As the November election season gets underway, don't be fooled by the lies and rhetoric you are going to hear about Proposition 18. Clean Water Action strongly opposes this bond placed on this November's ballot by the Governor and Legislature. This measure will only worsen California's precarious financial position while failing to address California's most urgent water needs.

Bad Fiscal Policy

Proposition 18 is the largest water bond ever placed before voters, and is the fifth water bond in the last decade. Just paying the bond back will put a tremendous stress on the state's already depleted General Fund, which is used to repay general obligation bonds. In the past two years, California's General Fund expenditures have shrunk by about 15%, from a high of $102 billion in 2007-2008 to an estimated $86 billion this year⁽¹⁾, resulting in significant cuts to state services and payments to local counties. These cuts will get worse if this bond is passes since repayment of general obligation bonds takes precedence over most other General Fund expenditures - like higher education and in-home support services for seniors. This year, $5.75 billion from the General Fund will go to pay debt service on existing bonds and the number is expected to grow to over $10 billion in 2013-2014 as already approved but unspent bonds are sold⁽²⁾.

As California's economy struggles to recover, repayment of an $11.14 billion bond would cost the General Fund another $800 million annually or $24 billion over 30 years.

Bad Water Policy

Not only will Proposition 18 help put California in the poor house, it will support bad policies that will ultimately hurt the environment and our water future. Specifically it:

Includes $3 billion for new dams, the most expensive, environmentally destructive, and least productive sources of new water supply. While reservoirs have historically been funded by taxpayers, those receiving the water have been required to repay that investment. This bond allows public funds to pay up to 50% of the project cost, with no repayment.

Provides $1.5 billion in funding that will ultimately support a peripheral canal to divert Sacramento water around the Delta and feed the giant pumps in the South Delta. Voters rejected the canal in 1982 because of its ability to dramatically increase water exports from the Delta; this is a back-door mechanism to reverse that decision.

Set a precedent of promising support for local projects, not based on their merit or necessity, but as a means of buying votes in the legislature. The bond grew by almost $2 billion in the last hours before the Legislature's votes, as lawmakers who had been left out of the back room negotiations exacted funding for local projects in exchange for their "aye" vote.

Language was included in the bond specifically allowing private entities to manage and profit from reservoirs built with these bond dollars.

What's missing?

The bond does have some bright spots, including over $1.78 billion for environmental conservation and restoration and $250 million for water conservation. Unfortunately, that totals less than 20% of the bond.

A second problem is that no funding source other than general obligation bonds has been identified. A cheaper and fairer source of funding would be a small fee on water exporters whose increased pumping precipitated the environmental crisis in the Delta.

Finally, the bond is an $11 billion gravy train that will not fix the Delta. Most scientists agree that what the Delta needs most is more water. Instead the peripheral canal will reduce the amount of fresh water entering the Delta, and new supply sources funded by the bond will not be used to offset those diversions.

Fixing California water and the Delta

There are ways to meet California's water needs, protect the environment, and prevent the waste of billions of taxpayer dollars. Improved water management for California and fixing the Delta involves funding local, more sustainable ways to ensure the state's water supply, like recycling wastewater, reusing graywater,4 capturing stormwater for public use, and getting serious about water conservation.5 Requiring water agencies and irrigation districts to develop water sources that reduce exports from the Delta would provide a win-win for both the environment and for California water users.

Unfortunately, this bond seeks to perpetuate the 20th century mantras of "Need water? Build a dam." and "let the privileged few suck the rest of the state dry." When will California's legislators move into the 21st century and recognize that we have to change the way we use - and reuse - water in order to ensure that everyone has access to safe, clean, affordable water and that our unique environment is protected?

Vote No on Proposition 18!

This bond reflects all that is bad in California's water policy. Clean Water Action will be working between now and November to defeat this bond. Please help us by voting no when this comes before you on the ballot.

⁽¹⁾ CA Department of Finance, http://www.dof.ca.gov/budgeting/budget_faqs/documents/Chart-A.pdf
⁽²⁾ CA State Treasurer "2009 Debt Affordability Report" http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/publications/2009dar.pdf