Editorials

The Bakersfield Californian

Friday, Jul 02 2010 05:28 PM

Last Updated Friday, Jul 02 2010 05:28 PM

It'll be just as well if state lawmakers pull the water bond off the November ballot. California has a more pressing problem at hand.

Valley farmers and residential users alike desperately need the water infrastructure bill, but cannot realistically expect voters to approve such an expenditure with the relentless recession still gnawing at employers and the state's finances upside down due to a $19.1 billion hole in its budget.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who provided much of the muscle behind Proposition 18, has called for postponing the $11 billion proposal until 2012. To remove it from the ballot requires approval from two-thirds of the Legislature.

He knows the public's immediate focus on the budget crisis would likely spell doom for a ballot measure that was difficult to craft in the first place. Better to save it until it has a real chance.

The bond would fund a slew of projects to enhance water supplies and conveyance across the state, including the construction or improvement of canals, levees and dams.

California's water debate transcends party lines. On one side, opponents -- including some public employee unions, environmentalists and fiscal conservatives -- point to the deficit as a compelling reason to spike the bond. On the other, water agencies, growers, municipal districts and some unions that would benefit from the bond's passage, are disheartened.

Standing with them is state Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who devoted significant energy to the project.

"I fear that we may lose the momentum we were able to build in bringing so many parties together to agree to place the bond on the ballot," Florez said.

Florez may be right, but what of the lost momentum from a defeat at the polls? We fear voters will wonder if, in this economy, can we really afford the bond. The direct cost of the project is one thing, but it would also ultimately cost California as much as $809 million in yearly debt payments, according to the Legislative Analyst's Office.

A growing number of invested parties who were hoping to see the bond come to life understand the gravity of California's financial jam.

"We support the difficult decision by Gov. Schwarzenegger to seek postponement of the vote on the Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act until 2012," said Tom Nassif, president and CEO of the Western Growers Association. "Polling shows that voters support this measure, but they appropriately feel the state budget issues must be resolved first."

This year, California has received above-average levels of precipitation following several years of drought. That takes some of the sting out of losing the bond measure, but dry spells are certain to return. By the same token, exceptionally wet years will strain our storage, conveyance and flood-control systems. Heaven forbid a devastating natural disaster.

Legislators could vote soon to remove Proposition 18, and they know which way the political winds are blowing. The budget crisis must be dealt with first. Like, now.

But the longer we wait to fix the water system, the greater the danger to life and commerce in our state. We urge officials to keep the water bond simmering on a front burner, ready for a fresh rollout as soon as possible.