What's in Perata's Bill--"The Safe Drinking Water Act of 2008"--A $6.8 Billion Bond That Will Probably Be on the California Ballot in 2008 One Way or Another?

• Grants and direct expenditures for water supply projects, consistent with integrated regional water management plan standards.
• Agricultural and urban water use efficiency
• Recycling/reclamation/desalination
• Surface storage/groundwater/conjunctive use and re-operation
• Groundwater contamination prevention/clean-up

Projects include:

• Agricultural and urban water use efficiency
• Recycling/reclamation/desalination
• Surface storage/groundwater/conjunctive use and re-operation
• Groundwater contamination prevention/clean-up

Funding is allocated regionally (and spelled out as below), and there is a requirement that at least 50% of the costs be shared by local agencies. The California Department of Water Resources would be allowed to waive or reduce the cost-sharing requirement for projects that directly benefit a disadvantaged community.

• North Coast $70 million
• San Francisco Bay $240 million
• Central Coast $95 million
• Los Angeles subregion $369 million
• Santa Ana subregion $200 million
• San Diego subregion $161 million
• Sacramento River $131 million
• San Joaquin River $103 million
• Tulare/Kern $109 million
• North/South Lahonton $53 million
• Colorado River Basin $69 million
• Interregional $400 million

Delta Sustainability: $2.4 billion

• $1 billion for drinking water quality, water supply reliability for in-Delta and export users, flood protection, and safeguarding vital infrastructure.
• $1.4 billion for Delta ecosystem restoration consistent with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan and the findings of the Blue Ribbon Task Force, other native fish and wildlife restoration projects.
• No funding for construction of water transfer/conveyance facility.

It makes findings and declarations regarding the value of the Delta, the need to improve the Delta, the need to provide public funds to address Delta issues, and the need to fix the Delta to protect drinking water quality, improve water supply reliability, restore ecosystem health, and preserve sustainable agricultural and recreational values in the Delta. It also states the need for a comprehensive delta sustainability program that improves habitat for fish and wildlife, improve water supply reliability, improve water quality, and reduce vulnerability to earthquakes.

The Department of Water Resources (DWR) is required to develop, in cooperation with the Department of Fish and Game and the State Water Resources Control Board, and taking into consideration the recommendations of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan and the Blue Ribbon Task, a comprehensive delta sustainability program that includes both water conveyance and ecosystem improvements.

Bond funds are prohibited from being expended for the design or construction of delta water transfer facilities. All costs related to any water conveyance improvements are to be the responsibility of the agencies that benefit from those improvements.

The Legislature is prohibited from amending or repealing these provisions unless approved by the Legislature by a two-thirds vote.

Expenditures are contingent on the adoption of a comprehensive plan for delta sustainability.

Public Benefits and Delta Sustainability: Provides that funds are subject to appropriation by the legislature to DWR and are for grants and direct expenditure.

Requires expenditures to provide public benefits and support delta sustainability options. Allowable uses of the funds include protecting water supplies from disruptions, creating flow conditions to aid fish, improving the quality of drinking water, creating sustainable delta land use patterns and flood structures, and protecting transportation and other vital infrastructure in and around the delta.

Protect and Enhance Delta Ecosystem: Funds the development and implementation of a Bay Delta Conservation Plan and projects that are consistent with the findings of the Blue Ribbon Task Force.

Requires the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to identify projects for the enhancement and sustainability of selected fish species and be developed to meet the requirements of the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act.

Requires projects to be implemented through a cooperative effort among regulatory agencies, regulated and potentially regulated entities, and affected parties, including state and federal water contractors.

Conservation and Pollution Clean-Up: $1.085 billion

• $1 billion for ecosystem restoration, resolving water supply conflicts and urban watershed management projects.
• $85 million to protect delta ecosystem and state water supply from invasive species.

Eligible watersheds include:

• The San Joaquin River watershed.
• The Sacramento River watershed.
• The Salton Sea and Colorado River watersheds.
• The Los Angeles River watershed.
• The San Gabriel River watershed.
• The Santa Ana River watershed.
• The Klamath River watershed, including the Trinity, Scott, and Shasta Rivers and watersheds.
• North coast watersheds.
• San Francisco Bay watersheds.
• Central coast watersheds.
• South coast watersheds.
• Lake Tahoe Basin.
• Kern River and Tulare Basin.
• San Diego County coastal watersheds.
• The Ventura River watershed.
• The Sierra Nevada Mountain watersheds.

Requires use of California Conservation Corps or community conservation corps whenever feasible.

Groundwater Protection and Water Quality: $1.1 billion

• $400 million for projects that would prevent or reduce the contamination of groundwater that is used as a source for drinking water.
• $100 million for grants for small community wastewater treatment projects to protect water quality
• $500 million for stormwater management, and water quality
• $100 million to Ocean Protection Council to protect and improve water quality in areas of special biological significance

Establishes priority based upon the following criteria:

• The threat posed by groundwater contamination to the affected community's overall drinking water supplies, including the need for treatment of alternative supplies if groundwater is not available due to contamination.

• The potential for groundwater contamination to spread and reduce drinking water supply and water storage for nearby population areas.

• The potential of the project to enhance local water supply reliability.

• The potential of the project to increase opportunities for groundwater recharge and optimization of groundwater supplies.

Water Recycling: $250 million

Not less than $100 million to restore water supply lost to groundwater contamination.

Additional Provisions: Caps administrative costs at 5 percent, establishes the public process for developing grant guidelines, and states intent that the investment of authorized bond funds should result in public benefits.

Requires the State Auditor to annually conduct an audit of expenditures from the bond and report its findings to the Governor and the Legislature.

An Impressive Coalition of Supporters

Supporters of SBX2 2 line up to testify at water hearing

Take a look at the list of these environmental groups, water agencies, and others who have publicly signed up to support the provisions of this bill (listed in alphabetical order):

Audubon California, Big Sur Land Trust, Butte Environmental Council, California Alliance for Jobs, California Coastal Coalition, California League of Conservation Voters, the California Municipal Utilities Association, California Native Plant Society,California Rural League Assistance Foundation, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Trout, California Water Association, California Water Impact network, California Watershed Network, Central Delta Water Agency, City of Los Angeles, Clean Water Action, Community Water Center, Contra Costa Water District, Defenders of Wildlife, East Bay Municipal Utility District, Environmental Defense, Environmental Entrepreneurs, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, Environmental Water Caucus, Federation of Fly Fishers, Forest Issues Group,Friends of the River, Friends of the Trinity River, High Sierra Rural Alliance,League of Women Voters of California, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Mountain Lion Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Planning and Conservation League, Restore the Delta, Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, Save the Redwoods League, Sierra Foothills Audubon Society, Sierra Nevada Alliance, Sonoma County Water Agency, South Delta Water Agency, The Nature Conservancy, TreePeople, Truckee River Watershed Council, Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners, Tuolumne River Trust, Urban Creeks Council, Watershed Conservation Authority, and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe

Most of these supporters stress the comprehensive nature of the water improvements provided by the bond, without resorting to new dams. For example, the California League of Conservation Voters is on record as saying, "SB 2XX is a comprehensive bill that provides funding for the variety of measures the state needs to pursue in order to improve the reliability of its water supply, including improvements to the Delta and its ecosystem, the development of alternative water supplies, restoration of contaminated water supplies, and water conservation and efficiency measures. SB 2XX does not guarantee billions of taxpayer dollars to fund environmentally damaging, expensive and cost-inefficient dams that will contribute little to the state's water supply needs. That said, it also does not prohibit the use of funds for surface storage projects; they need only demonstrate their cost-effectiveness compared to other projects to qualify for integrated regional funding."