Long way to go for water bond until November ballot
By: Rose Creasman

Some of the most heated debates in California's water wars revolve around the Bay Delta. California might need to find a different solution to its water problems, if poll results showing voter support of the proposed $11 billion water bond are any indication.

More than 55 percent of 600 Californians polled would vote no on the measure, according to a study released by Tulchin Research on Feb. 19. Further analysis of the findings by Tulchin shows that nearly three times as many voters strongly oppose the bond as strongly support it: “32 percent of voters indicate they will definitely vote no on the bond if the election were held today compared to only 12 percent of voters who would definitely vote yes.”

“Voters recognize this bond as bad water policy and bad fiscal policy at a time when California is drowning in red ink," said Sierra Club California's Jim Metropulos in a statement regarding the poll. "We need clean water and we need a better water policy, but this bond is not going to get us there."

The Sierra Club California is one of several groups opposing the bond that paid for the poll, including Clean Water Action, Southern California Watershed Alliance, the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, Planning and Conservation League and Restore the Delta.

Proponents of the measure criticize the pollsters' methods, saying that the results quoted in the press release were based on one question from a longer poll, without including information about prior questions.

Passed by state legislators in November, the long-awaited bond, which includes four policy bills and one bond, aims to please everyone—including the fishing industry, Delta farmers and water suppliers to Central Valley farms and over 25 million people in Southern California. The package’s largest push is to address the major source of California’s water: the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. According to the California Department of Water Resources, the 2009 Comprehensive Water Package “represents major steps towards ensuring a reliable water supply for future generations, as well as restoring the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and other ecologically sensitive areas.”

If approved, San Diego is slated to receive at least $227 million for water projects next year, the bulk of which would help to finance the dam raise at the San Vicente Reservoir.

Janette Littler, partner in Callidus Consulting Group and former campaign manager for city attorney Jan Goldsmith, said that the bond’s success depends on the skill of the campaign in getting its message to voters.

“Voters are smart. They’re going to decide whether or not they believe this is a good investment in infrastructure,” said Littler. “Statewide initiatives in California are very expensive; it’s harder to communicate now that there are fewer dollars to do it. In the midst of this economic downturn, when the public's focus is turning toward increasing government debt, it is not surprising that support for the water bond would be lagging.”

Still, Littler maintains that well-informed voters may be swayed in favor of the bond as long as its supporters run a good campaign.

“When we preserved the two-thirds legislative vote in 2003, we were outspent 2:1 and we still won around 54 percent of the vote,” Littler said. “You can be outspent and still win, but it’s very hard.”

The controversial water legislation continues to polarize within California’s gubernatorial race, though the bond itself is generally a nonpartisan issue. Republican candidate Meg Whitman supports the bond, calling it imperfect but necessary, despite the $2 to $3 billion she claims are unwarranted expenses. Fellow Republican opponent Steve Poizner refuses to issue any more debt until the state can balance its budget, while lone Democrat candidate Jerry Brown is undecided on the issue.

Dennis Cushman, assistant general manager of the San Diego County Water Authority, said the public agency is impartial—if slightly ambivalent—to the poll’s results.

“We don’t have an opinion one way or another,” Cushman said in response to touting of the poll’s findings by opponents of the water bond. “Our job is to present the information in a fair and even-handed manner.”

Cushman added that the study didn’t seem exhaustive, and that he had never heard of the research firm.

“We’ve given hundreds of presentations about the water situation in San Diego over the past few years, and we’ll continue to do so, bond or no bond,” he said.