The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 07131993 - 1.139 4 June 10, 1993 �E C Ems® l Chairman JUN 2 31993 Contra Costa Co. Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor Martinez, CA 95932 cLER CON RAC os A coSORS � Dear Mr. Chairman: A very dangerous water bill for Northern California may be heard on July 6, 1993 in the Senate Agriculture and Water Resources Committee. AB 97 (Cortese) would allow water customers to sell the water assets of water districts to the highest bidder outside of the district. The bill eliminates control of water rights by our local jurisdictions. Under the bill, a water user in a district could write a contract with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to sell the user's water allocation from their local water district. These sales would not be subject to,the protections built into law to stop the State Water Project from taking water that was needed in the Bay-Delta and areas of origin. MWD would not be limited to taking only water that was surplus to the needs of the north. It could take all the water it needs by entering contracts with individual farmers and companies. It could even buy land in a northern water district and transfer the water to itself. Until May 25, there was language in AB 97 that allowed the "possessor of the water right" to veto water sales which were harmful to the local environment and economy. But in a power play by MWD, that language was nullified on May 25 by amendments the giant south state water agency forced into the bill. Until then, the author, Assemblyman Dominic Cortese, had been trying to reach a compromise. MWD has fatally breached the consensus process. The Northern California Water Association has no choice but to oppose the MWD water rights amendments and call for the defeat of the bill unless the MWD amendments are removed and the bill reads, without contradicting language, that "the possessor of the water right shall make the final determination on the disposition of the water" in any water sale. AB 97 is now a dangerous bill for the environment and economy of northern California. We urge you to take a position in opposition to AB 97 unless the MWD water rights amendments are deleted. Sincerely, �� C.W.H. "Kip" Solinsky Executive Director CWHS/jh ?Enc. Senator Hotel Office Building C141D1121 1121 L Street,Suite 904 CDD- w� lamk• Sacramento,California 95814 916/442-8333 FAX:9.16/442-4035 NC-P 1 1 1 June 9, 1993 LEGISLATIVE ALERT******ACTION NEEDED On May 24 the Metropolitan Water District forced amendments into AB 97 (Cortese) which eliminates control of water rights by our local jurisdictions. The MWD amendment nullifies the following water rights protection language which has been in the bill since it was introduced: "the possessor of the water right shall determine the final disposition of the water" in any water transfer. The MWD amendment limits the power of the water right possessor to issues "necessary to avoid adverse impacts on the water right". Unless the possessor could claim there was imminent danger the water right would be lost or stolen, all important aspects of ownership, such as selling the water, are transferred to the water utility customer by the MWD amendment. The following are examples of attributes of ownership which will be lost by water districts by the MWD amendment: 1. Water district customers are authorized to sell their water allocation directly to MWD includingsetting the price; any profit from the sale goes to the utility user; the district loses all equity value of the water. Under current law only the owner of the water right, the district, could enter a sale contract to transfer water out of the district. 2. With the MWD amendments, local jurisdictions won't be able to stop a water sale for any of the following reasons: a. The sale is harmful to the environment; b. The water is needed by neighboring water districts; c. The water is needed to meet the General Plan of the local community; d. The sale will have adverse third party effects; e. The sale will be harmful to the regional economy; f. The sale price does not reflect the value of replacement water and constitutes a gift of public funds; g. The sale proceeds, or portions thereof, should be invested in fish screens and infrastructure improvements for the benefits of all users in the district; h. The sale will result in a violation of the area of origin protection statutes since it is not surplus to the needs of the local community. i. The tail water from using the water in the district is needed for wildlife and fish in local agricultural drains and wildlife areas. MWD will be able to bypass our locally elected officials, buy land in our districts and transfer the water to themselves, and otherwise undermine the water rights system. AB97 will be heard in the Senate Agriculture and Water Resources Committee on July 7, 1993. Please send letters in opposition to the MWD amendments to the Senators on the committee: McCorquodale (Chairman); Ayala; Calderon; Craven; Kelley, Kopp; Lewis; Presley-, Rogers; and Thompson. The Committee address is Room 2031, State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814. Copies should be sent to your local legislator and the Governor. Senator Hotel Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 904 Sacramento, California 95814 916/442-8333 FAX: 916/442-4035 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY TUNE 3, 1993 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 1, 1993 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY FEBRUARY 8, 1993 CALWORNIA LEGISLATURE--1984REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 97 Introduced by Assembly Member Cortese anuary 7, 1993 Below, is the water rights language as A.B. 97 was introduced and which NCWA supports: 35 479.32. Notwithstanding any other provision ision of this 36 chapter, the possessor of the water right shall determine 37 the final disposition of the water. Below, is the MWD May 25 amendment forced into the bill in Ways and Means which is completely contradictory to the language above. NCWA opposes this amendment. 38 479.33. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of 39 this chapter,any tr=der pLursuan' to this chapter shalt be 40 subject to the approval of the possessor of the water right, AB 97 _10— I subject only to those conditions necessary to avoid 2 adverse impacts on the water right which, based upon 3 facts known by the possessor of the waterright, would not 4. have occurred in the absence of the transfer. 5 (bj The possessorofthe water_ right-may- jot 6 disapprove a transfer that could, if approved, be made 7 subject to conditions that would reasonably protect 8 against the adverse impacts on the water right. NC� �. June 10, 1993 The Honorable Dan McCorquodale, Chairman Senate Agriculture and Water Resources Committee State Capitol, Room 4032 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator McCorquodale: The Northern California Water Association opposes the June 3 water rights amendments by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to AB 97 by Assemblyman Dominic Cortese. We support Assemblyman Cortese's decision to not request a hearing on the bill until disagreements within the consensus process are resolved. The MWD amendments eliminate control of water rights by local jurisdictions. Last year, your committee protected water rights by approving legislation which provided that "the possessor of the water right shall make the final determination on the disposition of the water" in any water sale. NCWA supports the Committee's position. The MWD amendments nullify the possessor language which has been in AB 97 since it was introduced. The amendments go far beyond "jump starting" water transfers. Local jurisdictions would no longer be able to consider the following factors and others in deciding whether to approve or deny a sale of water utility assets by the utility customer: 1. The sale is harmful to the environment; 2. The water is needed by neighboring water districts; 3. The water is needed to meet the General Plan of the county; 4. The sale will have adverse third party effects; 5. The sale will be harmful to the regional economy; 6. The sale price does not reflect the value of replacement water and constitutes a gift of public funds; 7. Agricultural return flows are needed for wildlife and fish; 8. The sale will result in a violation of the area of origin protection statutes since it is not surplus to the needs of the local community. We also oppose the inclusion of pre-1914 water in a bill which authorizes utility customers to sell the water assets of the utility. We would expect the customer to sell the senior water rights with the highest value. That water is needed by districts to survive during droughts. We urge you to delete the MWD water rights amendments or hold AB 97 in committee. Sincerely, C.W.H. "Kip" Solinsky Executive Director cc: Committee Members Assemblyman Cortese Committee Consultant Senator Hotel Office Building 1121 L Street,Suite 904 Sacramento, California 95814 916/442-833.3 FAX: 916/442--035 Gons1�r w '�- 1. 131 RECEIVED I JUL - 6 1993 July 2, 1993 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. TO: PERSONS INTERESTED IN AB 97 FROM; C.W.H. "Kip" SOLINSKY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR On June 29, 1993, AB 97 was amended to restrict the ability of water rights holders to exercise their rights. For example, the authority to sell district water would be granted to water utility customers in the district who do not now have the power to sell district water. While earlier versions of the bill allowed water users to propose to sell water outside of the district, the water right holder made the final decision. The new version of the bill leaves water districts in the position of having to object to the sale from a limited list of authorized reasons. The bill now represents a major change in the water laws of the State of California. Local communities and their elected representatives on water districts will lose control of their most important natural resource. The Northern California Water Association is opposing AB 97 as amended on June 29, 1993. CWHS/Jh Senator Hotel Office Building 1121 L Street,Suite 904 Sacramento,California 95814 916/442-8333 FAX: 916/442-4035 .j Cons gid- r w I. 135 NC1 RECEIVED JUL - 6 1993 I July 2, 1993 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. TO: PERSONS INTERESTED IN AB 97 FROM; C.W.H. "Kip" SOLINSKY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR On June 29, 1993, AB 97 was amended to restrict the ability of water rights holders to exercise their rights. For example, the authority to sell district water would be granted to water utility customers in the district who do not now have the power to sell district water. While earlier versions of the bill allowed water users to propose to sell water outside of the district, the water right holder made the final decision. The new version of the bill leaves water districts in the position of having to object to the sale from a limited list of authorized reasons. The bill now represents a major change in the water laws of the State of California. Local communities and their elected representatives on water districts will lose control of their most important natural resource. The Northern California Water Association is opposing AB 97 as amended on June 29, 1993. CWHS/Jh Senator Hotel Office Building 1121 L Street,Suite 904 Sacramento,California 95814 916/442-8333 FAX:916/442-4035