Senior Member
An important victory for the delta & crucial upcoming public meeting to stop tunnels
Senior Member
Indeed good news....... quite astounding.....this is not the first time a financial plan for the tunnels has been absent.
There is definitely varying degrees of "Accountability"...... Corporations, especially those that are publicly traded on the stock exchanges are certainly held accountable and their management and decision making is arduously scrutinized. There are a number of ways corporations and their 'management' are held accountable. I can't say the same thing about the politicians behind WaterFix AKA Tunnels.
In this case, Restore the Delta steps up and fights for accountability. Why do they have to fight for what should be law applying to those in public office funded by TAX PAYER money?! It's criminal.
In many cases, even the smallest budgeted projects/tasks identified as needed to accomplishing a broad general objective at a corporation must be vetted and scrutinized via prioritization processes (feasibility, alternatives, etc.) before commencing, etc. (I'm over simplifying strategic planning....... so my apologies)
Nevertheless, simply apply the Tunnel Project to any of the fundamental decision making tools, matrix, prioritization tools, etc. and it does not pencil out. Especially when it appears that many of the pre and post construction costs are not included in the estimated $16 billion....... this smells the same as the way Oroville Dam was developed....... "The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree".
I'm by no means an expert on high level strategic planning. Only providing an observation on a friendly fly fishing forum.
Forum Godfather
Waterfix Finances....
This project in some form or another has been studied to death over at least 30 years as it was initially proposed decades before the turn of the century. Remember the peripheral canal and the rejection by the voters at the polls??? The problem was always that it made no economic sense and caused environmental damage. Politically, for the governor, it's a must do project. So, he's doing everything he can to make it happen, up to and including making every move to assure that ratepayers/taxpayers foot the bill. Waterfix has been examined by economists from NorCal universities and, with the exception of UC Berkeley, concluded that the project wasn't cost beneficial. Of course, none of this takes into account the aging portion of the CVP/SWP from the pumps to the ends of the canals. Guess who will pay for the repairs/upgrades to damages to bridges/overpasses caused by over pumping of groundwater. After all, Waterfix only provides for 35 miles of tunnels.
If you're a ratepayer receiving water from the SWP, you can look forward to paying increased bills for water delivery and (as a taxpayer) footing a portion of the bill from the general fund to service the bond debt and Delta restoration (finding a place in the Delta to dump tunnel muck and calling it restoration) over the next 50 years. The rest of us will suffer the fate of paying for servicing the bond debt as taxpayers. Brown's gift to growers and water contractors.
That's enough ranting from me....
Last edited by Darian; 08-10-2018 at 07:59 PM.
"America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won't cross the street to vote."
Author unknown
Senior Member
Rant away! Technically, I do not see it as "ranting" as what you state is pretty true.Originally Posted by Darian
This project in some form or another has been studied to death over at least 30 years as it was initially proposed decades before the turn of the century. Remember the peripheral canal and the rejection by the voters at the polls??? The problem was always that it made no economic sense and caused environmental damage. Politically, for the governor, it's a must do project. So, he's doing everything he can to make it happen, up to and including making every move to assure that ratepayers/taxpayers foot the bill. Waterfix has been examined by economists from NorCal universities and, with the exception of UC Berkeley, concluded that the project wasn't cost beneficial. Of course, none of this takes into account the aging portion of the CVP/SWP from the pumps to the ends of the canals. Guess who will pay for the repairs/upgrades to damages to bridges/overpasses caused by over pumping of groundwater. After all, Waterfix only provides for 35 miles of tunnels.
If you're a ratepayer receiving water from the SWP, you can look forward to paying increased bills for water delivery and (as a taxpayer) footing a portion of the bill from the general fund to service the bond debt and Delta restoration (finding a place in the Delta to dump tunnel muck and calling it restoration) over the next 50 years. The rest of us will suffer the fate of paying for servicing the bond debt as taxpayers. Brown's gift to growers and water contractors.
That's enough ranting from me....
"Ranting" is more like what a certain person does on Twitter every day........
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks