission of bringing together a comprehensive flood package this year is not an easy one. PCL and other environmental groups will do everything we can to help achieve the shared goal of strong, safe, and environmentally-friendly flood protection for California.

Gary Patton is the Executive Director of the Planning and Conservation League, a statewide, nonprofit lobbying organization. For more than thirty years, PCL has fought to develop a body of environmental laws in California that is the best in the United States. PCL staff review virtually every environmental bill that comes before the California Legislature each year. It has testified in support or opposition of thousands of bills to strengthen California's environmental laws and fight off rollbacks of environmental protections.

Posted on August 26, 2007

Comments

Why do we wanna protect residents that are too stupid to build or buy homes below the water line?

Seems like a potential reprise of NOLA - which should absolutely not be rebuilt. (That goes for coast summer home communities too.)

Occasionally, Darwin gives spontaneous IQ tests. Some people fail, esp those who build at the bottom of a soup bowl and expect a dirt wall to retain water.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Posted by: Bill Wiese at August 26, 2007 08:33 PM

Zoning and other land use regulations are an important way to manage development vs conservation issues. If too many voters are allowed to build below the water line, then they can pressure government to give them a bail out. California cannot afford to build a dam and a reservoir in every mountain valley to provide flood protection for every foolish floodplain development.

I agree that NOLA land that is below sea level should not be rebuilt using taxpayer money. The USA needs a big city where the Mississippi River meets the Gulf of Mexico, but if there is not enough high ground in the old NOLA area, then new developments should be built somewhere upstream closer to Baton Rouge.

Bruce R. Thomas
Davis CA

Posted by: Bruce R. Thomas at August 27, 2007 02:13 PM

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.

Stat tracker