Pacific Institute Report on CA Prop 1
Published on by Water Network Research, Official research team of The Water Network in Government
If Passed,Proposition 1 Would Be the Fourth-largestWater Bond in California History, Funding a WideRange of Water-Related Actions and Infrastructure with a Total Cost Exceeding $14 Billion over 30 Years, This Report is an Independent Analysis of the Bill
With the state facing serious and deepening water challenges, voters on November 4thwill be asked whether to approve Proposition 1, the Water Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014.
The ballot measure would raise $7.12 billion in new general obligation bonds along with reallocating an additional $425 million of previously authorized, but unissued, bonds to fund a wide range of water-related actions and infrastructures. When the full costs of the bond are assessed, including interest payments, Proposition 1 will cost over $14 billion and be the fourth largest water bond in California history.
The Pacific Institute, an internationally-renowned independent think tank focused on water issues, has released areportthat helps voters untangle the complexities of the water bond measure.
The Pacific Institute is taking no formal position for or against Proposition 1.
The report, Insights into Proposition 1: The 2014 California Water Bond, and itsexecutive summary, notes that California's pressing water troubles require expanded investment, changes in policy and institutions, and in some cases fundamentally new technologies, policies, laws, and behavior.
The water bond is only one solution - and perhaps an imperfect one at that - when many are needed.
"California voters are faced with a difficult decision on the water bond," says Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute.
"Our new report looks at the subtleties along with the complexities of the bond measure to help voters make wise decisions at the polls."
With the goal of informing voters, the report analyzes the bond's key provisions and their potential impacts.
Thereportexplains how funds would be allocated, including how the water storage funds may be divided among competing projects.
It also describes how the bond addresses the needs of disadvantaged communities and ecosystems.
An overarching conclusion of the report is that while the taxpayer-funded bond could provide benefits to California's communities and the state's environment — including specific water supply, reliability and environmental quality improvements — those benefits are not guaranteed.
The Institute concludes that Proposition 1 would have little impact on the immediate challenges posed byCalifornia's severe drought.
Some of the state's most pressing water needs are slated to receive relatively limited portions of the total funds.
Thereportnotes that a clear benefit of the bond would be the allocation of funds for select ecosystem protection and restoration as well as improvements to surface and groundwater quality.
If Proposition 1 passes, Institute recommends in the report that the California Water Commission developrigorous, independent, and transparent rules governing evaluation and quantification of public benefits from proposed water storage projects.
It recommends that decisions about the rest of the funds be made with a focus on meeting public andecosystem needs for safe and reliable water, improvements in efficient use, and reductions in the risks of future droughts and floods.
The report makes it clear that passage of Proposition 1 would be just the beginning of a long-term investment to fund better institutions, smarter planning, and more effective water management strategies. It can be, at best, a down payment on our water future.
Source: Pacific Institute
Read More Related Content On This Topic - Click Here
Media
Taxonomy
- Water Management
- Financing
- Governance & Planning