California voters may be feeling a sense of deja vu when they consider Proposition 3, an $8.9 billion water bond on the November ballot to fund a long list of water projects — from repairing Oroville Dam to restoring Bay Area wetlands to helping Central Valley farmers recharge depleted groundwater. Didn’t the voters recently approve a big water bond? Maybe two of them? Yes. And yes.
For the second time this year, California voters will be asked to approve a bond measure to pay for water infrastructure and environmental protection programs. Proposition 3 on the November statewide ballot asks voters to approve $8.9 billion in bonds to pay for water infrastructure and environmental projects. During the June primary election, California voters approved Proposition 68, which authorized the state to sell $4 billion in bonds to pay for parks, water infrastructure and environmental projects.
In the November election, California voters will decide on 11 propositions. Here’s everything you need to know about Proposition 3. Proposition 3 authorizes bonds to fund projects for water supply and quality, watershed, fish, wildlife, water conveyance, and groundwater sustainability and storage. A YES vote authorizes the State to issue $8.877 Billion in general obligation bonds for water infrastructure, groundwater supplies and storage, surface water storage, and dam repairs. It also includes money for watershed and fishery improvements along with habitat protection and restoration.
Flint, Mich., isn’t the only place where tap water is poisonous. Shockingly, more than 1 million California residents are exposed to unsafe tap water each year in our homes, schools and public buildings. Latino and low-income communities are suffering the most. At the same time, longer droughts and shrinking Sierra snowpack endanger the water supplies of millions more Californians, and threaten extinction for salmon and other wildlife. More extreme storms have exposed vulnerable old dams and canals that need maintenance to protect us from floods and deliver water to homes and farms.
What’s being sold as commonality between Republicans and Democrats on environmental concerns based on support for Proposition 3 is a false premise. Prop. 3 is not what it appears to be. There are several bad ideas incorporated in this $8.9 billion bond statewide bond measure. A shift of the fiscal burden for water delivery systems from corporate agriculture and water agencies to the general public. How? The bonds would be repaid out of the state’s general fund, thus all taxpayers, not just the project beneficiaries, would foot the bills. Another good deal for large, well-connected water interests, and one more bad deal for the average taxpayer.
In today’s Water Works, brought to you by AquiMax, there will be another water proposition on the ballot for Californians this November. Proposition 3, the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018, would authorize $8.877 billion in general obligation bonds for various types of water projects. The proposition’s broad spending categories include watershed lands, water supply, fish and wildlife habitat, water facility upgrades, groundwater, and flood protection.
We must do more to protect the future of California’s water, but that doesn’t mean just pumping in more money without making sure the investments will have widespread benefits for the public. Proposition 3 – the $8.9 billion bond on the Nov. 6 ballot – fails that test. Voters should say “no.” The measure promises money for quite a few local agencies, nonprofits, private water companies and others, which is great for them. It’s not clear, however, that these are the projects that California needs most right now, or that they couldn’t get the money elsewhere.
The Water News Network is San Diego County’s source for water news and information.
