Panel seeks public input on Delta water issues
New effort to tackle water supply reliability and ecosystem restoration.
Mike Taugher
Oakland Tribune
01/19/2011
The state has hit the pause button on one fast-moving Delta plan but another equally speedy one gets under way this week and it could determine the estuary's future.
The newly formed Delta Stewardship Council, which is to develop a plan to restore and protect the estuary, scheduled its Bay Area stop Thursday in Concord.
Its Delta Plan, mandated by 2009 state law, is meant to be a legally enforceable long-term strategy for a more reliable supply of Delta water to farms and cities and to restore the Delta's imperiled ecosystem. It is required to do so in a way that protects Delta communities.
The Stewardship Council plan will touch on how water is used statewide, flood safety and other issues.
A first draft is due out next month and the plan must be done by the end of the year.
That's a highly ambitious schedule, and it is not clear how specific the plan will get.
For example, will it embrace tunnels to deliver water south from the Sacramento River or rule them out? And if it embraces them, will it recommend a particular size? Will it make determinations of how much water is available to pump out of the Delta?
In any case, it will have to address the conflict at the heart of the problems in the Delta -- the conflict between a seemingly unlimited thirst and a limited, and thanks to global warming, uncertain, water supply, said the chairman of the council.
"It's going to be fairly sober on the need to live within our means," said Phil Isenberg, chairman of the Delta Stewardship Council.
The Delta supplies water for about two-thirds of Californians. Some, like 500,000 Contra Costa residents, get all of their water from it. Others, like those in Southern California, rely on the Delta for about one-third of their water.
Two batteries of pumps near Tracy also supply irrigation water to about 2 million acres of San Joaquin Valley farmland.
The meeting in Concord is one of seven up and down the state being held through Tuesday. The idea is to gather as many ideas as possible from the public to help shape the plan.
It also will set standards that local governments, including Contra Costa County and East Contra Costa cities, will have to comply with, especially in land use. Wetlands restoration plans could reduce property tax revenue if they take agricultural lands out of production, a sensitive issue for local governments.
"We keep trying to get our foot in the door -- don't forget the impacts on local government," said Contra Costa County Supervisor Mary Piepho, whose district includes portions of the Delta, including Discovery Bay.
The Delta Plan is mandated by state law and is under the guidance of the newly formed Delta Stewardship Council.
By contrast, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan is less sweeping in that it is essentially a strategy to comply with endangered species laws by building a canal, or tunnels, to move water and to restore wetlands to improve conditions for fish.
The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is mostly driven by contracting water agencies that take water out of the Delta, but its steering committee also includes environmentalists and government biologists.
It is on hold for now as the Jerry Brown administration takes stock and consultants rush to complete an extensive scientific analysis.
That analysis is meant to determine whether fish populations will be helped or harmed by the $12 billion plan to take Sacramento River water through tunnels beneath the Delta and to restore wetlands.
Federal biologists have been critical of the work, but the consultants have been trying to address the criticisms and hope to have a report done this month or in February.
The big question is whether routing water past the Delta from modern intakes on the Sacramento River, rather than the Tracy pumps, and restoring wetlands is enough to justify the amount of water farms and cities south of the Delta want.
If the answer is no -- that less water is available -- that could lead agencies to determine that the project does not make financial sense.
