Archive for the ‘Delta & Environment’ Category
The 29th Annual California Coastal Cleanup Day, the state’s largest volunteer event, will take place on Saturday, September 21st, 2013. The event is expected to draw more than 70,000 volunteers who will combat marine debris at over 800 locations throughout the state by removing the trash that has accumulated on California’s beaches and inland shorelines over the past year. Get out there, join the effort in Antioch. Last year, over 100 participants volunteered There are three locations to choose from: Antioch Marina, Prewett Park & Fulton Shipyard. Select your location when you complete your registration (see link below). Last year over 100 participants came together to clean along the Delta and create awareness of why trash so damaging to our aquatic and coastal areas.
Coastal Cleanup Day provides a way for tens of thousands of Californians to remove trash from our environments, but also reinforces that each of us, as consumers of goods and producers of those goods, has a responsibility to reduce, prevent, and clean up marine debris. For more information, and to register to volunteer, visit www.art4antioch.org/Coastal-Cleanup.asp or email Diane@Art4Antioch.org. or call Diane Gibson-Gray at (925) 325-9897 or Julie Haas-Wajdowicz at (925) 779-7097.
For more information visit www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/ccd2.html.
By Restore the Delta
Sacramento, CA – Restore the Delta, opponents of Gov. Jerry Brown’s rush to build Peripheral Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries today released its “Simple Math” total of costs.
“The Brown Administration has released tens of thousands of pages but not one single, simple accounting of the costs,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta. “They are hiding the math because the cost keeps escalating and the benefits diminishing,”
Cost of Peripheral Tunnels:
Construction $14.5 billion
Operations & Maintenance $ 1.5 billion
Interest on Tunnel Revenue Bonds $26.3 billion
Habitat and Conservation $ 7.0 billion
Interest on General Obligation Bonds $ 3.2 billion
Administration and Research $ 1.6 billion
TOTAL $54.1 billion
All costs drawn from BDCP documents.
Restore the Delta is working everyday through public education and citizen activism to ensure the restoration and future sustainability of the California Delta. Your general contribution can help us sponsor outreach events, enable us to educate Californians on what makes the Delta so special, and assist us in building a coalition that will be recognized by government water agencies as they make water management decisions. Restore the Delta is a charitable 501(c)3 organization. Donations are tax deductible. For more information visit www.RestoretheDelta.org.
Call BDCP a disaster for the Bay-Delta region and urge officials to halt process and consider the concerns raised by northern California stakeholders
SACRAMENTO, CA – On Thursday, May 30, 2013, several Members of Congress from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta region spoke out against the current Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and the lack of input afforded their constituents at a press conference in Sacramento. The current BDCP proposed by Governor Brown, the U.S. Department of Interior and south of the Delta interests would devastate the Delta region and ignores the concerns repeatedly raised by stakeholders in the Bay-Delta region.
Recently, the State of California released a 20,000 page long Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for the BDCP. Chapters 1-7 of the plan were released in the last few months and Chapters 8-12, which include the financing mechanism, were released yesterday.
Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents most of Antioch, said, “The Governor recently released additional information on his deeply-flawed plan for the Delta region, which further proves he is intent on forcing this plan forward without any regard for the farmers, families and small business owners who rely upon a healthy Delta for their livelihoods, or for the incredible environmental damage that will result. As it stands, the plan will cost billions of dollars, devastate the most valuable water resource we have in California, and ultimately create no new water. There is a better way forward, and it must include the input of the people who stand to lose the most if the Delta is destroyed.”
Rep. George Miller, who represents the other portion of Antioch, commented, “Governor Brown and his administration officials have failed to demonstrate that they are taking into account the real physical and financial harm that can come to Bay-Delta communities if a BDCP plan is pushed through without the proper cost benefit analysis of alternatives, an adequate finance plan, or without acknowledging the best available science—science that has pointed to the real possibility that this plan could overtax our water resources and devastate the Bay-Delta region. Without doing so the BDCP is further than ever from a sustainable policy. It is time to seriously reevaluate this plan to ensure it fulfills the co-equal goals that it is mandated to adhere to, and takes into consideration the concerns of the businesses, families and communities that rely on a viable, healthy Bay-Delta region for their livelihoods.”
Other Members of Congress from Northern California added their thoughts, as well:
“The State of California, in partnership with the federal government, is on the verge of recommending a plan for California’s water future that does nothing to solve California’s water problems and is a disaster for northern California. For more than six years the BDCP has ploughed its way ahead led by a very small group of individuals, none of whom represent northern California. Our constituents and stakeholders in the Bay-Delta region have been shut out of the process. To find a long-term solution all of the stakeholders, not just the beneficiaries of the project, must have a seat at the decision-making table. We can and we must do better for California. Unfortunately, the current BDCP falls far short.” – Rep. Doris Matsui (CA-6)
“The proposed BDCP is not a workable solution. It puts the interests of South-of-Delta water contractors ahead of the Delta’s and North-of-Delta’s farmers, fishers and small business owners. Livelihoods are at stake. Until we have a plan that is transparent, based on sound science and developed with all stake-holders at the table, then any process that moves us closer to building these tunnels will recklessly risk billions of California tax dollars and thousands of jobs. Let’s take the time to get this right.” – Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-5)
“The California water system is under enormous stress from a growing population and climate change. The proposed peripheral tunnel plan fails to deliver a real solution for this fundamental problem. Without adding a single drop of new water to the state’s supply, the tunnels would deliver massive amounts of water from Northern to Southern California, destroying the Sacramento Delta in the process. Instead of wreaking havoc on the Delta region with a massive, expensive plumbing system, we need a cost-effective, comprehensive water plan. I have outlined a strategy that would add to our water supply through conservation, recycling, storage, and improvements to our levees while respecting water rights and using the best science. It’s time for a midstream correction to the BDCP: let’s bring everyone to the table and develop a plan that meets the needs of all Californians.” – Rep. John Garamendi (CA-3)
“All of us here understand that water is critical in our state and that there needs to be a bay delta solution that does not put south-of-delta water contractors ahead of everyone in or north-of-delta. It’s vital for our health, our environment, and our wallets that we have a comprehensive, long-term plan for securing water access and storage that’s based on sound science. The livelihoods of our local farmers, anglers, and small business owners are at stake, and the potential risk to jobs and billions of California tax dollars is too big to ignore. Continuing with this plan, without getting input from all stakeholders, and without considering other alternatives is a bad idea for Sacramento County families.” – Rep. Ami Bera (CA-7)
Learn how sustainability and pollution prevention can help reduce operating costs while at the same time have less impact on the environment.
Join us for Coffee with the Chamber May 16, 2013
“Learn the benefits of becoming a Green Certified Business”
Speaker: Mr. Paris Greenlee, P.E., Pollution Prevention Manager
Contra Costa Environmental Health
Green Business Program
Date: Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Time: 8:30am – 10:00am
Where: Antioch Chamber of Commerce Offices
101 H Street, Unit 4, Antioch
Bring plenty of business cards, a pen and paper! Look forward to seeing you there!
For more information visit www.AntiochChamber.com or call (925) 757-1800.
No Cost-Benefit Analysis of No-Tunnels Alternative; Hiding the Cost so Taxpayers Won’t Know What They’ll Pay, What They’ll Get in Return?
By Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Campaign Director, Restore the Delta
SACRAMENTO, CA – Restore the Delta (RTD), a coalition opposed to the Brown Administration’s rush to construct massive Peripheral Tunnels to take millions of acre-feet of water from the Delta, today said the Brown Administration appears to have canceled a comprehensive benefit-cost analysis of its BDCP proposal for Peripheral Tunnels to export Sacramento -San Joaquin/San Francisco Bay-Delta water, mainly to benefit unsustainable mega-farms on the west side of the Central Valley. The decision to hide the total costs from public scrutiny once again reveals how the Brown Administration is continuing to doctor up the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, a fatally flawed plan, in order to sell it as something that it’s not to Californians.
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta said, “In refusing to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the Peripheral Tunnels, the Brown Administration is not following the guidelines established by its own agencies. In its rush to build a project that would exterminate salmon runs, destroy sustainable family farms and saddle taxpayers with tens of billions in debt, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the Central Valley, the Administration has yet to complete a valid cost-benefit analysis of its Tunnels and seriously examine a no-tunnels solution. It’s little wonder the Brown Administration is backing away from a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis. The only one done to date showed the costs were $7 billion short of the costs.”
Univ. of the Pacific economist Dr. Jeffrey Michael noticed the change and reported it on his blog. The Administration had contracted with the Brattle Group to perform a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the BDCP. The Brown Administration is rigging analysis of the proposal by refusing to include a no-tunnels alternative, and excluding some costs that would fall on water ratepayers. Now, they have backed away from a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis and plan to dump partial and incomplete studies on the public. How many water ratepayers will examine 6 partial studies and synthesize their results into a full picture of who pays how much and who benefits how much? They are counting on no one doing that analysis – one that is their duty and obligation to conduct.
“This project will cost billions upon billions of dollars to give ever-increasing amounts of taxpayer and ratepayer subsidized water to corporate agriculture and real estate developers to make millions upon millions in profits. California will not go dry without these tunnels. There are no guarantees that southern California residents will even receive more water,” said Barrigan-Parrilla.
Barrigan-Parrilla said the Brown Administration doesn’t want the true cost of the project known, “The ‘tunnels’ represent more than simply a transfer of good quality water around the Delta. They also represent the largest transfer of private wealth in our history.”
The common people will pay for the tunnels and a few people will make millions. It will turn a Delta waterway, already in crisis, into a sewer pipe. It will be bad for the fish, the ocean and the people of California.
“BDCP is still not considering any alternatives for meeting the coequal goals except the peripheral tunnels, although there are several that could be evaluated,” added Barrigan-Parrilla.
However, in a letter to State Legislators from California Natural Resources Agency Secretary John Laird, “The alternative of a 3,000 cubic feet per second Delta conveyance – which the Portfolio-Based Conceptual Alternative calls for – will be studied in this process. As with all 15 alternatives that we are studying in this EIR process, it will be evaluated against the co-equal goals, as well as other goals including reliability in the face of an extreme event.”
The eight-point alternative being pushed by Congressman George Miller, who represents part of Antioch in the U.S. House of Representatives, which can be read by clicking here, includes the 3,000 cfs Delta conveyance, instead of the two-tunnel plan which will move 9,000 cfs.
Frazier defends Delta in response to state official’s comments that it “cannot be saved,” McNerney calls for resignationMonday, April 29th, 2013
By Allen Payton
Assemblyman Jim Frazier (D-Oakley) released the following statement today in response to reported comments from California Natural Resources Deputy Director Jerry Meral that “BDCP is not about, and has never been about saving the Delta. The Delta cannot be saved.”
“I am appalled by the reported statement from the Deputy Director. This confirms what many of us in the Delta region have long suspected: that BDCP is not about Delta restoration, it’s about Southern California water interests.
For those of us who live, work, and play on the Delta, there is no doubt that ‘conveyance’ means the decimation of the Delta as a critical resource, and a devastating impact on the communities that depend on it, including the habitat that the Delta sustains.”
However, according to an article on the Huffington Post, “The Brown administration…defended …Meral and said his words were taken out of context.
Advocates Tom Stokely and Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla said Meral’s comments were made during a casual conversation with Stokely at an April 15 event.
According to Barrigan-Parrilla, head of Stockton-based Restore the Delta, Meral said that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan is not about saving the Delta, and that the Delta cannot be saved. She said Friday that she was standing a short distance away when she heard the comments, and wrote them down. Stokely said Friday that her account is correct.
A Resources spokesman said Meral’s comments were taken out of context during a discussion about the ‘potentially calamitous threats’ the Delta faces from sea level rise, earthquakes and levee failures.
Both advocates said Meral had been talking about his concern that a mega-flood could someday swamp the Central Valley, as it did in 1861-62.”
In response to Meral’s comments, five Democrat members of Congress whose districts cover portions of the California Delta, including Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Stockton, who also represents most of Antioch, have called on Governor Brown for Meral’s immediate resignation.
According to an article in the Stockton Record, “It’s not surprising that opponents of the administration’s water plan would exploit and politicize out-of-context comments ‘reported’ by a longtime critic of the project,” Resources spokesman Richard Stapler said in an email. “The administration remains deeply committed to maintaining a healthy Delta ecosystem.”