HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05182010 - D.1RECOMMENDATION(S):
CONSIDER report on Delta legislative and regulatory activity at the state and federal levels
and related matters and provide direction, as necessary.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact to the County from this status report.
BACKGROUND:
Activity at the state and federal levels regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has
hardly abated since the passage of the Delta-related 5-bill package last November. In fact,
due to the establishment of a Delta governance structure in the bill package and on-going
work by the state on critical projects like the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and the
Interim Delta Plan, activity has continually ramped up.
This report will provide an overview of recent activity at the state and federal levels related
to the Delta, with particular emphasis on the engagement of the Delta Counties Coalition
(DCC) in the most critical legislation, policies and programs in play. Oral remarks by the
Contra Costa Water Agency Director, Roberta Goulart, and Supervisor Piepho, Contra
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 05/18/2010 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I
Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
ABSENT:Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: L. DeLaney, 5-1097
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: May 18, 2010
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
D. 1
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:May 18, 2010
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Legislative and Regulatory Activity Update
Costa County's representative on the DCC, will supplement this report.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
State Legislation:
Despite passage of the water package last November, a number of Delta water-related
bills are currently being considered for 2010. A list of bills is included in the attached
chart. Highlights include the following:
AB 2092 (Huffman) and SB 1469 (Simitian): These are two bills currently being
processed that address the assessment of fees for implementing the 2009 Water
legislation (Stewardship Council, Delta Plan, Conservancy overhead). Due to the
state budget crisis, these activities are now being funded largely through state bond
revenue. The intent of the fee program is to have the parties that benefit from
specific water projects pay for them and to have parties that are adversely affect
water resources pay for their restoration. The Board’s Delta platform supports the
beneficiary pays principle.
AB 2092 (Huffman) requires the Delta Stewardship Council to develop a long term
financing plan to pay the costs of implementing the Delta Plan. It also requires the plan
to include fee proposals to pay for private benefits associated with the implementation of
the plan. The bill has passed out of Assembly Appropriations and is awaiting a vote on
the Assembly floor. The DCC is working with the author to address concerns relative to
the in-Delta entities being included on the list of those who would be assessed to
implement the Delta Plan. The DCC is supporting the idea that the costs of Delta
restoration and the effects of the Delta Plan should be determined in a public process and
borne statewide, but they should be paid by those who will directly benefit by the receipt
of exported Delta water.
AJR 38 (Arambula) : Assembly Resolution to expedite the Two-Gates Project. The
Resolution seeks to expedite federal evaluation of the Two-Gates project which
could have significant adverse impacts to County emergency response and to the
Delta boating community. Last year the federal government withdrew support for
this project due to the concerns of Contra Costa County and other Delta
stakeholders. At this point, Contra Costa and the other Delta counties have been
joined forces in an attempt to block this legislation which attempts to revive the
project.
AB 2304 (Huffman): Groundwater Planning. This bill would require water agencies
that rely on groundwater to coordinate their planning with the city or county
planning agency. The concern is that this bill’s requirements may eventually become
mandates upon cities and counties to conduct additional groundwater planning. This
bill is in the Assembly Third Reading File.
AB 2598 (Brownley): Sate Trust Lands: This bill would require recipients of
granted public trust lands by the state to prepare plans for sea-level rise and
granted public trust lands by the state to prepare plans for sea-level rise and
authorizes establishment of fees to help fund plan preparation and implementation.
The concern is that this concept may be expanded to include all land subject to
inundation by sea-level rise, which would create another un-funded mandate for
local government or create a financial burden on property owners who would be
assessed a fee for planning and implementation. The DCC is opposed to this bill
unless amended. It is currently in the Assembly Third Reading File.
SB 808 (Wolk): A bill to extent the current state levee subventions program cost
share of 75% state, 25% local. Without this extension a 50-50 cost share will apply,
making levee work prohibitively expensive to many reclamation districts. The Delta
Counties Coalition supports this bill.
AB 1834 (Solorio): This bill authorizes landowners to install, maintain and operate a
rainwater capture system and provides for the state establishing guidelines to
encourage such projects. Delta counties have supported this bill.
AB 1886 (Yamada): This bill requires DWR to update the stat water plan to include
a report on measures taken to reduce reliance on the Delta. The Delta Counties have
supported this bill.
SB 565 (Pavley): This bill requires the State Water Resources Control Board, in
collaboration with the Department of Public Health and the Department of Water
Resources, to adopt a statewide plan to ensure that at least 50 percent of the
wastewater is annually discharged directly into the ocean, as of the year 2009, is
recycled and put to beneficial use by the year 2030. The Delta Counties are
currently watching this bill; it was approved by the Senate and is now in the
Assembly Water Committee.
SB 918 (Pavley): This bill requires the Department of Public Health to adopt criteria
for groundwater recharge with recycled water by December 31, 2013. The bill
requires the Department to adopt criteria for reservoir augmentation with recycled
water by December 31, 2016. The bill requires the Department to report to criteria
for the potable use of recycled water. Delta Counties are watching this bill which is
currently on the suspense file in Senate Appropriations committee.
SB 1173 (Wolk): This bill sets up a process for the State Water Board to prohibit
the use of potable water for non-potable purposes. Delta Counties are watching the
bill, which is still in the Senate, but has been approved by policy and fiscal
committees.
SB 1443 (Simitian): This bill extends the sunset of the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta Multi-Hazard Coordination Task Force (Task Force) until a required report is
submitted and repeals the governing code section for the Task Force until January 1,
2013. Delta Counties are watching this bill.
2010 Water Bond:
A California Water Bond Proposition will be on the November 2, 2010 ballot in
California as a legislatively-referred state statute. The measure is known by its supporters
as the "Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010." If voters approve,
the water bond proposition will allow the state government to borrow $11.1 billion to
overhaul the state's water system.
The motion to put the bond proposition on the November 2010 ballot was passed in the
California State Senate and the California State Assembly on November 4, 2009. Dave
Cogdill was the primary sponsor of the measure.
The last time California voters approved a water bond was with Proposition 84 in 2006.
Proposition 84 authorized $5.4 billion in spending on water projects. Its supporters spent
$11.4 million on their campaign urging a "yes" vote. Four years earlier, with Proposition
50 in 2002, voters approved $3.4 billion for water projects.
Although there will be plenty of hot-button issues on the 2010 ballot in California, some
observers predict that "the biggest fight, the sharpest split, may come over water."
As of January 2010, California has a total bond debt of $89 billion from previous bond
issues approved by the state's voters. The state makes yearly debt payments of about $10
billion on its $89 billion debt load.
There are a number of pros and cons to evaluate prior to consideration of a possible
position on this bond, and no recommendation for a position is forthcoming by staff at
this time. While the County has no formal position on the bond, there are issues we want
to convey, chief among them are:
Support removal of the required 50% local match to obtain funds for Delta projects
Funding is inadequate to make substantive progress on Delta restorative projects.
Authorizing more state bonds backed by the General Fund could worsen the state’s
fiscal crisis and adversely affect other programs and services that rely on state funds.
Legislative Hearings:
A number of hearings have been held this spring on bills that have been attended by the
Counties’ elected officials, staff and lobbyists. Of particular interest on May 11, an
Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee oversight hearing on the Stewardship
Council, the BDCP and interaction with local Habitat Conservation Plans.
Chairman Huffman and others had pointed questions about the Stewardship Council’s
rubber-stamp of Department of Water Resources' decisions, including using their
contractors, among other items. In his opening remarks, Assembly Member Huffman
emphasized that no construction could begin on any new conveyance facilities unless
emphasized that no construction could begin on any new conveyance facilities unless
and until the State Water Resources Control Board approved a change in point of
diversion with binding commitments to protect the Delta. County representation on a
BDCP/HCP panel occurred via Sacramento and Yolo counties.
Status of Implementation of the 2009 Water Package:
The Delta Stewardship Council has been established (see attachment for information
about Council members). Supervisor Don Nottoli from Sacramento County is our
lone advocate on the Council from the Delta counties, as the appointed Chair of the
Delta Protection Commission.
1.
Monthly meetings are being held. Phil Isenberg was selected Chair.
The Interim Delta Plan is in development. A request for comments has been made.
(See letter attachment for Contra Costa perspectives on Interim Delta Plan)
Progress on the development of a Delta Plan: Consultant CH2M-Hill selected
through DWR process.
Establishment of Delta Conservancy: First meeting scheduled June 9, 20102.
The restructured Delta Protection Commission (DPC) has been meeting. The DPC
must advise the Delta Stewardship Council on Delta issues and complete the
following studies:
3.
Primary Management Zone Study (due July 1, 2010). Consultant hired. Will
consider changes to (expansion of) the Primary Management Zone.
Economic Sustainability Study (due July 1, 2011)
The Delta Counties Coalition (DCC)
The Delta Counties Coalition has recently engaged a Coordinator through the Delta
Counties CAOs to organize strategy and set priorities for the Coalition. As the new Delta
governance structure has developed, the DCC has been grappling with DCC resources
and consideration of those activities that are best placed within the DPC, versus other
activities which are more county-centric.
Bay Development Conservation Plan (BDCP):
The development of the BDCP is well under way by the state Department of Natural
Resources. The stated aim of the BDCP is to identify a set of water flow and habitat
restoration actions to contribute to the recovery of endangered and sensitive species and
their habitats in the Delta. The goal of the BDCP is to provide for both species/habitat
protection and improved reliability of water supplies. As the BDCP evaluates habitat,
physical and operational alternatives intended to restore the Delta ecosystem while
providing water supply reliability, state and federal agencies are developing a joint
Environmental Impact Report/Statement (EIR/EIS) under the Delta Habitat Conservation
and Conveyance Program (DHCCP). The EIR/EIS will determine the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed BDCP.
The Delta Counties met with then-Secretary Mike Chrisman on a number of occasions,
yet no solution emerged as to how counties could become formally involved in the
BDCP process without signing precondition language accepting a canal. Secretary Snow
has indicated an intention to work with the Counties via individual MOU’s and has not
ruled out the potential for state funding aid.
Federal Cooperation Agreement for BDCP :
The federal government, through the Department of Interior and the Bureau of
Reclamation has offered to collaborate with one or more of the Delta Counties through
our inclusion in a MOU as Cooperating Agencies. Initial review of this option by staff
looks very promising, as the three federal agencies and one state agency meet monthly on
details related to the Environmental Review Process for the BDCP. Staff will continue to
explore with the Department of Interior the development of an acceptable MOU.
Federal Legislation of Note:
SF Bay Improvement Act of 2010 (Jackie Speier/HR 5061):The bill to obtain
significant funding to restore San Francisco Bay is moving, with Supervisor Gioia
and others providing testimony at a recent Congressional hearing in Washington,
D.C. There is great interest expressed by the DCC in broadening the language to
include funding for Delta related projects, yet also great consternation that to do so
could derail the bill.
Clean Water Restoration Act: The current legislative proposal, authored by Rep.
James Oberstar (D-Minn.), will drop the word "navigable" from the Act, which will
result in much greater areas regulated under the Clean Water Act.. The two sponsors
are from Michigan and it is unlikely that any counties in California will support.
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) Request: A WRDA request for project
authorization and funding for Corps of Engineers Delta projects was submitted to a
congressional delegation by the Delta Counties Coalition. (In addition, Contra Costa
County submitted three additional WRDA projects: the Mount Diablo Mercury
Mine Clean-up, the Rodeo Creek Restoration Project, and the Rheem Creek
Restoration Project.)
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
ACCEPTED the report on Delta legislative and regulatory activity at the state and
federal levels and related matters as presented.
ATTACHMENTS
Legislation Matrix
Letter to DSC on Interim Plan
Stewardship Council
About the Delta Stewardship Council (taken from Council website)
The Delta Stewardship Council was created by legislation passed in 2009 and
consists of seven members with diverse expertise providing a broad statewide
perspective. Of the seven, four are to be appointed by the Governor, one each by
the Senate and Assembly, and seventh is the Chair of the Delta Protection
Commission.
Council members are:
Randy Fiorini, of Turlock, has been managing partner of Fiorini Ranch since
1975 and managing partner of FarmCo since 2001. Previously, Fiorini was
president of Fiorini Family Vineyards from 2002 to 2008 and owner of Farm Data
from 1984 to 2000. He is past president and board member of the Association of
California Water Agencies, past board president and director of Turlock Irrigation
District Division #5, and past president and board member of the California Farm
Water Coalition. Fiorini holds a Bachelor of Science in Fruit Science from
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. He was appointed to
the Delta Stewardship Council in March 2010 by Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger.
Gloria D. Gray of Inglewood, CA, has been an elected member of the Board of
Directors of the West Basin Municipal Water District since 2006. In 2009 she was
appointed to be one of two West Basin representatives on the 38-member board
of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Ms. Gray dedicated her
36-year career to the Los Angeles County Departments of Human Services and
Health Services, last serving as an Associate Hospital Administrator. She was
appointed to the Los Angeles County Hospital and Health Care Delivery
Commission, and served two terms on the Inglewood Unified School District,
from 1995 - 2003. She holds a bachelor's degree in Business Administration from
the University of Redlands, a Health Services Management Certificate from the
University of California, Los Angeles and a master's degree in Governance
Certificate from the California School Boards Association. She was appointed to
the Delta Stewardship Council in February 2010 by Speaker of the Assembly
Karen Bass.
Phil Isenberg, of Sacramento, has served as president of Isenberg/O'Haren
Government Relations since 2005. From 1977 to 2004, he was counsel for Miller,
Owens and Trost, Attorneys at Law. Previously, Isenberg served as a member of
the California State Assembly representing the 9th District from 1992 to 1996 and
the 10th District from 1982 to 1992. From 1975 to 1982, Isenberg was mayor of
the city of Sacramento from 1971 to 1975. Isenberg served as chair of the
California Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force from 2004 to 2006
and served as chair of the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force from 2007 to
2008, which was reformed into the Delta Vision Foundation, a private
association, where Isenberg has served as chair since 2009. He is also a
member of the Sacramento Valley Conservancy Advisory Board. Isenberg holds
a Doctor of Jurisprudence from the University of California, Berkeley Boalt Hall
School of Law and a Bachelor of Art in Social Science and Government from
California State University, Sacramento. He was appointed to the Delta
Stewardship Council in March 2010 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Patrick Johnston, of Stockton, is the President and CEO of the California
Association of Health Plans. He served 20 years in the Legislature, 10 in the
Assembly and 10 in the Senate. He chaired the Senate Committee on
Appropriations for six years and chaired the Assembly Committee on Finance
and Insurance for four years. Beyond his years in the legislature, Mr. Johnston
worked for Health Net in government relations and taught public policy part-time
at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of the Pacific. He is
an advisory board member of the UC Berkeley Petris Center on Health Care
Markets and is a former member of the California Bay-Delta Authority and the
California Delta Protection Commission. Mr. Johnston is a graduate of St
Patrick's College and holds a Master's Degree from CSU Sacramento. He was
appointed to the Delta Stewardship Council in March 2010 by the Senate
Committee on Rules.
Hank Nordhoff, of Del Mar, has been chairman and chief executive officer of
Gen-Probe, Incorporated since 1994. From 1992 to 1994, he served as president
and chief executive officer of Targe Tech and from 1988 to 1992 he was
president and chief executive officer of American Biogenetic Sciences. From
1986 to 1988, Nordhoff was vice president of mergers and acquisition for Sterling
Drug Company and from 1970 to 1986, he was director of licensing and business
development for Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. He holds a Master of Business
Administration in international business and finance from Columbia University
and a Bachelor of Arts in international relations and political economy from Johns
Hopkins University. Nordhoff served in the United States Navy from 1963 to
1967. He was appointed to the Delta Stewardship Council in March 2010 by
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Don Nottoli, of Galt, CA, is a member of the Sacramento County Board of
Supervisors, first elected in November 1994, His district includes portions of the
City of Sacramento as well as several suburban communities, rural agricultural
areas, as well as portions of the Sacramento River Delta. Prior to his election,
Don served as chief assistant to former Fifth District Supervisor Toby Johnson for
16 years. Don is a former member of the Galt City Council and served for more
than 17 years as a board member with the Galt High School District Board of
Trustees. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Government/Journalism from
California State University, Sacramento. He was appointed to the Delta
Stewardship Council in February 2010 as chair of the Delta Protection
Commission.
Richard Roos-Collins, of Berkeley, has been director of legal services for the
Natural Heritage Institute Since 1991. Previously, he served as deputy attorney
general of the public rights division for the California Department of Justice from
1989 to 1991. From 1986 to 1989, Roos-Collins was attorney-advisor for the
Office of the General Counsel, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
He is co-chair of the Agricultural Water Management Council and a member of
the Bay Delta Conservation Plan Steering Committee. Roos-Collins is also
director of the Pacific Forest and Watershed Lands Stewardship Council and
founding director of the Hydropower Reform Coalition. He holds a Doctor of
Jurisprudence from Harvard Law School and a Bachelor of Arts in English from
Princeton University. He was appointed to the Delta Stewardship Council in
March 2010 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Contra
Costa
County
The Board of Supervisors
David Twa
Clerk of the Board
and
County Administrator
(925) 335-1900
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553
John Gioia, 1st District
Gayle B. Uilkema, 2nd District
Mary N. Piepho, 3rd District
Susan A. Bonilla, 4th District
Federal D. Glover, 5th District
May 12, 2010
Delta Stewardship Council
650 Capitol Mall, Fifth Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Contra Costa County Comments on Interim Delta Plan
Dear Chairman Isenberg and Members of the Council:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide Contra Costa County’s insights for a proposed
structure and components of the Council’s Interim Delta Plan.
The recently enacted legislative water package created a close relationship between the
Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) and the Delta Protection Commission (DPC), primarily
mandated through strong land use ties and an established DSC oversight role. It would
therefore seem both appropriate and prudent for the Council to utilize as a foundational
document for the Interim Plan, the DPC’s Resource Management Plan which was revised
and adopted earlier this year. The Resource Management Plan (RMP) offers very
recently-updated background and policy guidance in the areas of land use, agriculture,
natural resources, recreation, water, levees, and infrastructure that could serve
exceptionally well in this context. It is probable that the RMP could evolve further as the
Delta Plan is developed.
We would also respectfully request the Council to consider options for optimal levels of
participation by the Delta Counties and other local agencies, organizations and individuals
in your deliberations over short and long-term plans. Outreach for participation from these
stakeholders should begin with development of the Interim Plan.
We see components of this document much as described in Water Code Section 85054,
which includes recommendations for early actions, projects and programs. In addition,
the Interim Plan should set the stage (identify and begin to shape components) for the
longer-term Delta Plan.
We are all aware that even with its expedited schedule, the final water supply
infrastructure ultimately proposed by the BDCP will not be in place for many, many years
to come. As a result, we cannot continue to delay short and medium-term actions that
have the ability to yield meaningful solutions and reduce risk to people, property, the
ecosystem and our state’s water supply. Despite the fact that a number of short-term
actions have been discussed for years and many of these actions engender little
controversy, few if any have been implemented. It is time to step up as a leadership body
1
2
and move toward implementing these short and medium-term actions that will provide
results and reduce risk while longer-term solutions are being worked out.
For Contra Costa County, this includes specific short-term actions to improve the
ecosystem, water quality, and the fishery. An initial list of these projects includes:
• Levee improvements: There are a number of strategic, high priority levee
improvement projects that will clearly provide protection in the short and long term;
among them are the western Delta islands and levees that protect important infrastructure
and Delta communities.
• Continue the state levee subventions program at 75/25 cost share; support and
work with Delta Long Term Management Strategy (LTMS) and other federal programs
such as Corps Levee Stability Improvement Program.
• Stockpiling of appropriate size rock at strategic locations in the Delta for purposes
of emergency levee repair.
• Water quality and fishery improvements at Franks Tract: options in this area should
be reexamined.
• Additional and improved fish screens at pumps.
• Subsidence reversal projects.
• Habitat improvement projects, such as the Dutch Slough restoration project.
• Emergency response planning activities: support and continued funding of existing
programs; expanding components of these programs are paramount.
• The concept of a ‘beneficiary-pays’ long term financing structure needs to be
worked on. Some initial concepts and a timeline need to be developed.
• Development of Delta problem identification and scientific analysis in the broader
context (issues not otherwise covered through the BDCP process).
Other potential projects that have no clear identified or demonstrated benefits or projects
mired in controversy should not be considered further, such as the 2-Gates Project. The
federal government has said it sees little or no science to justify this project; no clear
benefit to fish and is examining other options Delta-wide. Contra Costa County strongly
recommends striking this project from the list.
The above-mentioned programs and projects are not specific to Contra Costa County and
most have been debated over time. As a result we have not provided additional detail on
these items. However if you have questions, or desire additional information, please
contact Roberta Goulart of my staff at Roberta.Goulart@dcd.cccounty.us or (925) 335-
1226.
Sincerely,
MARY NEJEDLY PIEPHO
Supervisor, District III
cc:
Contra Costa County Legislative Delegation
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Delta Counties Coalition
3
Contra
Costa
County
The Board of Supervisors David Twa
Clerk of the Board
and
County Administrator
(925) 335-1900
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553
John Gioia, 1st District
Gayle B. Uilkema, 2nd District
Mary N. Piepho, 3rd District
Susan A. Bonilla, 4th District
Federal D. Glover, 5th District
May 12, 2010
Delta Stewardship Council
650 Capitol Mall, Fifth Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Contra Costa County Comments on Interim Delta Plan
Dear Chairman Isenberg and Members of the Council:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide Contra Costa County’s insights for a proposed
structure and components of the Council’s Interim Delta Plan.
The recently enacted legislative water package created a close relationship between the
Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) and the Delta Protection Commission (DPC), primarily
mandated through strong land use ties and an established DSC oversight role. It would
therefore seem both appropriate and prudent for the Council to utilize as a foundational
document for the Interim Plan, the DPC’s Resource Management Plan which was revised
and adopted earlier this year. The Resource Management Plan (RMP) offers very
recently-updated background and policy guidance in the areas of land use, agriculture,
natural resources, recreation, water, levees, and infrastructure that could serve
exceptionally well in this context. It is probable that the RMP could evolve further as the
Delta Plan is developed.
We would also respectfully request the Council to consider options for optimal levels of
participation by the Delta Counties and other local agencies, organizations and individuals
in your deliberations over short and long-term plans. Outreach for participation from these
stakeholders should begin with development of the Interim Plan.
We see components of this document much as described in Water Code Section 85054,
which includes recommendations for early actions, projects and programs. In addition,
the Interim Plan should set the stage (identify and begin to shape components) for the
longer-term Delta Plan.
We are all aware that even with its expedited schedule, the final water supply
infrastructure ultimately proposed by the BDCP will not be in place for many, many years
to come. As a result, we cannot continue to delay short and medium-term actions that
have the ability to yield meaningful solutions and reduce risk to people, property, the
ecosystem and our state’s water supply. Despite the fact that a number of short-term
actions have been discussed for years and many of these actions engender little
controversy, few if any have been implemented. It is time to step up as a leadership body
1
2
and move toward implementing these short and medium-term actions that will provide
results and reduce risk while longer-term solutions are being worked out.
For Contra Costa County, this includes specific short-term actions to improve the
ecosystem, water quality, and the fishery. An initial list of these projects includes:
• Levee improvements: There are a number of strategic, high priority levee
improvement projects that will clearly provide protection in the short and long term;
among them are the western Delta islands and levees that protect important infrastructure
and Delta communities.
• Continue the state levee subventions program at 75/25 cost share; support and
work with Delta Long Term Management Strategy (LTMS) and other federal programs
such as Corps Levee Stability Improvement Program.
• Stockpiling of appropriate size rock at strategic locations in the Delta for purposes
of emergency levee repair.
• Water quality and fishery improvements at Franks Tract: options in this area should
be reexamined.
• Additional and improved fish screens at pumps.
• Subsidence reversal projects.
• Habitat improvement projects, such as the Dutch Slough restoration project.
• Emergency response planning activities: support and continued funding of existing
programs; expanding components of these programs are paramount.
• The concept of a ‘beneficiary-pays’ long term financing structure needs to be
worked on. Some initial concepts and a timeline need to be developed.
• Development of Delta problem identification and scientific analysis in the broader
context (issues not otherwise covered through the BDCP process).
Other potential projects that have no clear identified or demonstrated benefits or projects
mired in controversy should not be considered further, such as the 2-Gates Project. The
federal government has said it sees little or no science to justify this project; no clear
benefit to fish and is examining other options Delta-wide. Contra Costa County strongly
recommends striking this project from the list.
The above-mentioned programs and projects are not specific to Contra Costa County and
most have been debated over time. As a result we have not provided additional detail on
these items. However if you have questions, or desire additional information, please
contact Roberta Goulart of my staff at Roberta.Goulart@dcd.cccounty.us or (925) 335-
1226.
Sincerely,
MARY NEJEDLY PIEPHO
Supervisor, District III
cc:
Contra Costa County Legislative Delegation
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Delta Counties Coalition
3