Prop. 84 in jeopardy despite support from environmentalists

By MATT WEISER
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
If it were possible for the largest water and parks bond in state history to get lost on the ballot, this could be the year.

Proposition 84 was certified for the statewide ballot after a coalition of environmental groups collected more than 600,000 signatures. It would raise $5.4 billion to acquire public lands for recreation, improve state parks, restore wildlife habitat, protect water quality, and boost flood control.

Historically, Californians have strongly supported using bonds for these purposes, approving two-thirds of such measures _ four since 2000.

But a recent Field Poll showed the measure with just 50 percent support, barely enough to pass on Nov. 7. A poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed voters split over Proposition 84, with only 42 percent saying they would vote "yes."

This is despite broad support from farmers and environmentalists, Democrats and Republicans, even both Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his challenger, Phil Angelides.

The reason may be simple: Supporters didn't do any advertising until this month. By Election Day, they expect to spend $9 million on mailers, TV and radio ads.

"We're quite optimistic that it will pass," said Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation, one of 500 groups across the political spectrum that support the proposition.

But 84 is also sharing ballot space with four other bond measures proposing another $37 billion in borrowing, all placed on the ballot by the state Legislature and Schwarzenegger. One of these, Proposition 1E, is similar to 84 in that it funds water and flood control projects.

"All the bond measures face a challenge because there's so much money on the ballot this time, and five measures that involve borrowing," said Mark Baldassare, research director at the Public Policy Institute of California.

In the institute's survey, 58 percent of those polled said the total amount of state borrowing on the ballot is too much. Yet there was majority support for propositions 1B through 1E, the Legislature-sponsored initiatives.

The biggest chunk of the bond's spending _ about $1.6 billion _ would go toward water quality projects. This could be spent to improve water and sewage treatment, create water banking and groundwater recharge systems, restore upstream watersheds to protect water quality, and capture and treat storm water.

Specific sums are set aside for each region of the state. The Sacramento River region would get $73 million.

"For the last 20 years or so, most of the water development in California has been by local districts," said Steve Hall, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies. "This would put money in their hands to help continue that."

Opponents, including Jim Uhler of the Roseville-based National Tax Limitation Committee, complain that there is no bond money earmarked to build new reservoirs.

"There's not one dime allotted for water storage, which is the No. 1 need California has," said Uhler.

Supporters disagree. Hall said the measure allocates money for feasibility studies of four major reservoir projects identified as promising by state and federal officials. There is no money to build them, but construction cannot occur without the studies.Also, Proposition 84 puts up to $1 billion into a program called "integrated regional water management," which encourages local cooperation on common water solutions such as water recycling, conservation and storage.

Mark Cowin, chief of planning and local assistance at the state Department of Water Resources, estimates Proposition 84 could create 1.2 million acre-feet of new water supplies. That's enough to supply about 2 million households.

Another $800 million in the bond goes for flood control projects. Much of this is aimed at levees and disaster response in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. A catastrophe there would be a statewide crisis, because the Delta is a drinking water source for 23 million Californians.

Uhler also claims the proposition _ and the others on the ballot _ amount to a tax because the bonds tap the state general fund to pay new debts. Proposition 84 requires payments of $350 million a year for 30 years.

Supporters say the bonds will be repaid from existing state revenues and impose no new burdens on taxpayers. All the new bonds boost the state's indebtedness to about 6 percent of revenues. They say economists consider this reasonable.

Goldstein said bonds are a traditional tool for funding park and water projects. The state park system itself, in fact, was founded on a bond measure.

State parks now have a $2 billion backlog of deferred maintenance and delayed projects, Goldstein said, which Proposition 84 would help remedy with $400 million.

Examples of the need include the new Los Angeles State Historic Park, which still doesn't have any permanent facilities. Another is Angel Island State Park, where historic buildings are in dire need of restoration.

The money could also help establish new parks in the Central Valley, where population growth has created a huge need. The San Joaquin River Conservancy, for instance, aims to construct a river parkway near Fresno. It would get $36 million from the bond.

Another $100 million would help restore the San Joaquin River, where recent settlement of a 20-year legal battle returns year-round flows _ and, possibly, salmon runs _ to the river below Friant Dam.

"There are projects of every kind all over state, from restoring natural areas to historic preservation work," said Goldstein. "Just about every kind of project is in need."