Jeffrey Michael, Kathy Miller and Karen Mitchoff: Dump low-yield, high-risk Delta tunnels plan

California’s drought underscores the critical need to make smart and sustainable investments in water systems locally and statewide.

But with $15-plus billion on the line and so much pressure to get it right, Gov. Jerry Brown’s repackaged “anything-is-better-than-nothing” twin tunnels plan – inaccurately named the “California Water Fix” – is especially concerning because it does nothing to enhance water supplies in droughts and address the long-term security of local water supplies in the Central Valley or throughout the State.

In fact, the multibillion-dollar Water Fix actually hinders creation of genuine statewide water solutions – leaving farmers, businesses and local residents thirsty for answers.

The insistence to build tunnels forces everyone to wait longer for a reliable water supply. Rather than preparing for long-term drought, state officials continue to perpetuate a 30-year-old idea, urging people to “rally together” for a project that will be a financial loser for the Central Valley and all of California. Had they pursued more realistic, more sustainable alternatives to the tunnels several years ago, perhaps a more reliable water supply for south-of-the-Delta farmers would now be available.

The Water Fix is terrible for agriculture and water users statewide. If constructed, it won’t add a single drop of new water to California’s water supply.

The plan doesn’t pencil out from an economic standpoint and falls short of producing “real” scientific and environmental benefits. The tunnels would take thousands of acres of prime farmland out of production in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, deplete groundwater supplies in the path of construction, and degrade water quality to the detriment of farmers, cities and wildlife.

The Water Fix has been negotiated without critical stakeholder input, it violates state and federal environmental law, and it will cause irreparable harm to Delta communities in San Joaquin, Contra Costa and Sacramento counties.

Farmers who rely on Delta water exports will see their average water costs at least double under the Water Fix with little or no additional water delivered in return. These irrigation districts will be required to pay over a billion dollars per year on the construction debt, even during droughts when they receive no new water from the tunnels and can least afford the additional costs.

Farm water supplies that depend on San Joaquin River tributaries – Merced, Stanislaus and Tuolumne – will be at greater risk, as water from these rivers could be required by the state to replace flows from the Sacramento River that will be diverted into the tunnels before they ever reach the Delta.

The Water Fix’s environmental documents show that building the tunnels will yield less than 200,000 acre-feet of water for San Joaquin Valley farmers, enough to irrigate 60,000 acres. These farmers will be responsible for over $10 billion of the tunnels’ construction costs, or over $150,000 per acre before interest is accumulated.

Independent economists estimate the tunnels’ water yield will cost $3,000 per acre-foot, even without expected cost overruns.

The state has yet to provide a viable finance plan for the tunnels that protects taxpayers from the projects’ escalating costs. Because of the tunnels’ unprecedented debt for farmers, lenders could require greater flexibility for farmers to sell their irrigation water to cities and developers. If financing the tunnels results in irrigation water being sold to cities, the Valley could be left even drier than before. Farm and food-processing jobs would dry up with soil.

In addition to the tunnels plan, Gov. Brown also had advocated for better alternatives in his California Water Action Plan – including more storage, conservation, recycling, increased efficiency and regional independence. It’s easy to voice support for this “all of the above” approach, but in reality, there are limits to what farmers, taxpayers and ratepayers can afford.

The quest for the tunnels practically guarantees there will be less money for anything else – including more cost-effective and less risky ideas like storage, recycling and conservation, which we strongly support.

The state would make faster progress if it pursued real solutions that benefit everyone and avoids wasting tens of billions of dollars on a divisive, low-yield, high-risk plan for tunnels under the Delta. Fortunately, many other elected and non-elected leaders throughout the Central Valley and California are seeking sensible solutions that will ensure long-term water reliability, increased drought resilience, and respect for California’s increasingly fragile natural environment, including the Delta.

It’s time for the state to drop the deeply flawed twin tunnels plan and adopt real policy solutions that ensure sustainable water supplies, fiscal stability, an improved environment, and the viability of California’s agriculture and its farmers.

This story was originally published September 11, 2015 at 1:40 PM with the headline "Jeffrey Michael, Kathy Miller and Karen Mitchoff: Dump low-yield, high-risk Delta tunnels plan."