February 23, 2018 - The California Water Commission (CWC), tasked with dispersing Proposition 1 funds, met on Wednesday to some criticism and skepticism after its staff concluded earlier this month that no water projects proposed so far passed initial cost-benefit muster.  The announcement confounded the water and farming districts vying for the state bonds, along with elected officials who helped craft the 2014 proposition.  This week’s meeting was an opportunity for the CWC to review and take additional comment on the status of the applications CWC staff had assessed and determined lacking.  

Several lawmakers, including Assembly Republican Leader Brian Dahle (R-Bieber) and Senator Jim Nielsen (R-Tehama), asked the CWC to release the funds earmarked for new water projects, urging expediency as California slogs through another unseasonably warm and dry winter.

Proposals range from new groundwater banks, existing reservoir expansions and multibillion-dollar new dam projects.  Proponents say the projects will add valuable water storage without damaging the environment.

Passed overwhelmingly by voters at the height of California’s most recent drought, Proposition 1 appropriated $2.7 billion for new lakes and water storage.  The measure, which did not earmark funding for any specific project, requires the CWC to grade applications on overall public benefit, relative environmental value, resiliency and implementation risk.

Commissioners assured the crowd that the unfavorable initial round of cost-benefit ratio scores is just the first step in the process and that none of the projects have been summarily denied.

Armando Quintero, Chair of the eight-member body, pushed back on the notion that the CWC is being stingy with the bonds.  He says the 70-member review staff in most cases needed more information about the projects and that applicants can appeal the initial scores.  He also noted that the staff has met with and provided guidance to project applicants to clarify the need for additional data to achieve the “public benefit” scores required for approval.  A final decision is expected in July.

The two biggest projects have gained support from nearby cities, water districts and lawmakers.

Temperance Flat Dam east of Fresno would add 1.26 million acre-feet of water storage – and flood miles of canyons and Native American heritage sites along the San Joaquin River.  It would be the second-tallest dam in California with an estimated $2.6 billion price tag, and be operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.  Proponents want the state to pony up $1.3 billion in state bonds to spur construction.  The CWC gave the project among the worst grades of the 11 projects vying for state funding.

The competing Sites Project would be built in Colusa County, in the foothills of the California Coast Ranges north of Sacramento.  It would added 1.8 million acre-feet to California’s water system.  Sites is considered an “off-stream” project with most of its water piped in from the nearby Sacramento River.  Backers want $1.7 billion of the project’s $5.1 billion cost to be picked up by taxpayers.

While environmental groups campaigned for Proposition 1 in 2014, many haven’t jumped on board with Sites or Temperance Flat.  The Natural Resources Defense Council calls Temperance Flat a “boondoggle” that would have disastrous effects on salmon restoration efforts in the San Joaquin River.  The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations says Sites would damage struggling salmon and other protected species by diverting Sacramento River flows and calls the project a “nonstarter.”

Further complicating the conversation for the CWC was the Monday’s announcement by federal regulators that contractors will only receive 20 percent of their initial water allocation because of the state’s dismal snowpack.
Source: Rural County Representatives of California