The fight over whether California should build a $20 billion water tunnel in Sacramento’s San Joaquin River Delta is escalating, with Gov. Gavin Newsom pushing for a state water regulator to lay the foundations for the project before it expires and consider whether to grant key approvals.
The state’s Water Resources Management Board has launched a series of hearings on petitions by the Newspaper Bureau to amend water rights permits so that flows can be diverted from a new point on the Sacramento River where the intake of a 45-mile tunnel is being built.
The process has been strained in recent weeks as the Newsom administration and the water agency opposed how board officials handle parts of the process, urging opponents not to put political pressure on the board.
During a virtual hearing Thursday, Anne Carroll, an adviser to the state Department of Water Resources, called it one of California’s “most important climate adaptation projects,” and presented the case of the Tunnel’s Newsom administration.
“Changing precipitation patterns lead to more rain, less snow and limited ability to catch and move water,” Carroll said. “The ability to capture high flows when available is critical to adapt to changing climates.”
Proponents of the plan, called the Delta Transportation Project, say the state needs to urgently build new infrastructure in the Delta to protect water supply in the face of climate change and earthquake risks. Large Southern California water agencies support the project by providing initial funding to plan planning work.
Opponents, including Northern California agencies, environmental advocates and native tribes, argue that the project is an expensive boodoggle that harms the environment, fish species and communities, and that the nation should pursue other alternatives. They argue that the main beneficiaries are development interests in Southern California and agricultural landowners in the southern San Joaquin Valley.
The tunnel creates a second route for transporting water to the state’s pumping facility on the south side of the Delta. There, supplies will enter the state water project aqueducts, delivering them to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland.
Newsom pitched the project in a February 18 letter to State Waterboard on February 18, saying “California’s prosperity depends on it.” He said that California’s last two governors, Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger, also supported previous iterations of the concept of modernizing the state’s water system.
Six years ago, Newsom announced it was reducing its proposal for a twin tunnel in Brown, calling for a redesigned single tunnel instead. Now, he said the current proposal is “thoughtfully refined to protect the environment, fisheries, ecosystems, water quality and water supply.”
At a Senate Senate subcommittee hearing Thursday, Water Resources Director Carla Nemez answered important questions from lawmakers about the costs and environmental impact of the project.
Nemeth described the existing system as “really poorly performed” assets, saying that if the tunnels existed now, they could have captured more water during the storms of the past three years. State officials estimate that climate change could reduce the average supply available from the state’s water projects by up to 23% over the next 20 years, and Nemeth said tunnel construction would improve the decline and restore about 16% of its lost supply.
The Newsom administration’s petition package has been considered by Nicole Quenzi, who heads the state’s Water Commission’s independent administrative hearing. State officials oppose some of Quenzi’s original rulings, which are considering questions such as requests for historical data on the amount of water previously diverted under the rights and whether approval of the project would be in the public interest.
Nemeth issued a statement directed to Kuenzi on March 24, saying that the question of whether water use is in the public interest does not apply and that the petition will only apply in cases where new water rights are to its new water.
“Importantly, Congress has already determined that the state’s water projects are in the public interest, and Governor Newsom has made it clear that this project is of paramount importance to current and future Californians,” writes Nemeth. “Unfortunately, the Administrative Hearing office has combined the petitions and fundamentally expanded the scope of this hearing.”
Saying that it could lead to costly delays, Nemeth urged Kuenzi to “build an auditory process that will result in a final decision by the full state water committee before the second half of 2026.”
Opponents of the project, including several Northern California County environmental groups, tribes and representatives who rely on water from the Delta — responded with a letter urging the board to make it clear that political interference would not shake up the outcome.
“The board must assert its own independence and the independence of the hearing officer,” they wrote. “This loss of independence, or even the appearance that it appears to have been lost, will undermine the credibility of the Board and its mission.”
Ossha Meslube, the lawyer who signed the letter on behalf of Contra Costa and Solano counties and other local agencies, said the board’s integrity is at stake and there is public trust and trust in the process.
There have been at least seven cases that challenge the project in court or in appeal, and Meserve is involved in most of them. She said that building the tunnel would “destroy farms, rural communities and the environment all at incredibly expensive costs.”
Opponents say the tunnels will threaten native fish species that are already suffering from massive population decline. They said instead should strengthen their water supply by upgrading the Delta’s aging levee, investing more in wastewater recycling, locally capture rainwater and making other improvements to use the water more efficiently.
As part of a campaign against the project, the nonprofit restored the Delta last month, releasing the results of a statewide survey of 649 registered voters. When first asked about the project, 46% were positive, 24% disagree, and 29% were unsure. However, after the same people presented the argument on both sides of the argument, the opponents rose to 58%, with 34% in favor and 8% undecided.
In a February poll reporting a 4-percent point margin of error, 62% said they preferred to invest in “developing local water supplies to ensure that California communities are more resilient and ready to tackle the threats of fires, droughts and floods.”
“The state must abandon this outdated project that they have lived in for decades,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta. “People reject expensive megaprojects like the Delta Tunnel.”
However, many leaders of Southern California’s large water agency are supporting the project and view it as a viable option to improve the reliability of supply from Northern California.
In December, the board of directors of Southern California’s Metropolitan Water District voted to spend $141.6 million on most of the preliminary planning work. The district, which supplies water to 19 million people, is not expected to decide whether to invest in building the tunnel until 2027.
Managers of MWD and other agencies, who are members of the state water contractor, have said they disagree with some of the hearing officers’ recent judgments.
In a letter to the board, the 19 water managers wrote: “Each day of delays in building this critical project, the cost of the project increases by more than $1 million.”
The current hearing is not the only issue related to prior to the board of directors. In January, the Newsom administration also filed a separate petition seeking an extension of the time to 2085 for water rights granting.
Chandra Chilmakuri, general manager of water policy for state water contractors, said that time extensions are another issue and must be addressed individually. If it is considered part of the current process, he said it could further delay approval.
He said water agency leaders hope that the board will reach a decision to amend the water rights permit as soon as possible.
“It’s very important to maintain a schedule,” Chilmakri said.
The state’s plans require construction to begin in late 2029 and complete the tunnel in 2042.
Source link
