by Ellen Schwartz, with material from Restore The Delta.
What can we do to stop the Peripheral Canal?
There are two things. One is, letters to the editor of the Sacramento Bee or Sacramento News & Review (email sactoletters@newsreview.com ). See below for tips on writing a letter.
Second, and urgent, we need to flood Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg’s office with calls, letters, faxes, and everything we can do
Senator Darrell Steinberg
State Capitol, Room 205
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-651-4006
916-323-2263 (fax)
Email form: http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.aspx?district=SD06 .
WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION?
www.restorethedelta.com, (Restore The Delta’s website)
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Restore-the-Delta/105222779562?ref=ts&__a=1#, (their Facebook page)
http://restorethedelta.wordpress.com/(their blog)
Letter to the Editor Project
For crafting a letter to the editor, pick two or three points from the extensive list below and write about what concerns you. Check the work limit on-line and follow the directions regarding email or snail mail. Write in and send your letter.
Points to consider. It would be good to flood the SJ Mercury News and the Marin Independent Journal, as well as the Sac Bee. These papers cover Huffman, Simitian and Steinberg’s constituents. Steinberg is working to cut deal, and in the case of Simitian and Huffman they are working to move forward the peripheral canal. Feel free to question, why as northern California legislators they are working to send water to Western San Joaquin Valley agribusiness at the expense of neighboring communities (or refer to Steinberg as a Delta legislator).
Make a letter that is your own and send it to each paper. And/or write a letter and call your friends in Sacramento, San Jose or Marin to sign and send as a constituent.
Here’s a sample:
Dear Editor:
The legislature is continuing with its “informational hearings on a package of water bills related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the plans to address California’s crisis in the Delta.
It took a while for the public to get to see that legislative language, but having now taken a look at it, we remain strongly concerned about the process, the transparency, the costs and abdication of oversight contained in these proposals.
However, the Schwarzenegger plan to build a 50 mile-long canal will not generate any new water, abdicates any meaningful oversight, cedes absolute authority to faceless bureaucrats and will cost over $10 billion, even more once you add mitigation and restoration costs.
The legislative package we see does nothing to change those facts. In fact, Senator Simitian’s bill will enable the Governor to build the canal without assurances for Delta fisheries and Delta communities.
Why is this Northern California representative intent on supporting a water grab to support San Joaquin Valley agribusiness at the expense of the Delta’s ecosystem?
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Points to Use
The legislature is continuing with its “informational hearings on a package of water bills related to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the plans to address California’s crisis in the Delta.
• It took a while for the public to get to see that legislative language, but having now taken a look at it, we remain strongly concerned about the process, the transparency, the costs and abdication of oversight contained in these proposals.
• To be clear, we strongly support the need to address our state’s critical water needs and hope to see issues addressed, including, but not limited to the governance of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, water conservation, flood management and groundwater recharge, reclamation and reuse.
• However, the Schwarzenegger plan to build a 50 mile-long canal will not generate any new water, abdicates any meaningful oversight, cedes absolute authority to faceless bureaucrats and will cost over $10 billion, even more once you add mitigation and restoration costs.
• The legislative package we see does nothing to change those facts.
• We are concerned with the way the current process was developed in secret without meaningful public input. The manner in which these proposals are being jammed through defies public interest at a time when the public is most interested in how government is spending their resources. Public input presently is limited commentary on specific subjects that are acceptable to legislative staff.
• Governor Schwarzenegger and others believe moving water via a new Peripheral Canal will help solve water supply issues in the Southern and Central California and resolve ecosystem issues in the Delta. Instead, it would have the same devastating consequences for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay as the one rejected by the voters in 1982, but would cost billions of dollars more.
In fact, leaders of the last peripheral canal fight maintain that the bill produced in 1982 actually offered the Delta more protections than what we see in this current legislative package.
• The Governor is so determined to build a new canal he is claiming the authority to move ahead with the project without voter approval. In addition, the Governor’s Delta Vision Task Force maintains that the new Peripheral Canal should be set in motion despite the fact they have yet to deal with how to manage or govern the Delta.
• Recent press reports that officials from the Department of Water Resources officials are already planning to drill into 16 locations throughout the Delta for potential intake sites for the canal without appropriate public review or input.
• However, the process is so Ad-Hoc that it underscores the need to create governance structure before the State starts spending the people’s money.
• News reports indicate that under DWR’s latest “plan-a week” approach, they are floating the idea of an American version of the English Chunnel, “exploring the price and engineering challenges associated with digging a roughly 35-mile tunnel under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to bring more supplies to Southern California.”
• So not only would this legislation authorize a politically appointed commission to approve digging a canal bigger than the Panama Canal, now it could authorize the boring of a tunnel longer than the tunnel under the English Channel. And make us pay.
• One of the other things that concerns us is that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan Steering Committee was formed without a single in-Delta environmental or agriculture representative and the Capitol Weekly reports “no lawmaker with deep delta roots is on the [legislative] conference committee,” responsible for the legislative water package, “fueling suspicions that the delta is being short-changed in order to push through a massive construction program.”
• Folks in the Delta want their voices heard and that’s why they organized.
• This lack of public review over the legislative water package isn’t just about transparency; it’s also about taking the time to evaluate potential consequences. There are some parts of the Delta that would be more susceptible to flooding if a canal or tunnel were to be put into place due to interruptions in water movement around certain channels.
• There is no question that the Delta is in crisis and we must find a way to work together to save the Delta and the San Francisco Bay.
• But there has to be a better way than jamming this down the public’s throat and asking them to pay billions for a project they haven’t had any say in at a time when the state has been issuing IOU’s, cutting back on schools, and shutting down parks.
• We need a more comprehensive and thoughtful approach to address our state’s water needs. We want an approach that safeguards the Bay, the Delta, the environment and the people who live and work in the area. We want real solutions that include cost effective and environmentally sound programs and projects that will capture, recycle, and treat water.
• We are looking for an approach for long-term Delta management that are based on a firm understanding of Delta freshwater needs and programs that include strong protection for sufficient flows of water necessary for healthy Delta communities, including Delta agriculture.
• And finally, we need an approach that includes restored groundwater banks and flood plains along with a comprehensive flood and emergency readiness plan.
• The current process doesn’t make sense, this legislation is not enough and there is no need to rush into the Governor’s New Peripheral Canal or American Chunnel.
Comments