In spite of massive opposition by fishermen, family farmers, environmentalists and Delta residents who packed a room in the Holiday Inn in Sacramento today, the Delta Stewardship Council endorsed controversial conveyance and storage amendments to the Delta Plan that that project opponents say will hasten the approval of the California WaterFix.
Only one member of the Council, Solano County Supervisor Skip Thomson, voted against the amendment that promotes “dual conveyance,” a euphemism for the Delta Tunnels Plan, as the preferred conveyance option.
He cited voting for the amendments, in the face of broad opposition, as an example of the “Abilene Paradox,” when a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many (or all) of the individuals in the group. A common phrase relating to the Abilene Paradox is a desire not to “rock the boat.”
Before the decision, Thomson commented, “The amendment is too narrowly focusing on Delta Conveyance. What happens if the conveyance doesn't work? I’ll be voting no on the amendment,” he stated.
After the decision, Mike Brodsky, lawyer for the Save the Delta Alliance (STDA), responded, “The Delta Stewardship Council is headed for self-destruction. The previous Delta Plan was struck down by the courts. These amendments to the plan will also also be struck down by the courts and will lead to the abolition of the Delta Stewardship Council.”
Brosky added, "I am very disappointed that the Council approved a policy that favors big money water exporters over the Delta. Several Council members seemed not to be fully informed on what they were voting for and had an incomplete understanding of the Delta and its residents as well as inadequate information on how the water export system works and what the WaterFix project will do.”
“We will continue our efforts to educate Council members and seek changes in their one-sided policy as the environmental review process goes forward. Litigation may be required because of some of the mis-steps the Council made on Thursday. Nevertheless, we will continue our educational efforts to make real the stated intent of several Council members to protect the Delta—regardless of any new and the existing ongoing litigation,” he concluded.
Restore the Delta (RTD) noted that their organization, environmental groups and Delta residents have requested the Delta Stewardship Council to follow Delta Reform Act mandates to reduce reliance on the Delta, invest in existing levees, protect fish, and stop the damage from operation of the state and federal water pumps near Tracy.
”Instead, the DSC chose to promote ‘dual conveyance’ systems in order to aid the Brown Administration and special interest water districts attempting to fast-track the Delta Tunnels (also known as ‘California WaterFix’) proposal,” RTD said
Responding to the decision, Restore the Delta Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, said, “I’m not surprised. While the Council improved their amendment some by requiring new conveyance and storage projects to address the state’s required human right to water policy analysis in their language, the edited amendment ignore the full breadth of laws and policies that should be evaluated for Delta environmental justice communities, and only considers impacts to environmental justice communities outside of the Delta," she stated.
“The Council continues to tinker around the edges within their planning process instead of fully complying with all state laws and policies regarding environmental justice, protecting the Delta as an evolving place, creating measurable criteria for improving Delta flows, and promoting logical water supply reliability planning. Clearly, the Council picks and chooses what portions of their mandate they are willing to execute. For instance, the DSC claims other state civil rights and environmental justice policies don’t apply to them; this kind of thinking has already gotten the Council in trouble with the courts on the Delta Plan,” Barrigan-Parrilla stated.
Osha Meserve, Attorney for Local Agencies of the North Delta (LAND), stated, “The Council has confused the public about the implications of its decision. While the Council has characterized the amendments as necessary to keep the Delta Plan up to date, the amendments appear designed to placate the mega-water agencies gunning for the Delta Tunnels project. These agencies have demanded that the Council take actions to endorse the Delta Tunnels project, and that’s what the amendments do.”
“If the DSC decides eventually to integrate these conveyance and storage amendments as currently drafted into the Delta Plan as proposed, progress on protecting the San Francisco-Bay Delta will be set back decades. Under no scenario, could an isolated diversion project like the Delta Tunnels be built and operated in a manner that would leave the Delta environment and communities intact,” she concluded.
RTD noted that the Council has failed to complete a basic assessment justifying dual conveyance projects, such as a water supply analysis to show the water is available, or a cost-benefit analysis showing the project could pencil out for ratepayers. The group also said that “the Council has failed to meaningfully address state environmental justice policies.”
Note: Stay tuned for a more complete report on the Delta Stewardship Council meeting later.
