State

Next year there will be an $11Billion bond measure placed on the ballot to finance the "Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010".

This is for us, Californians! We will help fund this and decide the future of our state instead of the Federal Government getting in the way and allow CA to capture more storm runoff in the way of dams and underwater storage, protect the Delta, and utilize our own resources.

We must stay involved, however, and NOT let Big Government tell US what they will do...we must tell THEM what we want!

I don't plan to vote yes on any water measure that does not include limited growth measures to evaluate water needs and retain our agricultural land.

We've had a number of years of unprecidented growth of large "McMansion" projects in the desert. This will just start again withhout some limitations.

"we will help fund this"

Really ? It's a bond measure, we'll pay the interest and 20 years from now, our kids will pay the principal when it comes due. Along with the several hundred billion dollars the state owes on everything else we've bought with bonds. Ditto, the trillions of dollars the fed owes everyone.

Sounds like a great idea ! Even better that we actually don't have to pay for it ! Screw our kids !

The State has no jurisdiction over local counties or cities on growth policy. Don't confuse what the water legislation is for. We lack sufficient domestic supplies and are in danger of losing even more if our infrastructure is not repaired. Insisting that this measure be linked to a side argument as a condition for support is typical of what passes for considered deliberation of proposals in this State. It took a lot to get this deal hammered out and any effort to sabotage it over extraneous issues will hopefully be exposed for all to see.

beagledude: Make a distinction between a priority issue and one of the more usual silly proposals submitted to voters. Does the State have billions of surplus funds anywhere? No. Do we need to get this project started immediately after decades of dithering? Yes.

Paying interest on borrowed money is how the world works. There are too few sources for loans as it is with our crappy credit rating from past mismanagement. There is no free lunch. A Cash basis for the 5th largest economy on the planet is more silliness.

Paying for "new water" is something California MUST do and relying on the government IS SILLY!

Does this mean continue the distribution of water from the north? How about bringing water from the west (salt water from the ocean)? We can collect rainwater and store storm water runoff...conserve and just use less. Are we reusing our greywater?

All this will take action by the people, not rely on government to fix everything, oh wait...we are supposed to BE the government! So, what are YOU doing to insure our next generation will have water?

This is the perfect example of the legitimate function of government. Individuals have neither the resources or authority to resolve a statewide issue such as water supply for future needs. There are no examples of such broad scope projects being handled by volunteers who wish to do good.

The way I see it, the state of CA stands to make some of the biggest water infrastructure anywhere in the world. With the 5th or 7th or whatever largest economy in the world, and with population nearly 40 million, it is a complete joke that we are relying on canals and pipes through "environmentally sensitive" regions to bring SO CAL our water. We should have been desalinating for decades now, and I don't see why there isn't a big push for this now. We have the technology, it's even relatively affordable compared to 10 years ago. Some small districts along the coast to desalinate. But if So Cal implemented a large scale desalination infrastructure effort, we could be selling water to Las Vegas and Phoenix. Why politicians want to do it any other way is perplexing. The Pacific ocean is a constant reliable source; we never have to wait for mother nature.

I guess that would piss off anti-development thinking individuals to some extent, but face it: The development will happen one way or another, so it might as well be done properly. Bringing more water to the area will solve many problems related to groundwater overdrawing, overall supply shortages, and reservoir/lake/stream stability.

The first mention of cost scares everyone because the chuckleheads scream when tax increases are involved. They see no connection between water supply and maintenance or actual enhancement of our water sources. Desalinization is being uses in the lower Baja Peninsula to promote expansion of hotel/tourism. Can Mexico be better equipped to take advantage of proven technology than the US? Apparently so. The middle east has many more examples of desalinization bringing prosperity to arid deserts and there are no complaints about cost.

We seem to be saddled with such poor thinking among our population that we are doomed to recreating the dustbowl in the Southwest out of ignorance and stupidity.

Desal is spoken about quite often and technology is advancing to where we will be using more and more salt water. There are actually plants along the coast of California, already. The primary issue is the cost of pushing the water uphill and until we solve our energy issues in this state, we wil not be utilizing the desalination technology to it's fullest - heck, look at the push back just to bring water from the north, and that's a downhill run!

Here's a broad breakdown of what the $11.1 Billion Bond would fund:
$455 Million for drought relief and wastewater improvements
$1.4 Billion for infrastructure improvements
$2.25 Billion for Delta restoration (levees & water quality)
$3 Billion for storage (dams and aquifers)
$1.7 Billion for watershed restoration and enhancements
$1 Billion for groundwater cleanup
$1.25 Billion for water recycling, conservation & efficiency projects.

Don't like it? Contact your State Representative and be a part of the solution by doing your part in conserving and protecting this precious resource for generations to come!

Mr Wayne: There would be no need to push the water up a hill. The coast gets most of it's water from inland sources so it would simply require a swap. Lake Arrowhead is buying MWD water but the actual water being delivered is through Feather River water in exchange for San Bernardino basin water being sold to MWD, being sold to LACSD.

Feather River water is pumped over the Tehachapis and is not entirely a downhill flow.