16 environmental justice, tribal and fishing groups announce opposition to ‘More Water Now’

By Dan Bacher | @DanBacher |

SACRAMENTO—  Sixteen tribal, environmental justice, fishing, and conservation  groups on Tuesday, December 21, announced their strong opposition to  the “More Water Now” ballot measure initiative, otherwise known as the  “Water Infrastructure Funding Act of 2022.”

The  initiative, being pushed by Central Valley agribusiness and water  districts to fund an array of new water projects in California, is being  circulated for signatures and could potentially be placed on the  November 2022 ballot.

Groups  announcing their opposition include: Sierra Club California, California  Indian Environmental Alliance, Society of Native Nations, Idle No More,  Restore the Delta, Azul, Golden State Salmon Association, Sunrise  Movement OC, California Coastal Protection Network, Health the Bay,  Surfrider Foundation, Los Angeles Waterkeeper, Orange County  Coastkeeper, The River Project, Heal the Bay, and Social Eco Education.

Proponents  of the measure say they represent “a growing coalition that brings  together Californians from all backgrounds, united by a single goal:  Let’s overcome droughts and climate change by investing in a 21st  century water infrastructure.”

They claim on their website that The Water Infrastructure Funding Act of 2022 initiative  “funds construction of water supply infrastructure and water  conservation programs to end water scarcity in California forever” for  “an estimated $50 billion over the next ten years (less than this fiscal  year’s state budget surplus).”

“From  California’s vast tracts of irrigated farmland that feed the world, to  the tens of millions of Californians that have built an economy that is  the envy of the world, it is time to upgrade California’s water system  to create sustainable, abundant water,” their website states.

“When  water is abundant, everyone wins. Urban customers and farmers have  plenty of water even in dry years, with plenty of additional water to  preserve and improve California’s precious ecosystems,” initiative  advocates contend.

Water Districts  endorsing the initiative include the East Orange County  Water District, Mesa Water District, Olivenhain Water District, Orange  County Water District, Serrano Water District and Yorba Linda Water  District.

Organizations endorsing it  include the California Latino Water Coalition, California Milk Producers  Council, California Water Alliance, Central Valley Taxpayers  Association, Los Angeles County Business Federation, National Latino  Ranchers and Farmers Association and Tulare County Farm Bureau.

Cities  and Counties endorsing it include the City of Newport Beach, City of  Porterville, City of Woodlake, Kings County and Tulare County.

Finally, businesses backing  “More Water Now” include Barcellos Farms, Duarte Nursery, Fowler  Packing Co., Granville Homes, Hammond Ranch, Harris Farms, John Kautz  Farms and Pacific Farm Management,

On  the other hand, rather than being an “everyone wins” proposition as  advocates contend, opponents say the initiative will fund  “environmentally destructive” water projects by siphoning money from the  state General Fund.

“Among the  most harmful parts of the initiative is a provision that would amend  the State Constitution to siphon money from the state General Fund to be  allocated to provide minimum funding to environmentally destructive  water projects,” according to Sierra Club California in a  statement.  “Earmarking these funds for storage and supply projects will  severely impede funding for other public amenities that depend on the  General Fund, such as health care, fire fighting, housing, and other  public services.”

Opponents also note  that the initiative also includes a provision that would allow the  Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to override decisions by the  Coastal Commision – including approvals, denials, and/or issuances of  permits that include requirements for environmental protection.

“These  projects include dams, reservoirs, ocean desalination plants in Tsunami  zones adjacent to the Ascon superfund site, and other projects that  have documented negative impacts on the environment,” the Sierra Club  continued. “How these projects are prioritized for funding is not  dependent on efficiency, meaning that projects that are the least  sustainable may secure funding. Moreover, there would be no  environmental standards for the projects.”

“This  measure would take California in the wrong direction regarding water  supply management instead of investing in solutions we need to stay  resilient in the face of the climate crisis,” the Club stated.

Again, the measure’s backers are largely agricultural businesses who would financially benefit from the measure passing, as the LA Times reported in early December.

Tribal,  environmental justice, fishing and conservation groups leaders  issued statements citing their many reasons for opposing the initiative:

“Our  oceans are in much need of healing,” said Lydia Poncé, Mayo, Quechua.  “The ocean and all the waterways are life-giving as part of Earth  Mother. The proposed plans and the earmarked funds will further  desecrate Her health. As Indigenous People, we do not support Ecocide,  and Terracide. We defend and honor Nature’s Rights; Her rights include  defending and honoring the Spirit of Water.”

“California  should immediately be supporting a wide scale return of Tribal  management of California’s ecosystems,” said Sherri Norris, Executive  Director, “California Indian Environmental Alliance. “Tribal management  created the resilient local food systems and groundwater recharge of our  state’s naturally filtered drinking water. Indigenous management of  forested landscapes created balanced carbon sinks. In October 2020,  Governor Newsom called for ‘accelerated use of nature-based solutions’  to meet California’s climate change goals (Executive Order N-82-20) and  through Executive Order N-15-19 created the California Truth &  Healing Council.”

“It is clear the  Governor does not understand how the proposed Sites and Delta Conveyance  projects would undercut those efforts and be a continuation of the  destruction of local habitats, global climate pollution and the  continuation of Tribal cultural genocide. These wide-reaching projects  are contrary to Tribal management systems and cannot be engineered to  support restoration. Perhaps this is why the state is afraid to complete  the EIR/EIS studies before these projects are approved,” noted Norris.

“Committing  unrestricted general fund dollars to water districts that are in  climate change denial, that have used too much water for years  unsustainably, and that refuse to address issues of water equity and  affordability would make for dangerous policy and wasteful spending,”  stated Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director, Restore the Delta.  “General fund dollars are to support real-time priorities in state  spending, not special interests without accountability.”

“If  adopted, this initiative would be a step in the wrong direction for  California,” said Brandon  Dawson, Director, Sierra Club California.  “The climate crisis and its impacts on California water supplies demand  that we move away from environmentally damaging storage projects like  the type this ballot measure would fund. There are more reasonable and  smarter ways to meet California’s water demand, and this initiative  doesn’t provide those options.”

“Californians  cannot afford to take away money from social programs to invest it in  carbon-intensive water boondoggles that could further industrialize our  coasts for private profit,” stated Andrea Leon-Grossmann, Director of  Climate Action, Azul, “Enabling polluters to gut coastal and  environmental protections to erode the human right to water is a step  backwards for environmental justice and climate goals.”