Gov. Jerry Brown’s ambitious $17 billion plan, to divert water from the Sacramento River to serve the state’s central and southern population has encountered a potentially fatal setback. Earlier this month the board of Westlands Water District, the largest irrigation district in the country, voted to remove itself from the project, citing potential costs to individual farmers.
Commonly referred to as California WaterFix, the plan calls for two, 30-mile long tunnels that would transport raw water from the Sacramento River to state canals, where it would be treated and used to serve more than 25 million Californians, from the Bay Area to San Diego. California WaterFix, was designed to fix the logistical issue of supply and demand that state water planners have been trying to resolve for decades. Nearly all of the rain and snow that provide the state’s water supplies are located in Northern California, but most of the state’s population (and farms) reside in Central and Southern California. It now seems that the California WaterFix may be lost.[1]
Westlands was the first water district to vote on the project and was expected to contribute nearly $3 billion of its final cost. Now, if the project is to proceed, this cost will have to be distributed among other water districts, resulting in higher-than-expected water rates.
As a result, lawmakers are beginning to see a domino effect in other participants. In a report by Mercury News, John Varela, chairman of the Santa Clara Valley Water District described his apprehension of the project proceeding without the state’s largest water district.
“My magic eight-ball is just not coming up with an answer that is positive now that Westlands is pulling out,” said Varela. “I can’t imagine how we can go forward when one of the most significant water users in the state is sending a message that this project doesn’t pencil out for them. If it doesn’t pencil out for them, how does it pencil out for us?”[2]
In an interview with the Sacramento Bee, Westlands directors stressed that they felt uncomfortable with the costs that would be borne by the 600 farming families in the sprawling agricultural district. Westlands directors predicted the cost for its water would increase from $160 per acre-foot to more than $600.[3]
“We just can’t afford it,” said board member Jim Anderson.[4]
The interview also cites how Westlands directors were uneasy of spending that type of money on a project that, while indented to improve water deliveries, included no guarantee that the supply of water would grow.
“There’s just too many unknowns,” said director Larry Enos. “The only guarantee is that once we do it, we have to pay the bonds back.”[5]
Nearly $250 million has been spent planning the project over the past decade. According to Mercury News, Governor Brown has prioritized the tunnels before he leaves office next year. Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, the front-runner in polls to succeed him, has not taken a strong position either way on the project.
[1] California Natural Resources Agency. About California WaterFix. https://www.californiawaterfix.com/
[2] Rogers, Paul. $17 billion Delta tunnels plan in trouble after key water agency backs out. September 21, 2017. Web. http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/19/california-farming-district-considers-giant-water-tunnels/
[3] Sabalow, Ryab & Dale, Kasler. Farming district says it won’t pay for Delta tunnels in a vote that could kill the project. September 19, 2017. Web. http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article174229771.html
[4] Sabalow & Kasler. Farming district says it won’t pay for Delta tunnels in a vote that could kill the project. http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article174229771.html
[5] Sabalow & Kasler. Farming district says it won’t pay for Delta tunnels in a vote that could kill the project. http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article174229771.html
Picture Reference: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flickr