Editorial: A Pat Brown-wannabe needs broader support

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and key state lawmakers seem far apart on how to address California's immediate and long-term water challenges. And while it's admirable that they are finally focused on repairing the long-neglected Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, they'd be wise not to ask voters to approve a costly water bond as early as February, given the gulf that divides them.

Schwarzenegger last week upped the stakes by submitting a $9 billion water proposal to the Legislature's special session -- $3 billion more than he had previously floated. Most would be spent on three reservoirs -- Temperance Flat above Fresno, Sites in the upper Sacramento Valley and Los Vaqueros in the East Bay.

The scale of the governor's proposal is astounding. When former Gov. Pat Brown launched the State Water Project, he depended on a $1.75 billion bond approved by voters in 1960 (worth $11.7 billion in today's dollars). That investment helped launch the massive Lake Oroville and construction of the California Aqueduct, with water users eventually paying back more than 80 percent of the investment, including interest.

By contrast, Schwarzenegger is poised to spend nearly as much as Pat Brown to produce far less water, and with no beneficiaries signed up to repay their share. Assuming voters approve the $9 billion, the governor promises he will obtain commitments from water users before any public monies are spent. Yet taxpayers and voters are likely to be wary of such "trust us" arguments.

As the Orange County Register said in a critical editorial this month, the governor's plan "is to designate funds before beneficiaries have been identified, costs and benefits have been tallied, or the plans themselves have been finished."

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata thinks he has a better water plan. Perata proposes to spend roughly $5.5 billion, with most of that going to repair the Delta and pay a share of water projects chosen by individual regions. While a regional approach has some merit, the Senate's proposal has the feel of a package cobbled together to sidetrack the governor's less attractive plans.

Leaders such as Schwarzenegger and Perata need to realize they may get only one shot at seeking voter approval for water supplies. If they blow it, it could be several years before the state could plausibly ask taxpayers to invest in this form of infrastructure.

To ensure the widest possibly support, the governor and legislators should wait for the findings of the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force, which is expected this year to provide leaders with a clear set of strategies for moving water through the Delta, while protecting its ecosystem. If the governor and lawmakers want to help certain farm districts and cities, they need to nail down who would help pay for prospective water projects and whether those projects would generate water at the least possible cost.

Despite what some high priests of the water establishment say, a deliberate approach does not mean "a do- nothing" approach. The state already has tens of millions of water dollars available from water bond initiatives. State leaders should use the money to help the Delta and the state's larger water interests, instead of simply working to satisfy the high priests of the water trough.