OKAY [inaudible]
ARM.
CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER OF THE
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND
WATER COMMITTED --
WE I DON'T HAVE AN AGENDA OUT
THERE IF WE DON'T FOR PURPOSES
OF THE RECORD UP PUT IT IN THIS
IS THE A NET THAT THE INITIATIVE
STATUTE AUTHORIZING BONDS TO
FUND.
A PROJECT FOR WATER SUPPLY AND
QUALITY WATERSHED FISH WIRE A
WILDLIFE.
WATER CONVEYANCE AND GROUND
WATER SUSTAINABILITY IN STORAGE
TO NUMBER. EIGHTEEN NO SIX THE
AGENDA FOR TODAY.
IT'S GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU DID ON
THE OTHER COMMITTEE BECAUSE A MR
CONNOR GAVE ME THE TAPE LAST
TIME WHAT YOU TESTIFIED TO WILL
GET THE OVERVIEW FROM THE LA O.
BUT I REALLY WANTED TO GET
ENGAGED.
HARD QUESTIONS NOT THAT WILL
HAVE ANY IMPACT UPON WHAT THE
OUTCOME IS BUT I THINK IT'S OUR
OBLIGATION.
TO SHED LIGHT ON THIS PROCESS A
LITTLE BIT.
ON IN WHAT'S AND AND ASK A LOT
OF TOUGH QUESTIONS EH ABOUT THIS
IN A DIFFERENT MANNER THAN WE
DID WILL LET YOU MAKE QUICK
PRESENTATION SO.
AFTER MY OPENING COMMENTS WITH
OF AN OVERVIEW OF THIS OF THE
STATE BOND THAT.
BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN
THE WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS WE
CAN BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE
BIG PICTURE CONTEXT WHICH WILL
GET FROM THE LA.
THE INITIATIVE SPONSOR RESPONSE
PANEL WILL BE CITY TALK
ASSOCIATION OF THE CALIFORNIA
WATER AGENCIES KYLE JOHNSON
SIERRA CLUB Y. WATCH BOTH THE
PRESENTATIONS --
PUBLIC COMMENT IN CLOSING
COMMENTS BUT THE THE WHAT WE
WANT TO DO IS TO CUT YOU DON'T
NEED TO HAVE A OVERVIEW OF WHAT
THE DOCUMENT SAYS WE'VE READ IT
WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE WANT TO DO IS TO GET THE
COMMITTEE TO ASK AS MANY
QUESTIONS POSSIBLE.
ARMED WITH RESPECT.
TO DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE HOW
THEY WERE MADE FOUGHT THAT BUT
THE LARGER CONTEXT IS FOR
CALIFORNIA.
VOTERS ON IN MAKING THESE
DECISIONS ARE YOU KNOW WE HAVE
BEEN THROUGH THIS A LOT AND
CERTAINLY WE COULD HAVE BEEN YOU
CAME.
TO THE REPUBLIC CAME TO MY
OFFICE ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE.
SOME DEAL BUT YOU KNOW ONE OF
THE DARK SIDES OF THIS
INITIATIVE PROCESS WE'RE NOW
SEEING WITH ALL OF THESE DEALS
THAT WERE DOING.
THAT THE LARGER PUBLIC GOOD IS
OFTEN NOT.
AND IT IS IN THE LARGER ARRAY OF
CONTEXT OF ISSUES THAT WE'RE
FACING IS NOT ALWAYS THE
DETERMINATION IT'S THE ABILITY
OF PEOPLE TO SELF FUND. TO RAISE
MONEY THROUGH INTERESTED PARTIES
TO THEN PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS
STUFF THAT THEY POLLED THAT
LOOKS GOOD IT MIGHT HAVE A
BETTER A GOOD BENEFIT.
ON THE ONE HAND BUT ON THE OTHER
HAND.
IT'S NOT PROPERLY IN MY JUDGMENT
ANALYZED IN CONTEXT OF WHAT WE
SHOULD WE BE SPENDING OUR MONEY.
WHAT THOSE DETERMINATION SHOULD
BE THERE BASICALLY THAT THE
ISSUE OF BEING SELF FUNDED BY
SELECTORS WHO WANT TO USE THE?
BALLOT INITIATIVE TO GET A
REALLY SIGNIFICANT LEVERAGE OUT
OF ON THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE IT'S
ALWAYS EASY TO SO WATER WE KNOW
WHAT THAT POLLS LIKE.
AND AND THE PEOPLE THAT PUT THE
MOST AMOUNT OF MONEY UP --
SOMETIMES A WORTHY SOMETIMES ARE
NOT ONCE YOU GET THE THE
ATTENTION AND IS THAT ALL WAS
THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WHAT WE
REPRESENT THE REPUBLIC WE HAVE
TO LOOK AT HOMELESS ISSUES IN
HOUSING ISSUES AND AIR QUALITY
ISSUES AND ALL THE OTHER ISSUES
WHAT'S THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE.
OF OUR RESOURCES AND WHAT WE
TELL THE TAXPAYERS NOW I DON'T
ANTICIPATE THAT THE THIRTY EIGHT
MILLION PEOPLE.
THAT ARE WATCHING THIS HEARING
HERE TODAY.
ARE GOING TO INTEGRATE THIS WITH
THEIR BALLOTS DECISIONS.
BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AS
A RESPONSIBLE LEGISLATURE THAT
WE ASK ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS SO
THAT AT LEAST WE'VE MADE A
RECORD.
OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE A MISTER
BONDING HERE HAS WORKED FOR
YEARS ON THIS.
BUT IT WAS HIS DIET IS ENGINEERS
ARE SUGAR IN THIS AND SUGARY
DRINKS AND NOW HE'S BEING FORCED
ON IT ON A PUBLIC POLICY
DECISION. TO BE LEVERAGED ARE
THOSE THE RIGHT THINGS TO DO AND
I THINK SOME OF THOSE SAME
ARGUMENTS SHOULD AT LEAST BE A
DAYLIGHT IT HERE FOR PURPOSES OF
TODAY.
SO IN THAT CONTEXT WHAT WE WANT
TO DO.
AND THE DEBT SIDE REASON WE ASK
FOR THE OVERVIEW OF STATE BOND
THAT.
IS THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE HERE IS
IT'S NOT YOU CAN ASK WHETHER IS
WORTHY OR NOT.
BUT HOW DOES THIS FIT IN THE BIG
PICTURE SO WE CAN START WITH THE
ALLEGE ANALYSTS WOULD APPRECIATE
IT AND GOT TO GIVE US THAT
CONTEXT.
SO WE CAN DECIDE DOES THESE HAVE
THE DATA BEFORE US.
AND AND DE LIKE THIS IN A WAY
THAT IS APPROPRIATE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE
TIME AND THANKS ON SUCH SHORT
NOTICE FOR PUT THIS TOGETHER
YEARS REALLY DID A GOOD JOB AND
A CLEAR CUT AND PATIENCE AD
STUFF FOR I'VE SEEN OVER THE
YEARS BECAUSE I'VE READ THAT
STUFF BUT STILL PUTTING IT
TOGETHER IS VERY VERY.
IMPORTANT AND BEFORE YOU START
I'D LIKE TO ASK MR COMMENTS WITH
RESPECT TO THIS HEARING.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
APPRECIATE YOUR ORGANIZATION.
ABSOLUTELY SIR OKAY.
PRESENCE [inaudible]
BUT PLEASE ARE A GOOD MORNING AS
SENATORS BRYAN BROWN WITH THE
ANALYST'S OFFICE WE DO HAVE A
HANDOUT WHICH SHOULD BE
DISTURBED BY THE SHIT SERGEANTS
NOW.
WHILE HE'S PASSING THAT OUR THE
DOCUMENTS IS OVER VIEW OF STATE%
BOND THAT THAT'S RIGHT THAT OF
THAT SIR.
OKAY AND WE DO ON HAVE THIS
POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE FOR ALL
THOSE TENS OF MILLIONS OF
VIEWERS OF THE HEARING --
JUST BEFORE I BEGIN MY COMMENTS
--
DO WANNA PREFACE THE REMARKS OF
BY AYING A COUPLE THINGS JUST
REMIND THE COMMITTEE THAT WE
ARE.
CURRENTLY THE PROCESS NOW
FINALIZING OUR ANALYSES FOR THE
NOVEMBER BALLOT SO THE NUMBER
THAT WE HAVE IN THE HANDOUT YOU
PLEASE YOU THOSE IS
SOMEWHAT-PRELIMINARY WILL BE
FINALIZING
THOSE OVER THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS
I DON'T EXPECT HIM TO CHANGE
MUCH BUT JUST WANNA PUT THAT OUT
THERE IN.
ALSO JUST REMIND THE COMMITTEE
OUR ROLE IN THE BALLOT PROCESS
WE ARE REQUIRED TO AND WE ARE
IMPARTIAL --
WE PROVIDE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSES
OF ALL THE BALLOT MEASURE.
IT'LL BE ON BALLOT.
NONE FOR THAT REASON WE WILL BE
DOING --
WHAT WE OFTEN DO IN FRONT OF
YOUR COMMITTEE LOOKS AT PROVIDE
RECOMMENDATIONS OR SPECIFICALLY
POINTING OUT WHAT MIGHT BE
VIEWED AS EITHER THE BENEFITS
ARE THE TRADE OFFS OF ANY
PARTICULAR MEASURE THAT'S IT
WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS
AND?
AND HELP YOU --
THINK ABOUT THIS MEASURES AS WE
MOVE FORWARD --
I DO ALSO IS I SHOULD ALSO
MENTION TO YOU I'M HERE JUST TO
PROVIDE THIS HIGH LEVEL OR VIEW
I DO HAVE MY COLLEAGUE RACHEL
EHLERS HERE WHO WAS OUR LEAD
ANALYSTS ON THE WATER MEASURE.
TO THE EXTENT YOU HAVE SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS ON THAT SHE'S HERE TO
HELP ME ANSWER THOSE.
SO ON PAGE ONE OF THE HANDOUTS
TO QUICK OVERVIEW ON WHAT BONDS
ARE WE WE DO ACTUALLY HAVE QUITE
A FEW PEOPLE WHO ASK US OVERTIME
WILL WHAT.
WE ARE BOND [inaudible]
WORK SO IT'S A BIT OF OVERVIEW
BOND VERY SIMILARLY ARE AWAY
THAT THE STATE WELL AS LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND AND PRIVATE
INDUSTRY BORROW MONEY.
WE THE STATE SELL THE BONDS TO
INVESTORS THAT MONEY THAT THEY
SPEND PROVIDES THE CASH THE
STATE NEEDS TO DO PROJECTS.
IN THE STATE HAVE TO PAY BACK
THOSE BONDS OVER TIME AND WITH
INTEREST.
WE USED MONTH FOR A COUPLE OF
DIFFERENT REASONS --
WE MOST OFTEN USE BONDS TO FIND
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS TO HAVE
A LONGER LIFE SPANS YOU CAN
THINK OF SCHOOLS AND BRIDGES AND
ROADS AND OTHER TYPES OF
PROJECTS THAT WILL LAST.
SEVERAL GENERATIONS OF VERVE
TAXPAYERS NC PAYERS AND SO IT'S
REASONABLE OFTENTIMES THE HAVE
--
NOT JUST PEOPLE TODAY BUT PEOPLE
IN THE FUTURE HELP PROJECTS
THEORIES INTO IS OF COURSE
OFTENTIMES NOT EXCLUSIVELY THESE
PROJECTS ARE VERY LARGE AND AND
JUST DIFFICULT TO PAY.
FOR IN ONE LONG SUMMER PAGE YOU
GO BASIS BEGINNING ABOUT A LARGE
BRIDGE PROJECT FOR EXAMPLE MIGHT
BE.
MIGHT BE DIFFICULT --
IT THE STATE LEVEL WE HAVE VERY
BROADLY TWO TYPES OF BONDS THAT
WE USE --
EACH ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN SOME
RESPECTS SO GENERAL OBLIGATION
BOND WHICH ARE MOST OF THE BOND
THAT HE'S ILL --
SEE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT THESE
ARE ONES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE
REPAID BY THE GENERAL FUND.
AND ARE REQUIRED TO BE APPROVED
BY VOTERS ON THE STATEWIDE
BALLOT.
AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE WATER
BOND THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU
TODAY.
AND THE OTHER BROAD TYPE OF BOND
IS A REVENUE BOND THIS THEIR
COUPLE DIFFERENT FLAVORS OF THIS
MOST OFTEN WE THINK OF THESE AS
BEING.
BONTA HAVE A DEDICATED REVENUE
STREAMS YOU CAN IMAGINE A BRIDGE
TOOL THAT HELPS TO PAY FOR A
BRIDGE REPAIR CONSTRUCTION THERE
ALSO LEASE REVENUE BONDS ARE A
LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THOUGH
SOMETIMES A REPAID FROM THE
GENERAL FUND.
REVENUE BONDS ARE NOT REQUIRED
TO BE APPROVED BY VOTERS --
SO HOW MUCH DO --
BONDS COST AND WELL IT DEPENDS
ON A COUPLE OF FACTORS MOST
NOTABLY THE INTEREST RATE THAT
THE STATE GETS WHEN THE STATE
TREASURER ISSUE THE BONDS.
AS WELL AS THE TIME PERIOD OVER
WHICH THEY ARE REPAID AND OTHER
FACTORS AS WELL NOW.
THEM WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WILL
WHAT ARE THOSE FULL COSTS
OFTENTIMES IN NOMINAL DOLLARS
WIN -- WE'VE
ADDED THE FULL DEBT SERVICE THAT
IS THE INTEREST COST.
A VERY ROUGHLY THAT CAN --
IN THAT CAN.
PRETTY CLOSE TO DOUBLE THE COST
OF THE BONDS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER
THOUGH THAT IT IS THESE BONDS
NOW YOU JUST IF YOU LOOK AT THE
BY THE RATE OF WHAT OUR CARRIERS
ON THIS WOULD WE SPEND IT ON AND
I'M NOT TOTAL AT COST CENTERS
PRINCE WONDERS JUST INTEREST
COST WHAT'S THE PRICE TODAY.
ROUND NUMBERS IN --
THAT THE INTEREST RATE THAT
WE'RE GONNA BONDS NOW --
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAD THE MOST
RECENT NUMBER.
EIGHT I THINK IN RECENT YEARS
BEGINNING 4% OR LESS AND GUESS
WHAT YOU KNOW.
ON HISTORICALLY OVER A LONGER
PERIOD OF TIME IT'S THE AVERAGE
IN THE CLOSER 25% BUT WE'VE BEEN
IN A PRETTY LOW INTEREST
ENVIRONMENT AND WE SO IF THEY
SAID THE TOTAL DEBT SERVICE COST
ON BOND OFTENTIMES AND THAT
BEING DOUBLE WHAT THE ORIGINAL
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT WHAT.
THATSAID IT SPREAD OVER DECADES
TYPICALLY TWENTY THIRTY FORTY
YEARS AND SO WHEN YOU THINK
ABOUT THE REAL COST OF BOND IT'S
SIGNIFICANT IN LEFT BECAUSE OF
INFLATION AND THE TIME WHAT WE
CALL THE TIME VALUE OF MONEY A
TO MAKE THAT WE DON'T DISCUSSES
OFTEN IS.
THOUGH IS THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH ISSUING BONDS
AND THAT IS SIMPLY IF YOU THINK
ABOUT A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND
FOR EXAMPLE THE EXTENT DAY OF
THOSE ARE ISSUED THAT'S
COMMITTING THE STATE TO REPAY
THOSE BONDS OVER A NUMBER OF
YEARS.
THAT GENERAL FUND THAT IF YOU TO
REPAY THAT DEBT SERVICE IS
THEREFORE NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO
THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROPRIATE
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY A BAD
THING IF THE BONDS ARE ISSUED
FOR THINGS THAT ARE CONSIDERED
TO BE A HIGH PRIORITY TO THE
STATE.
THAT CAN BE A VERY.
WORTHWHILE THING TO DO BUT THAT
IS JUST SOMETHING TO BE
COGNIZANT OF ON PAGE --
TWO SUMMARY TABLE OF THE ALL THE
BOND THAT HAD BEEN ISSUED
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND THAT
HAVE BEEN ISSUED AND APPROVED BY
VOTERS AND SINCE TWO THOUSAND
YOU CAN SEE IT'S A TOTAL OF A
HUNDRED AND SIXTY NINE HUNDRED
SIXTEEN BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF
BONDS.
OF THAT TOTAL ABOUT THIRTY ONE
BILLION IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
RESOURCES AND WATER RELATED
BONDS --
NOTABLY AND JUST EARLIER THIS
MONTH --
PROPOSITION SIXTY EIGHT WITH THE
PROVEN THAT HAD FOUR POINT ONE
BILLION DOLLARS IN GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND AUTHORITY.
PAGE THREE AS SOME HIGH LEVEL
NUMBERS ON THE OVERALL COST OF
BONDS IN A CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW
IN THE STATE HAS EIGHTY THREE
BILLION DOLLARS OF GENERAL FUND
SUPPORTED BOND [inaudible]
GENERAL OBLIGATION IT'S REVENUE
BY.
ON WHICH IT'S MAKING ANNUAL
PAYMENTS --
THE EIGHTY THREE BILLION NOT THE
AMOUNT WE'RE PAYING ANNUALLY BUT
THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT'S BEEN
AUTHORIZED IN ISSUED.
IN SO RIGHT NOW OUR DEBT SERVICE
PAYMENTS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS FROM
THE GENERAL FUND ABOUT SIX
BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
A ONE BILLION OF THAT ON
RESOURCES RELATED BONDS --
LASTLY ON THIS PAGE --
WE IN ADDITION TO THAT EIGHTY
THREE BILLION THERE'S ABOUT
THIRTY EIGHT BILLION DOLLARS AND
AUTHORIZED GENERAL FUND
SUPPORTED BONDS TO HAVE THAT THE
BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE
LEGISLATURE OR VOTERS.
BUT THEIR BOND THEMSELVES ARE
NOT BEEN ISSUE BECAUSE THAT
PROJECT HAVING GONE FAR ENOUGH
ALONG THAT THE STE TREASURE FOR
THE HUNDRED SIXTEEN THREE
HUNDRED AND SIX HUNDRED SIXTEEN
BILLION THREE HUNDRED AND SIXTY
EIGHT MILLION THAT YOU'VE
INDICATED SINCE.
TWO THOUSAND WHICH WE'RE PART A
LOT OF THOSE AROUND YOU HAD
THOSE ARE AUTHORIZED TO BE FOOT
TO NEXT PAGE YOU SAY THAT
THERE'S THIRTY EIGHT BILLION
DOLLARS THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN
SOLD.
SO.
IN TERMS OF OUTSTANDING
OBLIGATIONS YOU TAKE THE THIRTY
EIGHT FROM THE ONE SIXTEEN TO
GET THEM THAT OUTSTANDING
OBLIGATION IF THERE'S A LITTLE
BIT OF DIFFERENCE HERE SO ON
PAGE TO THE TABLE JUST THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION.
APPROVED BY VOTERS TO WHAT IT
DOESN'T LOOK AT THE LEASE
REVENUE BONDS.
IT WOULD JUST WOULD THEN HOW
MUCH RELEASE I KNOW THAT THAT IS
GOING YOUR BLOWS OFF OFF BALANCE
SHEET BUT THE NLY HAVE BALANCE
SHEETS AND GOVERNMENT BUT FOR
THAT PURPOSE.
BUT BUT WHAT WE HAVE AND LEASE
REVENUE BONDS BECAUSE THAT'S
LIKE THE PRISONS IN A BUT A
BUNCH OF STUFF WE DID GET WE
HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE
OF A FUNDING GOT LEASE REVENUE
BONDS -- SO
YOU CAN THINK ABOUT PRISON
DIFFERENTLY FUNDED RELEASE
REVENUE RUNS OFTENTIMES --
CAL FIRE STATIONS ARE ANOTHER
EXAMPLE -- I
MIGHT HAVE TO GET BACK TO
COMMITTEE ON THE SPECIFIC NUMBER
IS A NO ON AN ANNUAL BASIS
WHERE.
I THINK OF THE SPENDING.
WHAT I WHAT WE'RE SPENDING OF
THAT SIX BILLION THAT WE'RE TOLD
SPENDING ON FOR GENERAL AT THE
GENERAL FUND ON BOND I THINK?
ROUGHLY HALF OF SIX BILLION
DOLLAR NUMBER THAT YOU PUT HERE
THE OVER SPENDING A YEAR THAT
INCLUDES BOTH LEAST JANET LEASE
REVENUE DIES AND EVER THAT'S A
TOTAL.
NUMBER SIX BILLION BOX WHICH IF
IT'S JUST ASSUME FOR EASE OF
EXAMPLE THE BUDGET WAS A HUNDRED
BILLION IT'S PERCENT.
DEBT SERVICE COSTS RIGHT INTO
THAT SIX BILLION I THINK ROUGHLY
10% OR SO AT LEAST REVENUE IN
THE REMAINDER IS --
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND
REPAYMENT IT SO THAT SIX BILLION
RIGHT NOW REPRESENTS BETWEEN
FOUR AND 5% OF TOTAL GENERAL
FUND AND THE LEAST REVENUE BONDS
FOR PURPOSES.
IT'S COMMITTEE ARE NOT THE
OBLIGATION OF TAX PAYERS.
THEY ARE THE OBLIGATION THE IT
INDIRECTLY IN THE SENSE THAT
THAT WAS DEFAULT THEY ARE
OBLIGATIONS OF US TO PAY ON AN
ONGOING BASIS TO THE BOND
HOLDERS.
BECAUSE WE PROMISED TO PAY --
BUT IT DOESN'T GO AGAINST THE
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT FOR
PURPOSES OF OF CREDIT RATING OF
THE STUDY CALIFORNIA GREAT AYE
THAT'S ONLY WITH GENERAL
OBLIGATION.
SELECT A FULL FAITH AND CREDIT
IS REQUIRED.
AND THEN SO IF YOU TURN TO PAGE
OF FOR A FINAL PAGE A COUPLE
NOTES ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT AND
SPECIFICALLY THERE WILL BE FIVE
BUT LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW FIVE
BOND MEASURES ON THE BALLOT.
THE BILL AUTHORIZED A TOOL
EIGHTEEN BILLION DOLLARS IN
ADDITIONAL BOND AUTHORITY OF
THAT AMOUNT ABOUT FIFTEEN
BILLION WOULD BE --
REPAID FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL
AMOUNTS LISTED HERE IN THE SUB
BULLETS THE LARGEST IS THE WATER
BOND THAT YOU BEAT BILLION.
IT'S I BONDS TOTAL EIGHTEEN
POINT FOUR BILLION THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT'S RIGHT YOU KNOW THAT IN
SOME OF THAT MAYES OF FOR
EXAMPLE THE TWO BILLION FOR THE
HOUSING. FOR PEOPLE HOMELESS
WITH MENTALLY ILL THE NO PLACE
LIKE HOME THAT WOULD BE.
THAT'S ON THE BALLOT NOT BECAUSE
IT'S A REVENUE BOND BUT BECAUSE
IT A MAN'S AN INITIATIVE SATUE
STOOD IN FRONT OF VOTERS IT IS
THE BOND MEASURE LOCATION ON
THAT THAT BASICALLY TAKES
REVENUE OF THE STEINBERG FUND
CORRECT.
ME OFF RIGHT PROPOSITION SIXTY
THREE THAT'S RIGHT RIGHT
[inaudible]
SO ON REPURPOSE.
BUT IT TAX.
RIGHT ANYTHING EXISTING EXISTING
REVENUES.
SO OF OF THAT EIGHTEEN A VERY OF
THAT FIFTEEN BILLION IN GENERAL
FUND SUPPORTED AUTHORITY --
OUR ESTIMATE IS THAT THAT WOULD
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE OF ABOUT
THIRTY BILL.
SURE IT'S OVER THE NEXT FORTY
YEARS AVERAGING ABOUT SEVEN
HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS
ANNUALLY OVER THAT TIME PERIOD.
IN GENERAL FUND THAT SERVICE AT
ANY OLD AND THEN SPECIFICALLY
THE WATER BOND THAT IS --
IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE TODAY
--
THE TOTAL ESTIMATED DEBT SERVICE
WOULD BE ABOUT SEVENTEEN
BILLION.
AND THAT WOULD ROUGHLY AVERAGE
ABOUT FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY.
WE ASK YOU SOME COMPOUND
QUESTIONS HERE JUST IT JUST KIND
OF LAID OUT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
CONTEXT THIS IS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WILL INTERCITY NEARS --
COUPLE THINGS AND YOU CAN ANSWER
ALL IN ONE BIG BUNDLE BECAUSE
THEY THEY ALL TIE TOGETHER CSUS
WRITE THIS DOWN.
ONE ON LOOK AT THE CREDIT
WORTHINESS IS CITY CALIFORNIA
AND THE INTEREST RATES BEING
PAID IS JUST THE RIGHT TIME TO
BE BORROWING.
THIS KIND OF MONEY THIS IS A
HAVE MORE THAN HALF WERE
BORROWING IS JUST THE RIGHT TIME
TO DO IT.
A DOESN'T AFFECT OUR CREDIT
WORTHINESS AND ON YOU KNOW THE
DIE NO WE HAD THE DEAD VISOR
COMMISSION WAS INVOLVED IN DOING
DEALING WITH THAT.
WHO WAS ON RULES AFTER AND I
CAN'T REMEMBER BUT MANY OF THAT
TRYING TO CREATE GUIDANCE WITH
RESPECT TO THAT HOW DO WE LOOK
IN TERMS OF HISTORICALLY?
AND WHERE WE ARE WITH RESPECT TO
DEBT AND AND ALSO JUST FOR
PURPOSES OF UNDERSTANDING THAT
ARE.
I MEAN I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD
SHAPE COMPARED TO THE NATIONALS
BUT LIKE GOING TO GET A SENSE OF
WHERE WE ARE.
IF YOU KNOW THAT IF NINE YOU GET
BACK TO US WITH RESPECT TO
NATIONAL THAT.
AND LASTLY ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH
OUR TWO THOUSAND AND SIX
PRINCIPLES THAT WE ESTABLISHED
WHEN WOMEN GUIDANCE --
FOO FOR WATER BONDS AND I WANT
TO KNOW HOW IN YOUR JUDGMENT --
THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT OR
INCONSISTENT WITH THOSE
PRINCIPLES.
OKAY ALL TRY TO HELP TRY TO HIT
EACH OF THOSE ON IN TERMS OF
CREDIT WORTHINESS EH THE CAN IS
PROBABLY WELL AWARE --
BACK DURING THE RECESSION AND
THE CREDIT RATING OF THE STATE
WAS DECREASED BY THE MAJOR
CREDIT AGENTS HE'S.
THAT WAS A FUNCTION OF MULTIPLE
THINGS --
NOT JUST.
DE OUTSTANDING IN THE STATE BUT
OF COURSE THE A BUDGET
STRUCTURE.
THAT CREDIT RATINGS HAVE
INCREASED SINCE THEN --
THE ITEM AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD
NO EXACT CREDIT RATING FOR EACH
OF THE AGENCIES BUT WERE IN A
GOOD STRONG --
STANDING WITH THE CREDIT
AGENCIES CURRENTLY --
CERTAINLY BETTER THAN WE WERE
DURING THE RECESSION I THINK
NGUYEN CREDIT AGENCIES LOOK AT
THAT HOW THEY LOOK AT THE STATE
AGAIN THEY LOOK AT A BROADER
PICTURE NOT JUST THAT'S HOW MUCH
DEBT SERVICE --
I WOULD HAVE TO GO AND DO SOME
RESEARCH ON HOW WE COMPETE OTHER
STATES I DON'T THINK WE'RE THAT
UNUSUAL THEY MENTIONED --
ARE GENERAL FUND AT SERVICES
BETWEEN FOUR AND 5% OF OVERALL.
OUR OUR DEBT SERVICE RATIO IS
THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR GENERAL
FUND REVENUES USED FOR DEBT
SERVICE IS BETWEEN FOUR AND 5%
RIGHT NOW THAT'S NOT.
A HISTORICALLY THAT'S PRETTY --
SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN IN IN
PAST YEARS NOT DRAMATICALLY
DIFFERENT THAT PARTLY THAT'S
BECAUSE OUR OWN OVERALL DEBT
SERVICE COSTS HAVE INCREASED.
IN PAST YEARS AS MORE MORE BONDS
HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED THAT SAID
IN RECENT YEARS BECAUSE REVENUES
HAVE BEEN SO STRONG OUR DEBT
SERVICE RATIO THAT PERCENTAGE.
HAS STAYED --
RELATIVELY --
SORT OF IN A HISTORICAL RANGE --
WHETHER THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME
TO BORROW --
MORE --
VERSUS OTHER TIMES I MEAN
FRANKLY WERE INTEREST RATES ARE
AT HISTORICAL A HISTORICALLY LOW
LEVELS IN RECENT YEARS FOR THIS
AND IN ONE SENSE NOT
[inaudible]
OR NOW [inaudible]
THAT'S PARDEE GOES LIKE THIS.
RIGHT NOTED IN TWO THOUSAND AND
EIGHT BECAUSE DROP IT.
BUDGET OFFERING.
TWENTY STAND HOW YEARS I'VE
HEARD MARIA.
SO ABOUT THAT WHOLE WHY I'M
TRYING TO SHED SO YOU DO ISLAMIC
THEY FILE.
RIGHT WITH SERVICE ACT A LITTLE.
WHAT IS SOME OF RAINY DAY FUND
WILL HAPPEN?
MINE WAS A NUMBER.
THEY DON'T SHAKE THEIR HAND.
ORDER ONE MILLION SO WE ARRANGED
A FIVE ONE WHERE WE ARE
[inaudible]
YEAH.
THERE YEARS.
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH [inaudible]
QUESTIONS.
AND ANSWER THE QUESTION IS IF
REYES SITUATION GOVERNOR SAYS HE
NEVER GOING ON THE ODDS ARE.
GOING THROUGH THEM.
CLEARLY HOUSE PRICES.
WELL YOU KNOW WHO.
IN CERTAIN AREAS WORKERS
UNEQUIVOCALLY CRITICAL WHY WAS
THE HALF OF THAT SOMETHING LIKE
THIS WE STILL HAVE MUCH MONEY.
BE ABLE TO STUFF WE MAY HAVE
ALTERNATIVES.
AND UP WATER FIXABLE STARTS
ABOUT OF THEM OVERSIGHT AND
TRANSPARENCY MEASURES POSSIBLE
USE PROCREATION BASICALLY WAS
US.
THAT IS NOT IN FINANCIAL.
TRANSLATE ASK YOU PROFIT
QUESTIONS WHICH IS.
THEY GOT ALLOWING I CAN BE OKAY
VIEWS IF YOU FEEL IF VOTERS SEE
ON THIS CASE THAT THE THE
PURPOSE AND THIS BOND ARE OF
HIGH ENOUGH PRIORITY THAT IT
COULD CROWD OUT.
USING THOSE FUNDS FOR OTHER
PURPOSES BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT.
TERM AS A BODY THINK ABOUT
WHAT.
NOT ONLY OUR PRIORITIES ARE BUT
WHAT ARE THE RISKS TO OUR
OVERALL BUDGET STRUCTURE BUDGET
PICTURE WHICH I THINK ARE OFFICE
HAS TOLD YOU TO BE VERY.
MINDFUL OF IS THAT THERE ARE UPS
AND DOWNS IN OVERALL REVENUES
AND THAT IS A THERE ARE THOSE
RISKS OUT THERE EVEN WITH.
REFER THE RESERVE FUNDS
AVAILABLE AND SO IT'S ALL PART
OF THAT BROADER BUDGET NIXON'S
SO -- I'M
NOT SURE HOW MUCH MORE SPECIFIC
ADVICE I CAN PROVIDE BUT I JUST
YOU KNOW OUR JOB WE'VE BEEN
TRYING AND I WOULD LIKE TO GET
MR MONEY ON THIS BECAUSE I'M
GONNA BRING HIM IN ON THIS.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO RESTRUCTURE
OUR WATER POLICY IN CALIFORNIA.
THE OLD RULE WAS STICK A STRAW
IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AND FEED
ALL THE PEOPLE IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA CREEK POLITICAL
CHAOS.
STRAW ON THE RIVER YOU KNOW NOT
REALLY BE RESOURCEFUL WITH OUR
WATER WE'VE HAD HUGE PROBLEMS
RESPECT CONTAMINATED WATER.
MORNINGS MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE IN
THIS THAN I AM BUT THEY TELL ME
WE GOT WHAT THREE HUNDRED
DISAPPEAREDWATER SIX OF WORSE
WATER THAN FLINT MICHIGAN.
SO THE QUESTION IS WAREHOUSES
HERE'S POLICYMAKERS WE'VE BEEN
PUSH WE PUSH TO STORM WATER
CAPTURE WHICH WAS VERY DIFFICULT
WHY SO THAT WE GET ANY PLACE WE
CAN CAPTURE STORM WATER.
INSTEAD OF HAVING TO IMPORT
WATER IS A GOOD THING TOO WE'RE
TRYING TO PUSH RECYCLE WATER
THREE WE JUST DID A BIG POLICY
WITH RESPECT TO WATER
CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY.
SO THAT WERE BETTER AT THAT NOW
WHAT ELSE WE KNOW WATER QUALITY
HOW MUCH IS THAT GONNA COST IF
TO TO BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP THE
WATER.
AND IN THE SEA SAID FORGET TO
FEED THE AQUA PEOPLE WANT US TO
USE THE GENERAL FUND MONEY
INSTEAD OF USING A FREE.
OKAY WHAT IS AT A HUNDRED
MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR IS OUT
WHAT IT IS WILL RIGHT NOW YOU'RE
SAYING WE'RE GONNA SPEND FOREIGN
THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR
FOR THE NEXT FORTY YEARS OUT OF
THE GENERAL FUND.
FROM A PUBLIC POLICY MAKERS
PERSPECTIVES IT'S SMARTER TO SAY
LET'S CLEAN UP OUR WATER FOR TWO
HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
AND THAT PER PER TOPS MORE
CALIFORNIANS WITH A MORE
SIGNIFICANT OUTCOME BECAUSE THE
WATER QUALITY IS NOT HAS HEALTH
IMPLICATIONS AS ALL OTHER
IMPLICATIONS RESPECTED PEOPLE
FIRST SUSPEND FOREIGN THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS. TO FIX A COUPLE
OF PROJECTS I DON'T KNOW THE
ANSWER THAT QUESTION BUT OUR JOB
IS TO ASK.
THIS IS FOREIGN THIRTY MILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR.
MY BUT SADDAM THOUGHT.
RUN OKAY IT SHOWS LIGHT ON THAT
YEAH.
BILL DONE YEAH OKAY FOR THIRTY
MILES YEAR.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER QUESTION
BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO RAISE IT.
BECAUSE FROM MY VIEW I'D MUCH
RATHER SHRINK THIS BOND GIVE A
HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OF THE
GENERAL FUND BACH WITH TELLS US
THAT ALL THE LINE THEY'RE GONNA
COME HERE TODAY TO TELL US WHY
THEY SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE EVERY
GROUP SUPPORTS THIS.
THE BOOK BILLS THAT BASICALLY
SAY GIVE ME A CHECK COURSE
EVERYBODY SUPPORTS THAT THAT THE
TAXPAYERS THIS OUR OBLIGATIONS
TO ASK TOUGH QUESTIONS FOREIGN
THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
IS IT BETTER TO HAVE ONE OR
TWO-EXTRA PROJECTS OR HAVE CLEAN
WATER FOR EVERYBODY.
SEEMS TO FAIR QUESTION I KNOW
THAT'S NOT YOUR DECISION YOU
JUST GIVE US THE BASELINE DATA
BUT THE BASELINE DATA THAT
YOU'VE GIVEN US A FOREIGN THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS.
BRINGS TO DIRECT QUESTION THAT
VERY ISSUE THAT I WANT MISTER
MORNINGS TALK ABOUT.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN THAT'S
A GREAT FRAMING IN A SET UP AND
I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE A WHOLE
LOT MORE TO OFFER TO THAT BUT
MAYBE TO TURN IT TO A QUESTION.
I KNOW ALEJO SAID.
BECAUSE YOU'RE TESTIFYING HERE
TODAY ANA PERSPECTIVE BOND
THERE'S SOME CONSTRAINTS ON
OFFERING EVEN RECOMMENDATIONS
SIR.
THIS ONE POSSIBILITY THIS IS
ANOTHER.
WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING.
UP.
COULD CAN YOU COMMENT.
THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE CHAIR
RAISES.
WE LOOK AT COST TO THE GENERAL
FUND.
IN TERMS OF PAYING THE DEBT.
IS THERE ANY EVALUATION THE LA
OR ANYONE ELSE DOES TO LOOK AT
SAVINGS.
IF WE INVEST THAT BOND MONEY IN
THE INTENDED PROJECTS.
SAVINGS TO THE STATE BY MAKING
THAT INVESTMENT VERSES NOT
[inaudible]
INVESTMENT.
IN A THAT WE'RE STILL GONNA END
UP PAYING FOR WHETHER IT'S
PUBLIC HEALTH.
AND TRANSPORT WATER OR PAY MORE
IN TERMS OF ACCUMULATED.
A CONTAMINATION.
COSTS OF TRANSPORTING WATER IT
CENTER DO YOU.
ON THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE
PROVIDE THAT ANALYSIS THIS IS
WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST
[inaudible]
BUT ANY EVALUATION OF WHAT THE
INVESTMENT SAVES US OR SAVES
LOCAL COMMUNITIES POINT I MADE
TENNIS OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES AND
SHE WAS A LEAD ANALYST ON THIS
PARTICULAR MEASURE BUDGET
PROBABLY YES SO OUR REQUIREMENT
IS TO DO AN ANALYSIS OF THE
FACTS AND FISCAL ANALYSIS OF ALL
THE MEASURE.
INCLUDING THE BOND MEASURE SO WE
DO IN -- IN
MUCH OF WE CAN TRY TO LOOK BOTH
NOT JUST OF BOND COST THIS
QUICKLY BUT ALSO WHAT ARE THE
OTHER POTENTIAL FISCAL IF THE
IMPACT BUT ON THE STATE.
AND AT THE LOCAL LEVEL OF
MEASURED AND SO WE DO THAT --
VILLAGE CAN TALK A BIT ABOUT
THIS PARTICULAR MEASURES IF YOU
I WOULD BE HELPFUL ON I WOULD
JUST.
BEFORE SHE DOES HER TO CARRY OUT
THAT -- A
LOT OF THE THE KIND OF QUESTIONS
YOU ASK --
IT CAN BE VERY DIFFICULT TO
ANSWER ACCOMPANIED IF YOU'RE
LOOKING AT A MEASURE TO HAVE A
LOT OF DIFFERENT --
DIFFERENT PROJECTS IT WOULD
REALLY HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF
GOT IT AND I THINK FOR US TO
HAVE THE FULL PICTURE AND TO BE
ABLE TO ACT RESPONSIBLY.
AS WE VOTERS WE TALK WITH
CONSTITUENTS.
EVEN IF IT'S BROAD ESTIMATES.
WHAT ARE WE GETTING FOR THE
INVESTMENT IS IT LOCALIZED IS
THAT STATE?
DOESN'T SAVE THIS COSTS IN OTHER
AREAS AS WE MOVE FORWARD SO IS
THERE ANYWAY THAT.
AT ANY OF THOSE METRICS WHEN WE
LOOK AT THE HOUSE.
RUSS AVERAGE EILERS WITH
ANALYST'S OFFICE I THINK AS MY
COLLEAGUE NOTED.
YEAH THE NATURE OF THE KIND OF
ANALYSIS WE DO ON BONDS ISN'T
QUITE THAT EXPENSIVE IN TERMS OF
COST BENEFIT WE DO LOOK AT
ATLANTA ARE CHARGED WITH LOOKING
AT THE IMPACT ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND WHETHER IT MIGHT
CREATE.
ADDITIONAL COSTS ARE SAVINGS I
THINK -- ON
NET BECAUSE OF THE TYPES OF
PROJECTS THAT ARE FUNDED HERE WE
THINK IN A LOT OF CASES THE
STATE MONEY WOULD REPLACE LOCAL
MONEY SO THERE WOULD BE STATE
FUNDING FOR PROJECTS THAT WOULD
LOCALS WOULD UNDERTAKE ANYWAY.
FOR HOW CLEAN WATER WATER
RECYCLING STORM WATER SOME OF
THESE AND TYPES OF ACTIVITIES SO
WE DO THINK THAT WOULD BE OKAY
SAVINGS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL --
ME OBVIOUSLY A TRADE OFF OF
COSTS AT THE STATEWIDE LEVEL BUT
IN TERMS OF IS INVESTING THIS
MONEY NOW SAVING ADDITIONAL
COSTS IN THE FUTURE I GUESS I
WOULD PROBABLY VENTURE TO GUESS
IN SOME CASES PROBABLY YES.
AND IN OTHER CATEGORIES PROBABLY
NO WE DIDN'T DO THAT TYPE OF
GRANULAR RIGHT ANALYSIS IT'S A
FRUSTRATION WITH A LOT OF OUR
BUDGET COMMITTEES AND COST
ANALYSIS WE GET KIND OF AN
IMMEDIATE LOOK.
DEPARTMENT FINANCE HOST HOUSES
[inaudible]
HOW SKINNER?
FACT IN IMPACT THE BUDGET IN THE
BUDGET YEAR.
BUT THEY CAN RARELY TELL US HOW
IT MIGHT PROTECT US FROM HIGHER
COSTS IN OUT YEARS AND I THINK
WE NEED TO BE ABLE.
TO DEVELOPER ABILITY IN LOOKING
AT BONTA INVESTMENTS --
IS THE CHAIR RACES A WHEN WE
LOOK AT THE CONTAMINATED WATER
AROUND THE STATE THERE'S A
PUBLIC HEALTH CONSEQUENCE.
THAT ALL TAXPAYERS ARE GETTING
SHOULDERED WITH PARTICULARLY
WHEN THE VICTIMS TEND TO BE.
LOW INCOME MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES THAT MEANS
[inaudible]
STATE.
WITH FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION IS
PAYING FOR MEDICAL COSTS.
SOME OF WHICH CAN BE EXORBITANT
WITH SERIOUS.
POISONING LEADING TO CANCER IT'S
ATRASO.
ARM WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BEST
INVESTMENT OF THIS KIND OF
MONEY.
OF PUBLIC HEALTH CONSEQUENCE
SHOULD ALSO BE PART OF IT IN
TERMS OF WILL THIS HELP US.
TECH PEOPLE AND SAVE THAT COST
TO OUR PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM --
OR NOT BUT I'LL DEFER BACK TO
THE CHAIR I I'D LIKE THE WAY YOU
FRAME AND HAD WE BEST INVEST
THESE ADDRESS A DOLLARS IT'S
LIKE LITERALLY.
THIS DEAL AND I WE'VE BEEN DOING
THIS FOR YEARS AND WE GOT TO
TELL THE TRUTH HIM BACK UP BUT A
AN ARMORED CAR TO THE TREASURY.
AND OU CAN TAKE BORN THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS OUT OF THE BACK
DOOR BECAUSE YOU CAN PULL
SOMETHING SPEND A FEW MILLION
DOLLARS BECAUSE IT'S AN ISSUE
THAT LOOK SEXY THE VOTERS.
AND DRAW THE DOUGH THE QUESTION
MISTER MONEY AND YOU'RE GOOD.
IT IN THE WATER POLICY IT JUST
FOCUS ON THAT AND CON WHAT'S THE
HIGHEST AND BEST USE.
BUT HAS IT FROM EVERY LEVEL OF
PUBLIC POLICY DETERMINATION FOR
OFFICE.
I SAY WHERE WOULD YOU SPEND THAT
MONEY I PERSONALLY THINK THE
IDEA OF WATER QUALITY AB AND I'M
A DISCIPLE OF MISTER MUNNINGS ON
THIS ISSUE.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT'S A HUGE
ISSUE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU
CAN.
HAVE THREE OR WATER DISTRICTS TO
WATER WORST IN FLINT MICHIGAN
AND AND WHERE TO FIGHT WHERE
WE'RE TRYING TO COME WITH THE
FEE IN THAT AND AND WE'RE GONNA.
DE THE OTHER THE AQUA PEOPLE WHO
TODAY THEY'RE GONNA SUPPORT THIS
AND I'M ASKING THE HARD QUESTION
MIKE OKAY YOU WANT TO SUPPORT
THIS.
WOULD YOU RATHER USE A GENERAL
FUND MONEY TO SOLVE THIS OTHER
PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY
SUPPORT IT WE LOVE THIS IDEA OF
CLEANING WATER BUT WE WANT YOU
TO PAY FOR BUTCH PAY TWICE AS
MUCH PAID FOR THIS AND THE PAY
FOR THAT.
BECAUSE IT'S EASY TO JUST ASK
FOR MONEY.
WHAT IS YOUR OFFICE WOULD DO YOU
KNOW MAYBE NOT NOW BECAUSE WHAT
WE'RE UP AGAIN?
YOU KNOW WHEN I WORKED ON THIS
MEASURE YEARS AGO TWELVE FIFTY
THREE TO CREATE THIS REVIEW
PROCESS I WANTED TO REQUIRE.
THE POINT THAT THEY GOT 25% YET
IT HEARING IN THIRTY DAYS
WEBBING HEARING NOW IT'S WAY
LIKE UNDER THE OLD RULES THE
HEARINGS WERE LITERALLY A MONTH
BEFORE THE ACTUAL ELECTIONS AND
WHAT REALLY HEARINGS.
YOU KNOW IN SOME OF THESE THINGS
SOME RIGHTS SOME WRONG WITH ABLE
TO GET THINGS ARE MAY GET THINGS
OFF THE BALLOT WHICH ULTIMATELY.
DEALS WITH THIS TENSION THE
QUESTION IS WHERE IS IT
APPROPRIATE AND WEARS IT
LEVERAGE WHAT IS THAT LOOK LIKE.
BUT I JUST THINK IT REQUIRES A
SET OF REALLY --
SCRUB THIS FOR OUR PURPOSES LOOK
I I'D SUPPORT THE POLICIES IN
THE STUFF BUT IT IS PROCESS IS
JUST UPSIDE DOWN AND WE'VE BEEN
DOING IT FOR YEARS AND WE GOT
THE TESTIMONY FROM THE ASSEMBLY
ABOUT HOW HE'S A HAVE PASSED
FROM VOTERS.
AND AND HOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN
RAISED AS I WATCHED THE
TESTIMONY MISTER MARROW AND OUT
AND ALL THAT DOES IS TELL ME.
THAT THEY FOUND A GOOD ISSUE
THAT YOU CAN TOUCH VOTERS WITH
THE DEL SUPPORT.
NOW THE IMPACT THAT'S BEEN
SPORTING LA GOOD PROJECTS NO
QUESTION BUT HAS THERE BEEN A
DIAGNOSTIC ABOUT IS THAT THE
HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE
MONEY. TO BE ABLE TO WITH ALL
THE ARRAY OF ISSUES BECAUSE A
CERTAIN GROUP OF PEOPLE GO OUT
AND FUND THIS BECAUSE THEY GET
THEIR PROJECT FUNDED AND THAT IT
IT THERE CONTINUES
APPROPRIATIONS IN VIOLATION OF
COR POLICY.
AND ARGUE BELIEVES YOU JUST
EXPRESSED OUR FUNDING THINGS
THAT EITHER THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT COULD FUND MAYBE NOT
IN THE SIERRAS.
AND ALSO ARE FUNNY THINGS OF
LOCUSTS CONFINED OR WE CAN BE
MORE CREATIVE IN COMING UP WITH
MATCHING PROGRAMS IN ALL SORTS
OF STUFF BUT IT'S JUST EASY TO
JUST.
HIJACKED THE CALIFORNIA TREASURY
AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GONNA
DO BECAUSE WE COULD USE IN THIS
YEAR PROCESS FOR THAT.
THOSE ARE TOUGH QUESTIONS AND WE
ALL OF PARTICIPATED AND I
PARTICIPATED FOR EDUCATION AND
OTHER THINGS BUT THEY DIG THE
THE EXPERTISE OF OF HAVING A
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH TO CONTINUE
TO ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS.
AND THEY LIKE THIS STUFF AND GET
BETTER IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
DO SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO
HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT
HEARING.
BOMB BUT EASY COULD CAN YOUR
OFFICE TO HELP US WITH THAT TO
THIS ISSUE BUT WITH RESPECT TO
KIND OF A LARGER THINK IN TERMS
OF WATER POLICY BILL TALK TODAY
ALEJO YEAH I MEAN WE ARE
CERTAINLY AT YOUR SERVICE TO TRY
AND HELP YOU THINK THROUGH THE
TRADE.
OFFS OF OF WHERE WHEN HOW TO
PRIORITIZE FUNDING WHAT THE
NEEDS ARE WHAT COST BENEFIT ARE
I THINK WE ARE WE ARE RELATIVELY
CONSTRAINED WITHIN THE CONTEXT
OF OUR ROLE. FOR FOR ANALYZING
BAD PROPOSITIONS THAT ARE BEFORE
THE VOTERS BECAUSE OF THOSE.
CIVIC STATUTORY REQUIREMENT WE
HAVE AN DEPENDENT SO AT WITH
REGARD TO A CONTEXT OF A
PARTICULAR PROPOSITION WE ARE
MUCH MORE LIMITED IN TERMS OF
THE TYPE OF ADVICE SOME WORK WE
CAN DO WITH YOU BUT MORE BROADLY
IN TERMS OF CRAFTING STATE
POLICY AND FISCAL PRIORITIES OF
COURSE.
WE ARE AT YOUR SERVICE YOU'RE
RUDE VISUAL JUST IF YOU MITCHELL
STILL FOLLOW MEDIA THINGS
TOMORROW BE BOTH INCIDENT THAT.
ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS --
IN DEAL WITH THIS POLICY BECAUSE
WE REALLY ARE BEEN WORKING HARD
ON TRYING TO RETHINK WATER
POLICY AND AND YOU JUST TAKE IT
TO THE NEXT LEVEL IF YOU WILL.
AND WE REALLY LIKE THE ISSUE AND
WANT TO HELP IT IT'S ONE OF
THOSE CHALLENGING ISSUES.
THAT IS EASY TO GET BONDS
BECAUSE IT POLL SO WELL BECAUSE
OF THE ONCE CLEAN WATER.
BUT YOU KNOW THE WATER WORLD
IT'S QUITE CHALLENGING BECAUSE
IT TAKES DECADES TO GET THINGS
DONE -- EN
AND BECAUSE HE'S ARE SUCH
DIFFICULT ISSUES WITH YOU KNOW
IT ANOTHER QUARTER PEOPLE SO.
ARE MANY ULCER.
OKAY WITH THANK YOU VERY MUCH
REALLY REALLY APPRECIATE WILL
FOLLOW UP WITH YOU OFFICE OKAY
[inaudible]
THANK YOU [inaudible]
OKAY.
OUR SPONSOR MISTER MARROW.
WHO'S BEEN WILDLY SUCCESSFUL.
YOU COME UP.
THE BIG CITY TALK ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES.
I'M GONNA GET I'M ASKING MY
STAFF TO GET --
JUST YOU KNOW ON A FEW HAVE OR
NOT BUT YOU KNOW EVERY
CONTRIBUTION THAT WAS MADE TO
SUPPORT THIS AND I WANT TO TIE
IT TO PROJECTS TO SEE.
LOOK.
NO SECRET THAT I JUST WANT OUR
JOB IS.
TO DAYLIGHT IT AND WHATEVER IT
IS IT IS YOU KNOW.
I DON'T TAKE AWAY THE
EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT YOU'VE HAD.
I DON'T YOU HAVE SOME BELIEVABLE
ONLY ANY ILLEGALLY SECRETS TIME
MAGAZINE SHOULD WRITE ABOUT GUYS
LIKE YOU KNOW BECAUSE THE MONEY
TO SEE BILLION ON ONLY BILLIONS
OF DOLLARS YOU PUT OUT THERE
[inaudible]
NO QUESTION.
BUT I THINK IT'S OUR ETHICAL
OBLIGATION BUT TASK TOUGH
QUESTIONS AND PUT YOU IN THE HOT
SEAT.
AND FOR GOING FORWARD AND HOW WE
DO THIS BECAUSE THIS IS ALREADY
ON THE BALLOT WE HAVEN'T BEEN
ABLE TO TAKE IT OFF.
BUT I THINK THE PROCESS NEEDS OF
SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES.
GO IN THE THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE JURY
MARROW WITH NATURAL HERBS
INSTITUTE [inaudible]
ARM.
I'M I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT
THAT WE DID MAKE IS PRETTY
SINCERE EFFORT TO TRY TO INCLUDE
WHAT ENDED UP BEING IN THIS
INITIATIVE IN THE LEGISLATIVE A
CONTEXT --
THE GOVERNOR OF BET WITH ME IN
THE* THAT WE DO THAT WE MET
WAS CENTER DELEON DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARK BOND
THAT S. B. FIVE THAT WENT
FORWARD.
BUT IN THE CONTEXT I THINK OF
THE CAP THAT THE GOVERNOR
IMPOSED OVER THE TWO BUGS THE
HOUSING IN THE PARK BY.
THE JUST WASN'T ENOUGH ROOM TO
INCLUDE SOME OF THE BEING IN
THIS MEASURE BUT WE DID TRY AND
AND UNFORTUNATE DIDN'T MAKE IT
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND ARM.
THE WATER NEEDS OF THE STATE
CONTINUE OUR IT BROUGH THINK IT
WOULD BE A IMPROVEMENT LOOK
GIVEN TO US FOR A LOT OF YEARS.
DON'T YOU THINK YOU'D BE
IMPROVEMENT THE PROCESS LOOK
YOU'VE GOT INTERESTS ON BOTH
SIDES.
THE QUESTION IS HOW CAN WE BE
MORE INVENTIVE IN MORE CREATIVE
TO SERVE THE COMMON GOOD.
AND MAYBE IF WE WERE TO PUT A
PASS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
THAT REQUIRED FINDINGS.
AS TO THIS STUFF OR DID
SOMETHING I KNOW EXACTLY THE
ANSWER BUT IT'S JUST YOU LOOK I
KNOW AND YOU KNOW AND I'VE
TALKED TO SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO
GET WERE YOUR BIGGEST FUNDERS.
IN THIS DEAL THAT WANT THE
MONEY.
AND THAT THEY'RE IN FEDERAL
PROPERTIES AND THERE'S OTHER
OBLIGATIONS AND IT'S PRETTY
SIMPLE TO JUST WRITE A BIG CHECK
AT LEAST IT'S NOTHING THOUGH
PEOPLE HAVE DONE THIS ALL THE
TIME IT'S ON THE STATUS BUT THE
STATE UPLOAD THIS THING WE GOT
ALL THESE OTHER PEOPLE
[inaudible]
IT'S A CHALLENGE WITH RESPECT TO
THE BOTTOM TO THE INITIATIVE
PROCESS THAT INCLUDES BONDING
AUTHORITY.
BUT MAY BE MAY BE BECAUSE THE
SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK
LEGISLATIVELY AND HOW THAT WORKS
MAYBE WE REQUIRE YOU TO GET
CERTAIN FINDINGS FROM THE LA ALL
OR SOME OTHER PEOPLE AS THE
HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THE
MONEY.
SO WE AVOID THIS KIND OF FOR
SALE APPROACHTHAT WHAT
DOMINATES THIS PROCESS BECAUSE
IF YOU KNOW YOU'RE GETTING IT
DONE JUST SHARE THAT WITH YOU.
BUT CERTAINLY THE LEGISLATURE
TOOK A BIG STEP FORWARD AN
INSTITUTE IN THE PROCESS THAT
YOU MISTER STEINBERG INSTITUTED.
I THINK IT COULD BE STRONGER IT
HAS WORKED IN ONE CASE IT
APPARENTLY IS ABOUT TO WORK IN
ANOTHER CASE WHERE INITIATIVE
PROPONENTS ARE WITHDRAWING
MEASURES AND SO.
IT SHOWS THAT THE APPROACH IS
REPRODUCTIVE I WOULD URGE ANY
KIND OF STRENGTHENING TODAY AT
ALL I THINK YOU'D FIND THAT THE
STRONGER THAT PROCESS WAS THE
MORE PROPONENTS TO BE WILLING TO
NEGOTIATE AND EVENTUALLY
WITHDRAW ARE YOU ABSTAINED.
FROM PROCEEDING WITH INITIATIVE
I DO THINK THERE'S A DESIRE BY
INITIATIVE PROPONENTS TO NOT
HAVE TO TWO INITIATIVES HAVING
DONE SOME THERE ARE A LOT OF
WORK.
SO WHAT WE WOULD COOPERATE IN
ANY WAY POSSIBLE WITH THAT AND
HAVE DONE THAT THE PAST ACTUALLY
WHEN I WAS WITH THE PLANNING
CONSERVATION.
ARE.
JUST VERY BRIEFLY BECAUSE I KNOW
YOU'VE REVIEWED THIS IT PRETTY
EXTENSIVELY I WOULD JUST SAY
THAT THE KEY ELEMENTS OF THIS
MEASURE OUR IT PRODUCES ABOUT A
MILLION AND A HALF ACRE FEET OF
NEW WATER WHICH IS ENOUGH FOR
THREE MILLION FAMILIES IN
CALIFORNIA.
IT DOES TAKE A BIG STEP FORWARD
IN A DRY IF YOU WATER.
ABOUT HALF OF THE MONEY EITHER
GOES DIRECTLY TO OR IS HEAVILY
BIASED TOWARD DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES THAT WAS A NEW TREND
IN THIS MEASURE THAT HAS NOT
BEEN REALLY PRESIDENT A LOT OF
WATER BONDS OR OTHER BONDS IN
THE PAST.
AND DOES ADDRESS SOME OF THE
PRIORITIES LEGISLATURE SAYS IT
HAS LIKE SIGMA LIKENS
IMPLEMENTING THE GROW WATER PLAN
THE U. VERY WISELY PASSED A FEW
YEARS AGO --
AS YOU POINT OUT IT DOES HAVE
BROAD SUPPORT BUT I THINK MORE
IMPORTANTLY IT'S IN A TREND THAT
THE STATE HAS HAD.
SINCE NINETEEN SIXTY WE'VE HAD
TWENTY FOUR BONDS THAT WERE
WATER ORIENTED SINCE NINETEEN
SIXTY ABOUT EVERY TWO AND A HALF
YEARS YOU'VE HAD A WATER BOND.
ALL BUT ONE HAVE PASSED VOTERS
GENERALLY DON'T KNOW WHETHER
WATER COMES FROM THOUGH THEY
HARDLY EVEN KNOW WHICH AGENCY
PROVIDES IT BUT THEY UNDERSTAND
IT ANYWAY SOMEHOW THEY
UNDERSTAND THAT THE WATERS IN
THE NORTH IT RAINS IN THE
WINTER.
THE NEEDS IN THE SOUTH THE NEEDS
IN THE SUMMER THEY GET THAT AND
SO THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY
THROUGH DROUGHT FLOOD ECONOMIC.
POSITIVE NEGATIVE TIMES HAVE
SUPPORTED WATER BUNS PRETTY MUCH
BY A WIDE MARGIN EVEN GO BACK TO
PROPOSITION ONE IN PROPOSITION
US SIXTY SEVEN SO --
I WILL GO THROUGH ALL THE
DETAILS OF THE MEASURE YOUR
STAFF IS THAT A GOOD ANALYSIS OF
IT BUT I WILL SAY THAT.
WE FIND A BEYOND JUST THE
SPONSORS OF THE MEASURE WE DO
HAVE A PRETTY BROAD --
ARRAY OF SPONSORS THAT OF VOTERS
IN POLLS AND PUBLIC AGENCIES
RECOGNIZE THE NEED FOR CONTINUED
WATER INVESTMENT AND WE'RE
TRYING TO PROVIDE THEM THAT UP.
I CAN GIVE YOU MORE THE DETAILS
IF YOU LIKE ME TO ANSWER BECAUSE
I WANNA.
WANNA GO BACK IN WHEN SHE THE
KEWL SUPERGRASS SUPERVISOR KEWL
WAS CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE --
THEN A GOVERNOR SHORT DISTANCE
--
HAD A SERIES OF THE
INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS AT THAT
THAT PRECIPITATED A SERIES I'M
TOLD THE FIVE HEARINGS.
A BY THIS COMMITTEE THE
PREDECESSOR CHAIR OF THIS
COMMITTEE AND SET FORTH
PRINCIPLES WHICH I SUSPECT YOU
HAVE REVIEWED AND I HAVE THEM
HERE CALLED BY.
FINANCING PRINCIPLES AND THOSE
BOND FINANCING PRINCIPLES HAVE
BEEN UTILIZED AYE IN ALL OF
THESE GOING FORWARD THE CRITICAL
ONE THAT I WANT TO REFERENCE YOU
TO AND ASK YOUR RESPONSES THE
FOURTH PRINCIPLE.
AND THAT'S FOURTH PRINCIPAL SAYS
RESPECTING SEPARATION OF POWERS
THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND
BALANCES.
AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE
PARTICULAR OVERSIGHT IS A
REFERENCE WIDE ASKED THE LA NO.
ANOTHER OF THE FUNDAMENTAL
CHECKS ON THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE
LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT LEGIBILITY
PERFORM.
THIS FUNCTION IS GREATLY AIDED
BY REQUIRING PROGRAMS TO BE
DEVELOPED IMPOTENT THROUGH
OPENNESS TRANSPARENT PROCESS IT
ALSO TALKS ABOUT.
THE LEGISLATIVE POWER TO
ALLOCATE FUNDS ONE OF THE
FUNDAMENTAL CHECKS ON THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS THE BUDGET
BUDGET PROCESS IN THAT PROCESS
THE ROLE OF THE GOVERNOR'S
DEVELOPER PROPOSED BUDGET.
THE ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE IS
TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED BUDGET
THAT MEN WERE NECESSARY AND TO
APPROPRIATE FUNDS. TO IMPLEMENT
THE BUDGET BOND FUNDED PROGRAMS
ARE FUNDED BY CONTINUES
APPROPRIATIONS BYPASS THE FORMAL
BUDGET PROCESS.
WHICH IS IT WOULD HIT WITH ITS
INHERENT CHECKS.
CONSEQUENTLY CONTINUE SHE
PREPARED BONDS PROGRAM SHOULD BE
AVOIDED.
I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT'S ARE THE
CAR I READ THE CONSTITUTION THAT
WE WRITE THE BUDGET THE GOVERNOR
CAN TAKE OUT WHAT THEY WANT BUT
THAT'S OK ALL EXCEPT.
BUT SUPERVISOR KEWELL'S ANALYSIS
HERE.
BUT THE IT WHAT IS CLEAR IS THAT
YOU HAVE WRITTEN THE BOND THAT'S
IN VIOLATION OF THE VERY
PRINCIPLES OF THIS LEGISLATURE
AND LOVE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS
IN THAT REGARD.
OF COURSE IT'S EASY TO DO THAT
YOU HAVE TO HASSLE ANYTHING THAT
MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE PEOPLE
THAT WROTE CHECKS.
TO SUPPORT THIS AND PUT IT IN
THE BALLOT.
BUT YOU KNOW WE WE ARE JOB IS TO
PROTECT THE PURVIEW OF THIS
BRANCH AND I'D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR
THOUGHTS ON THE WELL THERE ARE
TWO INTERESTING HISTORICAL OF
PERSPECTIVES ON THIS ONE IS.
EVEN PRIOR TO SENATOR KEWELL'S
ADOPTION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF
THE SENATE DEDUCTION.
OF THE LEGISLATURE APPROVED US
SENATE OF PROPOSITION
[inaudible]
TWO OH FOR NINETEEN NINETY SIX
WHICH SOMEWHAT SURPRISINGLY ó
I WAS INVOLVED IN THAT BOND OF
CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATE THE
MONEY.
EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PASSED BY THE
LEGISLATURE.
OUR THEN SUBSEQUENTLY I IN WHAT
BECAME PROPOSITION ONE NO VOTE
STARTED TO A RIGHT AROUND THE
TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE
PRINCIPLES.
LEGISLATURE ALSO CONTINUES THE
APPROPRIATE THE FUNDS TO THE
WATER COMMISSION FOR THE TWO
POINT SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS OF
THE STORAGE MONEY THAT WAS
APPROVED PROPOSITION.
ONE SO I'M NOT SAYING BY ANY
MEANS OF THE LEGISLATURE'S BEEN
CONSISTENT BUT SOMETIMES THE
LEGISLATURE'S RECOGNIZE THE
BENEFITS OF THE CONTINUOUS
APPROPRIATION.
I THINK SO AND IN POLLING THAT
WE DID FOR PROPOSITION.
ONE I WAS VERY INVOLVED THAT
CAMPAIGN WE FOUND THAT THE
PUBLIC -- IS
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF DEFERRING TO
THE EXPERTISE OF THE
ADMINISTERING ASIAN ITS THEY
REALLY FELL IN FOR EXAMPLE THE
COMPETITIVE PROCESS OF WHICH
WATER RECYCLING GRANTS PICK AN
EXAMPLE.
THAT THEY WANTED THE DEPARTMENT
OF WATER RESOURCES OF THE WATER
BOARD. TO BE THE ONES TO MAKE
THE DECISION ABOUT WHERE THE OF
FUNDS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED AND
AND NOT HAVE.
A IS THE LEGISLATURE'S
RECOGNIZED IN THE DISTRIBUTION
TRANSPORTATION FUNDS OF THE
WATER COMMISSION NOT HAVE THE
LEGISLATURE OR BE INVOLVED IN
THE INDIVIDUAL ALLOCATION OF
FUNDS NO I UNDERSTAND.
THAT GENERALLY LEGISLATURE DOES
IN FACT ALLOCATE THE MONEY TO DO
W. ARE THE WATER BOARD AND LET
THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS GO
FORWARD.
BUT THE CONTINUES APPROPRIATION
DOES FIND A LOT OF RESIDENTS
AMONG THE VOTERS IT'S ONE OF THE
STRONGER BICU JUST A IF I CAN
JUST PUSH IT ALL HARD ON THIS
[inaudible]
EH THE FUN OF IT A LITTLE BIT.
BUT YOU JUST TOLD US VOTERS
DON'T EVEN THOUGH ONLY ABOUT
WATER THEY KNOW WHAT IS
IMPORTANT I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT
COMES.
THEY KNOW IT KIND OF COMES IN
THE NORTH THEY DON'T REALLY GET
IT.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA SIT BACK AND
DEAL WITH SOMETHING ASSIST BIG
THIS COSTS US FOREST'S A MILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR.
THAT'S GONNA BE SEVENTEEN
BILLION DOLLARS TO PAY FOR AND
THAT WE'RE DEVELOPING POLICY
THAT'S CRITICAL THAT JUST SAYS
WHERE POLLS WELL SO WE'LL DO IT
I GUESS WE DO THAT ARE PROP.
ONE EIGHTY SEVEN IT POLLED WELL
WASN'T CONSTITUTIONAL BUT IT
POLL WELL IS THAT HOW I MEAN I'M
NOT SUGGESTING THAT.
YOU KNOW YOU'RE YOU'RE TRYING TO
PUT THIS TOGETHER AND WHEN FOR
THE PEOPLE THAT THAT YOU
REPRESENT.
A BUT I'M JUST THINK IT'S FAIR
FOR TRUST ASK THE QUESTIONS THE
GOVERNMENT IS THAT THE RIGHT WAY
TO MAKE STUFF HAPPEN.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A
POLICY TO SET THIS STUFF YOU
MADE THE DECISION TO DO THE
POLLING VERSES DOING THIS WHICH
WE DON'T YET FIRST ONCE A MONTH
BY TELLING YOU NOT.
ALL THE OTHER PROPOSITIONS JUNE
SAME THING AND WHAT PEOPLE SEE
ON TELEVISION RARELY REFLECTS
WHAT THE TRUTH IS.
I'M JUST THINK THAT IN A HEARING
LIKE THIS IT'S APPROPRIATE TO
ASK THOSE QUESTIONS OF A
VETERAN.
TWENTY SOME INITIATIVE WELL I
THINK YOU'RE AND YOUR POINT
ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE SETTING
THE PRIORITIES IS CORRECT AND SO
IN CONSTRUCTING THIS MEASURE.
WE ONLY ALLOCATED MONEY TO
PROGRAMS ALMOST IN EVERY CASE
THAT THE LEGISLATURE ITSELF ARE
ESTABLISHED THE WASTE WATER
RECYCLING.
WATER CONSERVATION THINGS LIKE
THAT THOSE ARE PROGRAMS THE
LEGISLATURE PUT INTO STATUTE
THERE WERE SIMPLY FUNDING WE
TRIED NOT.
TO YEAH.
ADOPT PROGRAMS ON THE PUBLIC
COULD BE UNAWARE OF THE
LEGISLATURE HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN
.
SO THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND
AGAIN THANK YOU. FOR YOUR WORK
AND NOT JUST ON THIS SPENT A
HISTORY OF HELPING MOVE OUR
STATE FORWARD I DID WANT TO ASK
A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON THE SAFE
DRINKING WATER CHAPTER FIVE
POINT.
ONE IN JUST SOME OF THE DATA
THAT YOU RELIED UPON --
TO REACH ITS HAS THE SOME OF
SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION
DOLLARS APPROPRIATED FROM THE
FUND. TO THE STATE BOARD FOR
EXPENDITURES GRANTS LOANS TO
IMPROVE WATER QUALITY.
OR HELP PROVIDE CLEAN SAFE AND
RELIABLE DRINKING WATER TO ALL
CALIFORNIANS.
IN THEN DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF
PAGE SEVEN SECTION EIGHTY SIX
DOUBLE -- OH
SEVEN THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED
MILLION SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR
GRANTS AND LOANS FOR PUBLIC
WATER SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS.
JUST SO I UNDERSTAND IS THAT
FIVE HUNDRED MILLION.
FROM WITHIN THE SEVEN HUNDRED
FIFTY MILLION OKAY SO SO THIS IS
A SUB ALLOCATION FROM THE SEVEN
HUNDRED FIFTY WHAT'S THE
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE IS THAT
WITHIN THE STATE WATER BOARD TO
DETERMINE THE DISTRIBUTION.
AND OTHER ANY FURTHER GUIDELINES
ABOUT ELIGIBILITY HAD A YOU.
ARE PRIORITIZE DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES THAT WAS THAT'S
GIVEN THE FIRST PRETTY THE
SECOND CALGARY THE YOU MENTION
THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT IS ONLY
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES IN THE
FIRST CATEGORY DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES GET THE FIRST
PRIORITY OF THOSE FUNDS.
THANK YOU AND THEN --
ON PAGE EIGHT AND ALLOCATION OF
TEN MILLION SHOULD BE AVAILABLE
FOR GRANTS TO PROVIDE SCHOOL
CHILDREN.
SAFE DRINKING WATER.
UNDER THE DRINKING WATER FOR
SCHOOL GRANT PROGRAM.
WHAT'S THAT FIGURE BASED ON HOW
MANY SCHOOLS IS THIS GONNA HELP
HOW MANY SCHOOL CHILDREN WHAT'S.
IT'S THE UNDERLYING DATA THAT IS
TEN MILLION ENOUGH IS THAT.
A PORTION OF THE NEEDS YOU KNOW
I I HAVE THAT DATA BUT I DON'T
HAVE IT WITH ME CAN I GET BACK
TO YOU GET THAT NUMBER WILL GET
IT FOR YOU THAT BE GREAT AND
AGAIN I'M JUST.
AGAIN IT IS THE CHAIR SEEKING
SOME OF THE CAN UNDERLYING
FOUNDATIONAL.
INFORMATION AND I THINK.
YOU AS WE ENVISION.
A FROM A POLITICAL POINT OF VIEW
OF MAKING THE CASE HER.
FROM BOND FUNDS UM.
THE MORE SPECIFICITY AND NOW YOU
DO HAVE BREAK DOWN SOME OF THE
ALLOCATIONS BY DIFFERENT.
CONSERVANCY DISTRICTS IN
DIFFERENT PROJECTS --
ON WATERWAYS ETCETERA BUT
UNDERSTANDING WHERE THOSE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ARE IF WE HAVE A KIND
OF A STATEWIDE.
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT.
NORTH TO SOUTH AND EVERYTHING IN
BETWEEN IS SICK CONCENTRATED
CENTRAL VALLEY IT CENTER SO
ANYTHING.
YOU COULD PROVIDE ON THAT --
WOULD BE HEALTH.
AGAIN JUST TO HELP ME
UNDERSTAND.
THE PROCESS IS I UNDERSTAND IT
WHEN A BOND IS PASSED IN THE
STATE HAS TO SELL THOSE BONDS.
TO TO BRING IN THE MONEY RIGHT
SO THE THE BOND PASSES SEVEN
HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION SIGNED
IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE IT
CONTEMPLATES.
SELLING THE BONDS.
HOW HOW WITH IN THESE
ALLOCATIONS?
ARE THE SALES OF THE MONTHS
PRIORITIZE FOR DISTRIBUTION IN
THE VARIOUS CATEGORIES THE THE
BOND LIKE ALL BOND SETS OF A
COMMITTEE OF THE CONTROLLER
FINANCE AND THE TREASURER THAT'S
A PRETTY STANDARD THING IN BONDS
NOW.
IN THAT COMMITTEE CONTROLS THE
ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS THE
ADMINISTRATION THROUGH.
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
STATE WATER BOARD WHATEVER WOULD
COME FORWARD AND SAY OKAY WE
HAVE APPLICATIONS FOR X. DEL
HOURS AND LET'S SAY THIS ADRIN
WATER PROGRAM WE NOW THINK THAT
WE CAN IMPLEMENT THOSE GRANTS.
AND SO NOW'S THE TIME PROBABLY
THE MONEY WOULD COME ACTUALLY
FROM THE POOL OF MONEY
INVESTMENT COME BECAUSE TEND TO
BE SORT OF THE BALANCE WHEEL OF
BONDS.
AND THEN BONDS WOULD BE ISSUED
SUBSEQUENT TO THAT ARE IN SOME
CASES ARE IN MANY CASES ACTUALLY
THE STATE REQUIRES LOCAL
AGENCIES TO BUILD THE PROJECT
FIRST SO WASTE WATER RECYCLING
PLANT THEY'D SAY OK.
OF CITY OF LOS ANGELES WHOEVER
YOU WANT TO BUILD THIS PLANT ó
GO AHEAD AND BUILD IT WILL
REIMBURSE YOU AND SO THE BUDGET
NOT BE SOLD UNTIL ACTUALLY AFTER
THE PROJECT WAS CONSTRUCTED
WHICH SAVES THE STATE A LOT OF
MONEY BECAUSE YOU KNOW OF THE
ISSUE BONDS AND HAVE.
THE INTEREST RUNNING WILD IN
ATLANTA BY DEFINITION THE
DISADVANTAGE COMMUNITY DOESN'T.
MR HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PUT
THAT MONEY UP FRONT AND GET
REIMBURSED FOR ANY EXACTLY AND
SO WHAT WE DID IN THE BOND WAS
TO GIVE DISPENSATION TO THOSE
CAN.
ALLOW THEM TO FRONT MONEY IN
SMALL COMMUNITIES DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY CAN'T DO
THAT THAT'S BEEN ABAR TO THEM
IN THE PAST BECAUSE THEY CAN'T
UP FRONT THE MONEY SO WE DID
MAKE THAT EXCEPTION.
I APPRECIATE THAT AND THEN THE
IN IDENTIFYING THESE
CONTAMINATED WATER SYSTEMS THERE
CAN BE [inaudible]
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
TREATMENT FACILITIES LINKING.
TO SAFER CLEANER WATER SYSTEM
ETCETERA.
IS THERE ANYTHING.
IN HERE THAT LOOKS CURRENT
UPSTREAM A FEW WELL* WHAT'S
CAUSING THE CONTAMINATION.
AND WE CAN BUILD A LOT OF
TREATMENT FACILITIES FOR ARSENIC
BUT IS THERE SOME WAY OR CHROME.
SIX SOME OF THOSE OR MAYBE NOT
GOOD EXAMPLES NATURALLY
OCCURRING CONTAMINANTS BUT LET'S
TAKE --
INDUSTRIAL CONTAMINANTS LIKE NAY
TREATS NOT SO WE SEND BOTTLED
WATER TO THE KIDS WHO CAN'T
DRINKER BASE WITH THE WATER
BECAUSE IT'S CONTAMINATED WITH
NITRATES.
THERE ANYTHING IN THIS THAT
GOES.
UPSTREAM TO THAT TYPE OF
REMEDIATION CHANGING --
INDUSTRIAL PRACTICES TO STOP.
THE POLLUTION BY YOUR QUESTION
ACTUALLY IS VERY TIMELY BECAUSE
YESTERDAY THERE WAS AN ARTICLE
ABOUT HOW GROW WATER OVERDRAFT
EXPOSES THE WELLS TO MORE
ARSENIC.
IN NATURALLY OCCURRING ARSENIC
IN SO WE HOPE BY THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
LEGISLATURE'S STATE WILL GROW
WATER MANAGEMENT ACT WE CAN
STABILIZE THOSE GROUNDWATER'S
AND THAT'S UPSTREAM OR DOWN
BELOW HE MIGHT SAY [inaudible]
TO TRIED TO GET THE SYSTEM
STABLE SO THEY DON'T START
DRAWING INTO THAT ARSENIC LADEN
WATER.
IN CREDIT RESTORE THE GROW WATER
LEVELS TO SOME EXTENT.
OR ANOTHER EXAMPLE WOULD BE A
HEAVY INVESTMENT IN THE SIERRA
NEVADA CONSERVANCY'S WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM BECAUSE WE DO
AMONG COMMUNITIES.
THAT I'VE SEEN THIS PERSONALLY
THAT HAVE HAD TERRIBLE
CONTAMINATION OF THEIR WATER
SUPPLIES WE SORT OF THE CINEMA
COUNTY FIRES AS WELL.
THAT IF YOU DON'T DEAL WITH THE
SUBSEQUENT RESULTS OF THOSE
FIRES AND TRY TO PREVENT THEM
MANAGEMENT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE
THAT PROBLEM RECURRING.
AND SO WE HAVE INVESTED IN THE
BOND -- OF
TWO HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION
DOLLARS IN THIS YEAR AND FIFTY
FOR CDF TRY TO PREVENT THAT KIND
OF CONTAMINATION SO THAT WAS
AQUA HAS A WONDERFUL PUBLICATION
ON THIS THAT I WOULD REFER YOU
TO THAT.
EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF
THEIR KIND OF WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT TO PROTECT THE WATER
SUPPLIES YOU TALK.
I APPRECIATE THAT NAM AGAIN AS
YOU POINT OUT.
THE COMBINATION OF DROUGHT IN
OVERDRAFT CAN EXACERBATE --
THE LEACHING OF SOME OF THESE
CONTAMINANTS AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
ARM AND I SHOULD S. MISTOOK IF
YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO
ADD TO IN THIS CHAIN OF
CONVERSATION ON ALL AWAY BUT I'M
APPRECIATING THE COVERS.
MISTER CHAIR FOR SOAKING IN AND
TO FOR BACK TO YOU I AM GONNA
HAVE TO EXCUSE MYSELF FOR A FEW
MINUTES HERE I HOPE TO BE ABLE
TO RETURN BUT IT'S A BUSY.
BUSY DAY.
BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONTRIBUTIONS.
OF COURSE IF YOUR QUESTION.
DOING THAT WILL MAKE
[inaudible] FOR BOB OPTIONS ARE
LIMITED THE METHODIST AND WHICH
FIVE WHO THEY ARE [inaudible]
BONNIE [inaudible]
DOT.
THEY ARE GOING TO GET THE MONEY
FROM WHY THE BODY.
TEXT ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO
YOU.
OR DESCRIBE.
BRIDGES ARCHES UNDER.
I MEAN IF.
THIS IS YOUR INFORMATION ABOUT
WHAT WENT ON LOCUSTS MARTIE
SEDAN LA.
FASHION RUN HARPER COLLINS BONDS
OF THE BOND FUNDS FOUR POINT ONE
BILLION DOLLARS NOT ENCUMBERED I
KNOW YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION
BUT I'M ASK YOU BUT YOU GOT AWAY
WITH A PRETTY A SIMPLE ANSWER IN
THE LAST HEARING BECAUSE I I
LISTENED TO IT.
YOU KNOW BUT I IT'S LIKE.
IT WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE WE'VE
BEEN THROUGH THIS ROAD I'VE BEEN
AROUND NOT AS LONG AS YOU BUT
PRETTY CLOSE I GO BACK TO
NINETEEN SEVENTY THREE AND BEEN
TO TONS OF THESE THINGS.
TOO SO SO ALL I'M SUGGESTING TO
YOU IS [inaudible]
I MEAN.
IN TERMS OF WHERE THE NEED IS IT
SEEMS TO ME MCCARTY SAID IN THE
BUDGET THOUGH.
THAT WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON HERE
AND I JUST WANTED.
AGAIN I'M NOT BLAMING YOU FOR
TAKING ADVANTAGE THE PROCESS YOU
BUT YOUR HONORABLE GUY YOU'VE
DONE.
GREAT WORK I DON'T TAKE THAT
AWAY I JUST THINK THAT IN THE IN
THE MOST APPROPRIATE MATTER IT'S
OUR OBLIGATION TO ASK THE TOUGH
QUESTIONS AS WITH LEGISLATURES
DO.
AND I MIGHT CHALLENGES BINS WE
HAVEN'T ASKED ENOUGH TOUGH
QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THE DAY
THE ECISIONS ARE WHAT THEY ARE.
WE HAVE TO PUT SHED LIGHT ON
THIS THING AND SO.
I MEAN I JUST LOOK AT THIS THING
AND AND I SEE THAT IT'S A
OPPORTUNITY THERE'S A WINDOW
POLITICALLY THAT MAYBE THESE
PEOPLE WILL VOTE ON WATER BOND
YET AGAIN. TWENTY FIFTH ONE AND
THAT IT'S IT POLLS EASY SO LET'S
KEEP FILL IN THE PIPELINE.
PEOPLE ARE UPSET BECAUSE DRIVE
ANOTHER FORM THIRTY MILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR ON DEBT SERVICE.
THE OTHER INTEREST IN THE STATE
ARE GOING TO GO CRAZY AND BEAT
YOU UP.
AND THAT THAT THE BECAUSE YOU'RE
IT'S TAEN FOREIGN THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS OF THE BACK DOOR
WHICH IS WHAT'S HAPPENING
BECAUSE I GUARANTEE IF YOU TRY
TO PUT DESPONDENT.
DURING THE DOWNTURN YOU HAVE A
LOT OF DIFFERENT OPPOSITION.
JUST THE WAY IT IS FROM TRYING
TO GET A SENSE OF IN THE MOST
CANDID WAY POSSIBLE IS.
YOU KNOW WHAT WAS THE MOTIVATION
FOR THIS WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE A
TON OF MONEY THAT HAS YET TO BE
SPENT.
THE ARE SOME URGENT ISSUE I
DON'T GET IT WILL THE THE
PREVIOUS WATER BUGS AND THEY DO
STRETCH BACK A LONG WAYS --
ARE PRETTY MUCH EXPENDED EVEN UP
TO PROPERTY FOR THIS TO A LITTLE
BIT OF MONEY LEFT IN THAT.
ONE I THAT WAS TWO THOUSAND AND
BUT ABOUT DROPPED ONE ONE UP ON
WEDNESDAY MORNING ADDRESS PROP
ONE TOOK UP ONE A LARGE AMOUNT
OF MONEY IS LEFT ESPECIALLY IN
THE ALLOCATION OF THE FUNDING
FOR STORAGE BECAUSE OF THE WATER
COMMISSION JUST THIS YEAR.
IS IN THE PROCESS OF ALLOCATING
THAT MONEY.
UP HOWEVER ARE THEY WILL
ALLOCATE IT --
ANY OVERLAP WITH THAT THERE'S NO
STORAGE MONEY IN THIS MEASURE SO
THAT'S REALLY QUITE A DIFFERENT
SUBJECT AREA THE REMAINDER OF
THE MONEY FROM PROP ONE ABOUT
FOUR POINT. ONE I CAN MEMBER
EXACTLY WHAT IT IS BUT IS EITHER
IS PRETTY MUCH BEEN ALLOCATED BY
THE LEGISLATURE THE DEPARTMENTS
THE DEPARTMENTS ARE GETTING AND
OUR WORDING AB GRANTS TO THE
VARIOUS APPLICANTS VERY CITIES
COUNTIES WATER DISTRICTS.
AND WE'RE TOLD BY THE AGENCIES
THAT THOSE FUNDS WOULD PRETTY
MUCH BE EXPENDED BY THE END OF
NEXT YEAR.
SO IT'S IT'S A SLOW PROCESS
BONDS TAKE AWHILE BUT I THINK BY
THE END OF NEXT YEAR WILL PRETTY
MUCH SEE THE EXHAUSTION OF THE
PROP ONE FUNDS.
INEVITABLY THERE WILL BE SOME
LEFT OVER THAT WILL DRAG ON FOR
FIVE OR TEN YEARS THAT'S ALWAYS
EVERYBODY HAS THAT.
BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF THE
WATER BONDS ARM BY THE TIME THIS
MEASURES IMPLEMENTED WHICH WILL
BE SOMETIME NEXT YEAR PRETTY
MUCH PROP ONE WILL BE EXHAUSTED.
SO I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE AN
OVERHANG PROP DOES SUCCEEDS A
DIFFERENT STORY BECAUSE IT'S
BRAND NEW IT HAS ABOUT A BILLION
DOLLARS WORTH OF PROJECTS IN IT.
ON THE OTHER HAND WHAT WE WERE
DOING THIS MEASURE FIRST WE
COULDN'T TELL WHETHER PROP SIXTY
EIGHT WOULD PASS OR NOT
OBVIOUSLY.
AND SECONDLY IT'S A PRETTY SMALL
AREA OF OVERLAP PROP A SIXTY
PROP -- SP
FIVE REALLY PREP SIXTY EIGHT
FUNDS A LOT OF IMPORTANT
PROGRAMS BUT NOT THAT MANY THAT
ARE IN OUR BOND THERE ARE SOME
OVERLAP AREAS THE ONE EXAMPLE
SOLVENCY.
US SALTON SEA HAD TWO HUNDRED
MILLION PRESS SIXTY EIGHT THE
STATE PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE IN
PHASE ONE OF THE SONGS HE IS
FOUR HUNDRED MILLION.
AND WITHOUT THEIR EXPENDITURE WE
COULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEALTH
DISASTER THAT'S REALLY KIND OF
UNPRECEDENTED IN CALIFORNIA WE
HAVE THE OTHER HALF OF THE MONEY
IN THIS MEASURES SO THERE DOES
NOT A CONFLICT BETWEEN THOSE --
TWO SIMILARLY SAFE DRINKING
WATER AS MISTER MONNING POINTED
OUT THE NEED IS OVER WHAT
WITHOUT OVERWHELMING BUT LARGE
VERY LARGE.
AND WE CAN EASILY EXPAND THE
COMBINATION OF THE TWO MEASURES
ON UNSAFE WATER GREAT.
DID YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS THE
OF YOU HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THE
DONOR ISSUE I MEAN I DON'T I'M
TO GET TO THAT ONE BY ONE WE'RE
GONNA GET WITH THAT'LL BE A LONG
TIME AWAY ABOUT THAT.
BUT I DO WANT ADDRESS.
THAT I FIND REAL PROBLEMATIC
HERE.
YOU KNOW. ONE OF THE GREAT
CHALLENGES THAT WE THINK ABOUT
OUR OWN POTS OF MONEY WHEN
YOU'RE CITY YOU WANT YOUR MONEY
AND YOU WANT SOMEBODY ELSE TO
PAYER COUNTY OR STATE OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
AND WE TRY TO CONTROL IT IT'S
JUST THE GAMESMANSHIP AMONG
POLITICIANS WHICH IS A DARK SIDE
OF POLITICS IN MY JUDGMENT.
IS THE IN THE DAY IT'S ALWAYS
TAXPAYERS MONEY RIGHT WHO'S
GONNA CONTROL ORDERS A GOAD YOU
BUILD THE WALL WITH THIS MONEY
BRIDGE THAT MONEY TO FIGHT THIS
WHATEVER THE SITUATION.
BUT SECTION EIGHTY SIX ONE SIXTY
SIX A OF YOUR MEASURES CHESS.
APPLICANTS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE
GRANTS LOANS AND CONTRACTS
PURSUANT TO THIS PROVISION
[inaudible]
INCLUDE.
FEDERAL AGENCIES OWNING OR
MANAGING LAND IN CALIFORNIA.
STATE THE CALIFORNIA GIVES OUT I
OVER THE YEARS BUT A DIFFERENT
NUMBER BUT WE ARE BY ORDERS OF
MAGNITUDE A CONTRIBUTOR STATE.
IF WE SIMPLY GOT A BELLY UP A
LEVEL BALANCE SHEET.
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
THE STATE GOVERNMENT WE COULD
PAVE OUR STREETS WITH GOLD WE
WOULDN'T HAVE ALL THESE PROBLEMS
THE NUMBERS ARE EXTRAORDINARY
MONEY WOULD YOU GIVE TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT WE COULD PAY FOR ALL
THIS STUFF.
THE NUMBERS ARE STAGGERING.
AND THERE'S REASONS THAT THE
FEDERAL SYSTEM WE GET THAT.
WHY IN A MILLION YEARS?
GIVEN WHAT'S GOING ON GIVEN OUR
RESOURCES GIVEN OUR FUNDS STABLE
TAX STRUCTURE.
WOULD WE WRITE A CHECK. TO THE
FOR ANY AGENCY THAT HAS
ELIGIBILITY TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WE'RE GETTING THE
HOST IF YOU READ THE NUMBERS WE
SAW ALL OVER THE PLACE WITH
RESPECT TO THE CURRENT
ADMINISTRATION.
WHEN YOU TALKED AGENCIES WILL BE
A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY
CALIFORNIANS SEE WHAT THEIR
REACTION WAS WHEN THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
TALKED ABOUT TAKING MONEY
BECAUSE IT IN LIKE A?
PROTESTS AT ONE OF THEIR
CAMPUSES WHY WOULD WE THAT
SADDAM IS HONESTLY IT'S NOT
WHETHER CITIES WERE STARS ARE
NOT MAKING THAT POINT.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE HAVE A
FINANCIAL STRUCTURE YOU'RE
ASKING THE VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA
TO WRITE A CHECK FOR SOMETHING
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COULD DO
AN EASILY DO IN SERVICE
POSSIBILITY.
THAT.
WILK TO MATCH PROGRAM TO
LEVERAGE PROGRAM IN A WAY THAT
PUSHES HIM EMBARRASS ISM BUT TO
WRITE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT
THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS AT
PLEASE HELP ME ON THIS OTHER
THAN THE FACT THAT YOUR
CONTRIBUTORS.
HAVE A PROJECT THAT INCLUDES
FEDERAL LAND AND THEY WANT THE
MONEY FOR IT JUST PLEASE I WANT
TO TRY TO GET ANSWERS TO THAT
THAT THAT.
I CAN'T GET THAT'S ONLY ONE
THING THEY AN'T FATHOM GET WHY
PEOPLE SUPPORT IT BUT THIS
[inaudible]
ONE MAKES ME.
QUESTION THIS WAS INCLUDED
BECAUSE OF A VIRTUAL DISASTER
THAT THE GOVERNOR AND MANY
OTHERS RECOGNIZE A LOT IN THAT
IS MISMANAGEMENT OF FEDERAL
LANDS IN OUR WATERSHEDS.
SO I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IF
YOU CAUGHT THAT OF BEING THERE
THE DAY THE RIM FIRE STARTED A
TALL WE COUNTY --
THE ON THE RIVER THAT DAY.
AND I WAS THERE ALSO WIN THE
RUNOFF FROM THE A TWO ARE ONLY
TURNED ACTUALLY BLACK.
SO THE THE WATER COMING INTO OUR
WATER DISTRICTS WAS HORRIBLY
CONTAMINATE WHICH IS INEVITABLE
FROM A FROM A BIG FORCE FIRE.
BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS
NOT INVESTING IN OUR WATERSHEDS
AND THEY ARE OUR WATERSHEDS
COMMITTED. TO BE HONEST ABOUT
IT.
IF THEY DON'T FIX IT WE YOU KNOW
--
JOHN ZERO TWO OF FORMER SIERRA
CLUB LOBBYIST USED TO SAY THEY
THROUGH THE SPIRIT BUT WE GOT
THE SHAFT.
AND IF WE DON'T FIX THOSE
WATERSHEDS WE'RE GONNA HAVE
CONTAMINATION PROBLEMS WATER
SUPPLY PROBLEMS AND WE'VE GOT A
FIFTEEN YEAR HISTORY NOW OF THEM
NOT FIXING THEM AND THIS IS
ENTIRELY DIRECTED.
TOWARD DEALING WITH FEDERAL
WATERSHED LANDS.
CAN AFFECT THE ONLY TIME THAT'S
MENTIONED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
BEING ELIGIBLE GRANT PROGRAM IS
UNDER THIS YEAR NEVADA
CONSERVANCY ACTUALLY.
WELL LET ME ASK COUPLE OF FOLLOW
UP QUESTIONS ON THAT.
WHY YOUR CREATIVE GUY?
WHY COULDN'T YOU AND WE'RE DOING
STUFF ALL DAY LONG NOW IN THE
LEGISLATURE DEALING WITH
TRANSFER OF OF LANDS PEOPLE ON
THE SO PARK LANDS?
THERE'S ALL SORTS OF LEVERAGE
TOOLS WE'VE GOT.
LET'S TAKE YOU AT FACE VALUE
THAT THIS AFFECTS US I CAN'T
READ THE PERCENTAGE OF THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA SO BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IT'S A PRETTY SICK
AFTER YA.
IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER
AND I THINK YOUR POINT IS WELL
TAKEN THAT IF THEY'RE NOT DOING
SOMETHING WE SUFFER FAIR CALL.
OKAY.
BUT THERE'S A HUNDRED CREATIVE
WAYS PAGE THIS.
WHERE YOU SAY YOU GET A
PERCENTAGE OR YOU DO GET A
BENEFIT HEAR THE SAME THING THAT
THEY DO TO US WHAT TAX LAWS?
BEGIN THE GOES TO THE POINT
ABOUT IT'S UNFORTUNATE BUT ON
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT
THAT PEOPLE WANT TO SPLIT BUT WE
SHOULD ALL BE ON THE SAME PAGE.
BUT THAT BEING THE CASE.
THERE JUST WAS NO CREATIVE
THINKING OF THE JUST YOU KNOW
THE RUSH TO WRITE A CHECK IN THE
ME FURTHER MAKE THE POINT WHERE
YOU LOOK AT IT IN YOUR SECTION.
EIGHT SIX EIGHT SIX ZERO TWO ONE
C..
AND EIGHT SIX ZERO TWO ZERO
WHERE YOU A FEDERAL AGENCY
SHOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR WASTE
WATER RECYCLING PROJECTS OR
TOILET RETROFITS OR EIGHT SIX
ZERO FIVE ZERO A STORM WATER
RESOURCES PLANTS.
OKAY I MEAN YOU'RE GIVING AWAY
THE STORE WITHOUT HAVING ANY
CREATIVITY TO LEVERAGE THE
TAXPAYERS DOLLARS WHAT I
UNDERSTAND.
I GET THAT THERE'S A NEED I GET
THAT SOMETIMES YOU GOT TO BEND
OVER FOR THESE URGENCY.
FAIR CALL THAT'S A REASONABLE
OCTOBER TATIAN BUT THEIR SHIP NO
EFFORT TO TRY TO PROTECT
TAXPAYERS IN MY JUDGMENT.
I WOULD STAY BASED ON THE
HISTORY THESE GRANT PROGRAMS
THAT.
OUTSIDE OF THIS YEAR THERE
CONSERVANCY WHICH HAS TO DO WITH
FEDERAL LANDS BY AND LARGE
BECAUSE OF HIS JURISDICTION.
THE CHANCES OF THE WATER BOARD
OR OR THEY GIVE YOU ARE GIVING A
GRANT TO A FEDERAL AGENCY FOR
ONE OF THEIR PROGRAMS WE PRETTY
SMALL FOR THE FEDERAL AGENCIES
DON'T TRADITIONALLY ACTUALLY
UNDERTAKE THOSE PROGRAMS ARE
CALL THEN WHY MAKE HIM ELIGIBLE.
WELL BIG JUST MAKES US LOOK LIKE
FOOLS WE'RE ASSN THE STUFF AND
WE DIDN'T DO THE HOMEWORK WE
CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S THAT
PUT IN BY.
PROPONENTS BUT WHY SHOULD WE DO
THAT.
WE WE DO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT.
DRIVES GRANTS TOWARD MATCHING
PROGRAM SO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE
NEED TO HAVE MATCHING.
GENERALLY SPEAKINGWE HAVE THAT
IN THE AGENCIES DO VERY MUCH
FAVOR THOSE KINDS OF PROJECTS
OKAY GREAT OKAY WILL THINK I
JUST.
APOLOGIZE YEAH BICU DONE ON
THE KURDS TO PUBLIX.
BUT I JUST --
EXPLORE THESE ISSUES I THINK
IT'S APPROPRIATE [inaudible]
THANK [inaudible]
ARMS.
WE GO THROUGH A FEW MORE
QUESTIONS I HAVE --
VERSION
.
I THINK WHAT I'LL DO IT TO SAVE
TIME.
IS WE HAVE.
ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
SEVEN EIGHT NINE WE HAVE
[inaudible] TEN ELEVEN TWELVE
THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN
EXAMPLES WHICH WILL SEND TO YOU
WILL PUT IN THE RECORD.
OF THE OTHER EXAMPLES WHERE WE
FEEL THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
YOU KNOW PROJECTS OR WERE YOU
SIMPLY.
I THINK DIDN'T HAVE A SHARP
ENOUGH PAN TO PROTECT TAXPAYERS
IN THE PROCESS.
NOW VON I SHE MORE THAN THAT
NOW.
BON THE BOOK THIS BOND USES THE
WORDS PRIORITY OR PREFERENCE
OVER FIFTY TIMES.
OVER FIFTY TIMES PRIORITIES THAT
APPLY TO THE ENTIRE BOND
INCLUDE.
AGENCIES IMPLEMENTING THIS
DIVISION WILL GIVE HIGH PRIORITY
COST EFFECTIVE PROJECTS.
YOU TALK ABOUT THAT'S IT EIGHTY
SIX OR ONE EV IT EIGHTY SIX ONE
SIXTY THREE B..
YOU TALK ABOUT PRIORITIES WILL
BE GIVEN TO PROJECTS THAT
LEVERAGE PRIVATE FEDERAL OR
LOCAL FUNDS WE'VE JUST SHOWN THE
INCONSISTENCIES THERE.
YOU TALK ABOUT EIGHTY SIX ONE
SIXTY SIX YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE
PRIORITIES FOR ELIGIBLES WITH A
PROJECTS WITH EXPERIENCE IN
PLANNING AND DESIGNING.
PLACE YOU GO ON THEN YOU TALK
ABOUT. EIGHTY SIX ONE SIXTY
SEVEN PIE PUBLICATIONS YOU SEE
EVEN FUNDS UNDER THE VISION
SHALL OF ADDITIONAL PRIORITY.
THAT INVOLVE THE SERVICE
CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS
IT'S ONE SEVENTY TWO EVERY
ENTITY IMPLEMENTING THIS
DIVISION SHALL GIVE THE HIGHEST
PRIORITY TO FUNDING PROJECTS TO
COMBINE.
RELATIVELY HIGH COST
EFFECTIVENESS DURABILITY
ENHANCING.
WELL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
EIGHTY SIX ONE SEVENTY EIGHT
AGENCIES EMPLOYING THIS DIVISION
SHOULD GIVE SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS TO PROJECTS THAT
EMPLOYEE NEW OR INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES. EIGHTY SIX ONE
SEVENTY NINE ONE PRIORITY SHOULD
BE GIVEN TO THE EXPENDITURES OF
FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES THAT AFFECT
THE DELTA. EIGHTY SIX ONE
SEVENTY NINE POINT FOUR IN
AWARDING GRANTS THE WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION BOARD.
A SHALL BE GIVEN PREFERENCE.
A THE E. NO SO THE BOTTOM LINE
IS WHEN YOU SAY THAT EVERYTHING
IS A PRIORITY.
NOT ONLY YOU CREATING A PROBLEM
WITH RESPECT TO INTERPRETATION.
BUT AREN'T YOU REALLY SAYING
NOTHING'S A PRIORITY.
ME HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU HAVE A
DOCUMENT LIKE THAT FROM OUR VIEW
ARE EXPERTS VIEW WHERE YOU SAID
THAT I UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES
AS IT RELATES TO IT.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO GET YOUR
THOUGHTS ON THAT I ACTUALLY OF
RAN SOME OF THESE PROGRAMS THAT
I WORK FOR THE STATE IN VARIOUS
ROLES.
AND I THINK THE KEY IS WHEN ONE
HAS.
ACTUALLY AWARDING GRANTS TO BE
SURE YOU LOOK AT THESE THINGS.
MAYBE THE WORD PRIORITY ISN'T
EXACTLY THE WAY THAT YOU
WOULDN'T ASK THESE AGENCIES TO
DO THAT BUT I DO THINK IT'S
APPROPRIATE FOR THEM TO THINK
ABOUT THINGS LIKE COST
EFFECTIVENESS.
BENEFITS TO DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES OF USING INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY THAT DOESN'T MEAN.
IT'S AN ABSOLUTE MANDATE ANY
CASE AS YOU POINT OUT THERE
EQUAL PRIORITIES BASICALLY BUT I
THINK THAT THE AGENCY SHOULD%
CONSIDER THOSE THINGS --
AND MANY OTHERS THAT YOU DIDN'T
MENTION BUT THERE ARE OTHERS IN
THERE BEFORE THEY WERE THE GRANT
IF THEY DECIDE IN THE END YOU
KNOW WHAT.
WE DON'T REALLY CARE IN THIS
CASE THAT TECHNOLOGY IS BEING
ADVANCED FINE BUT AT LAST THEY
THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
AND IS MAYBE A CHECKLIST YOU
MIGHT ARGUE AND BUT I THINK
THESE ARE THINGS THAT THE VOTERS
WOULD WANT TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN
YOU'RE MAKING THESE GRANT
AWARDS.
THE LEAST THAT WAS OUR THEORY.
IT ALSO EIGHT AND MADE THIS
POINT EARLIER BUT I JUST WANT TO
READ INTO THE RECORD FOR
PURPOSES THAT WE HAVE STATE
BONDS.
THAT YOU'RE ASKING TO MEET
FEDERAL OBLIGATIONS NOT JUST THE
ISSUE.
OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S THE
THE THE WATERSHED WHICH YOUR
POINTS WELL TAKEN IN THE FACT
THAT THEY'RE IGNORING IT BUT
ALSO THE FACT THAT.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE FEDERAL
OBLIGATIONS THAT WE'RE PAYING
FOR FOR EXAMPLE.
THE WATER DELIVERY OBJECTIVES OF
THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT
IMPROVEMENT ACT CREDITS AYE
PRIORITY ALSO THE SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER SETTLEMENT.
THAT WAS SETTLED WITH NATURAL
RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL VERSUS
CREEK ROGERS THAT SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AT RTC
ENVIRONMENT ORGANIZATION THE
BUREAUCRATIC RECLAMATION.
AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
DISAGREEMENTS TO RESTORE THE SAN
JOAQUIN RIVER --
EN AND HERE WE ARE WE'RE PAYING
FOR A IN DEBT TO UNDO THIS
DAMAGE WHICH THEY'RE LOBBING IT
THE FRY AND CURRENT CANAL THIS A
CANAL FACIITY OF THE BUREAU
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT.
WELL IT'S EXPERIENCE SUBSIDIES.
WHICH HAS REDUCED ITS CAPACITY
IN THIS ISSUE I'VE TALKED TO THE
PEOPLE IN THERE THAT THEY'RE
SMART ABOUT THIS.
BUT I WE HAVE TO ASK ITS WAS THE
CALIFORNIA ACT WITH ACT WHICH IS
PART OF THE STATE WATER PROJECT.
THE QUESTION IS WHO WE ARE FAIR
TO ASK STATE TAXPAYERS TO GO
INTO DEBT TO FUND THE FEDERAL CA
NOW --
SIMILAR KIND OF ISSUES I DON'T
THINK YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC ANSWER
FOR I JUST WANT TO RAISE THOSE
ISSUES.
AND THEN ALSO WE HAVE STATE BOND
FUNDS USING TO MAKE ANNUAL WATER
PURCHASES UNDER.
EIGHTY SIX ONE TWENTY YOUR
MEASURE SAYS THE BOARD CHAU SELL
TRANSFER STORE WATER.
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION OF THE
BOARD FINDS AT THE SALE WILL NOT
CAUSE HARM TO FISH AND WILDLIFE
THE ACQUISITION WATER USING
THESE FUNDS.
YOU KNOW WE'VE GONE THE DOWN THE
ROAD WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL
WATER COUNTIES ARE KEENLY AWARE
FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME.
IS THAT WAS PART OF CAL FED YOU
KNOW AGAIN WHY SHOULD THE
TAXPAYERS GOING TO OF THIRTY
YEAR DATA FORTY YOUR DEBT PING
THE CIRCUS TO FUND PURCHASES.
OF FOR ONE YEAR BENEFITS I MEAN
I THINK IT'S AN OLD BOND WATER
MYSELF THAT PRESENTS SOME
CHALLENGES.
ARM AS TO WHETHER IT'S EVEN
FINANCE SUPPORT BECAUSE YOU ONLY
AFFECTS FINANCE LONG TERM
CAPITAL COSTS.
LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE WE
BUT I ACTUALLY WAY BACK ON PROP
THIRTEEN MISTER SHADOWS WATER
BOND IN TWO THOUSAND WE SPENT A
LOT OF TIME WITH BOND COUNSEL.
DOING WITH THE QUESTION OF WHAT
ANNUAL COST TO BE PAID IN A BOND
VERSUS MORE --
SAID OF CATHOLIC COSTS AND
YOU'LL NOTICE IN NUMBERS SET UP
A REPRESSED FUND.
WHOSE INTEREST CAN BE USED TO
MAINTAIN THE PROJECTS LIKE IN
SAFE DRINKING WATER PROJECTS WHO
WE WERE TOLD BY BOND COUNSEL AT
THE TIME WAS DON'T GET CARRIED
AWAY THERE'S NO HARD AND FAST
RULE NEW YORK CITY WENT WAY
OVERBOARD.
THEY ALMOST BANKRUPTED.
AND SO KEEP IT WITHIN REASON
[inaudible]
ARM THAT LANGUAGE WAS PUT INTO
PROP THIRTEEN THE LANGUAGE YOU
SEE IN THE BOND HERE WAS PUT
INTO PROP THIRTEEN UNDER THE OF
FLOOD.
A MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND WAS
SUSTAINED ALL THE BOND COUNSEL
PROVED IT.
AYE I THINK WE'RE BEING
CONSERVATIVE HERE IN TERMS OF A
PERCENT.
OF IT'S PRETTY LOW PERCENT
PROBABLY.
I I IT WOULD BE MY GUESS BUT I
COULD TRY TO DERIVE THAT NUMBER
FOR YOU BUT THE VAST VAST
MAJORITY THE FUNDS ARE IN FACT.
FOR A CAPITAL OUTLAY IN THE SAFE
DRINKING WATER PROGRAM WE DO
ALLOW THE AGENCIES TO HAVE THREE
YEARS OF OPERATING FUNDS BECAUSE
THESE LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES
HAVE TROUBLE.
GETTING THEIR PROGRAMS UP AND
RUNNING SO IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE
WE REALLY DID ALLOWING THEM FOR
THREE YEARS ONLY
.
THIS IS OUR USUAL MORNING BUT
CERTAINLY [inaudible]
SENATOR.
FIRST QUESTION IS I MEAN ASK YOU
IS.
NO WORSHIPERS WORKERS.
THAT MEMBERS LAST.
MONTH.
HI SHE BEST USE WONDERING LAID
OUT OF LEADERS.
YOU'RE PEOPLE AT FOUR THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS TO SPEND OF THE
GENERAL FUND IS THIS HOW YOU'D
SPEND. FORTY HAVE OTHER
PRIORITIES THAT YOU'D ASKS FOR
BECAUSE IF YOU DO I JUST
REMEMBER THIS WHEN YOU COME TO
COMMITTEE IN THE NEXT
[inaudible]
ONE LOOK.
SO I'LL START WITH A FAR WITH A
QUESTION.
ON THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE MAKE
SOME OPENING COMMENTS ARE GO
AHEAD QUICK QUESTION.
PHONE SO THANK YOU CHAIR
HERTZBERG IN ON THIS IS A GREAT
CONSULTANT TEAM THAT YOU HAVE
HERE WITH EXCELLENT SO MUCH
EXPERIENCE AROUND THE TABLE --
SAID CINDY TALK WITH THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES AS YOU ALL KNOW BUT FOR
THE PUBLIC WE REPRESENT LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS THE PUBLIC WATER
AGENCIES AND OUR MEMBERS WE HAVE
ABOUT FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY MEMBERS
AND TOGETHER THEY PROVIDE ABOUT
90% OF THE WATER.
THAT'S DISTRIBUTED IN CALIFORNIA
TO THE PUBLIC TO AGRICULTURE AND
BUSINESS.
ON DESPONDENT OUR BOARD TOOK A
POSITION BACK IN NOVEMBER AND
THE OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS TOOK
UP BOTH.
PROP SIXTY EIGHT IN THIS BOND AT
THE SAME TIME AND REVIEW THEM
AND TOOK A SUPPORT POSITION ON
BOTH FUNDS.
LAST NOVEMBER AT OUR CONFERENCE
WE HAD A PANEL COME AND TALK
ABOUT THE BONDS IN ORDER TO
EDUCATE OUR MEMBERS ABOUT THEM.
AND WE HAD A PROPONENT FROM FOR
EACH OF THE BONDS AND THEY SPOKE
AND TOGETHER THEY SAID THAT THE
TWO BONDS ARE COMPLEMENTARY
WHICH I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU.
AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION SO I
WANTED TO HAVE THAT STATEMENT IN
THE RECORD.
IT'S SIGNIFICANT THAT THIS BOND
LIKE PROP.
SIXTY EIGHT LIKE PROP ONE HOPES
IMPLEMENT THE ADMINISTRATION'S
CALIFORNIA WATER ACTION PLAN
THAT CLEARING TAKES.
EIGHTY ALL TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX
KIND OF APPROACH TO WATER.
AND IN THEIRS KEY FUNDING ON OF
THAT CLEAR AND I THOUGHT I'D
HIGHLIGHT TWO OR THREE VERY
QUICKLY. ONE OF THEM OF COURSE
IS SAFE DRINKING WATER WHICH ON
THE LEGISLATURE'S VERY FOCUSED
ON OCT WAS VERY FOCUSED ON IN
MANY STAKEHOLDER GROUPS.
ANOTHER --
TOPIC IN THAT CLEAN IS GROUND
WATER WHICH IS A KEY ISSUE FOR
THE LEGISLATURE AND FOR THE
WATER COMMUNITY AND ALL OF JUST
TOUCH ON THOSE TWO IN THE
INTEREST OF BREVITY. FOR SAFE
DRINKING WATER PROP ONE WE TOOK
ON THAT RECENTLY WAS STATE WATER
BOARD STAFF IN THE PROP ONE
MONEY --
THEY SAID IT'S EITHER YOU KNOW
OUT THE DOOR OR IT'S IN PROCESS
ABOUT MONEY IS A IS ALLOCATED.
IN THIS BOND HAS FIVE HUNDRED
MILLION AS ON THAT CAME UP WHEN
SENATOR MONNING WAS TALKING WITH
MR MERYL.
AND THAT MONEY IS PRIORITIZE FOR
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES THAT
WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO THE TWO
HUNDRED AND FIFY MILLION.
THAT THE VOTERS JUST APPROVED IN
PROP SIXTY EIGHT AND FOR BOTH ON
THE NOVEMBER BOND AND PROP SIXTY
EIGHT THE MONEY FOR SAFE
DRINKING WATER IS PRIORITIZE FOR
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES.
THE OTHER AREA THAT'S PART OF
THE CALIFORNIA WATER ACTION
CLEAN THAT I WANTED TO MENTION
IS GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT.
AND I'M COMING DENNIS O'CONNOR
PROBABLY KNOWS THE SUSTAINABLE
GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT ACT BY
HEART -- BUT
YOU MAY RECALL THAT BACK IN
TWENTY FOURTEEN THERE WAS A LOT
OF WORK ON WATER BUT THE POLY
THE TWO BIGGEST ISSUES AND CLAY
WHERE THE WATER BOND.
IN THE WERE SO MANY DIFFERENT
VERSIONS AND DRAFTS OF THAT AND
THEN THERE WAS THE WORK ON THE
SUSTAINABLE GROUND WATER
MANAGEMENT ACT IN THOSE WERE
HAPPENING IN PARALLEL.
AT THE END OF THE DAY THE THE
LEGISLATURE IN THE STAKEHOLDER
GROUPS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON IT
FINISHED WRITING SIGMA PRETTY
CLOSE TO THE END OF SESSION.
AND WOMEN THERE WAS
CONSIDERATION OF SHOULD THERE BE
BOND MONEY FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
AS THEY WERE WRAPPING UP THE
WATER BOND SO HUNDRED MILLION
DOLLARS WAS ADDED INTO WHAT
BECAME PROP ONE FOR GROUND WATER
ON BASICALLY IMPLEMENTATION OF
SIGMA.
I THINK HAD SIGMA BEEN FINISHED
A SPHERE BEFORE THEY'RE PROBABLY
WOULD BEEN MORE IN THE WATER
BOND FOR SIGMA.
BUT AS IT TURNED OUT THERE WAS A
HUNDRED MILLION AND THAT ON YOU
KNOW IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT IF THE
UN DE W. ARE IN RESOURCES AGENCY
DOCUMENTS YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT
MONEY --
THAT'S ALLOCATED.
SOME NOW UNDER SIGNAL WE HAVE
TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY EIGHT NEW
LOCAL AGENCIES THEIR GROUND
WATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCIES
THEY'RE CHARGED WITH DEVELOPING
AND IMPLEMENTING GROUND WATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLANS.
THOSE PLANS ARE CRITICAL FOR
WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY IN
CALIFORNIA.
ON THAT RELATES TO SAFE DRINKING
WATER.
IN THIS BOND HAS THE SIX HUNDRED
FORTY MILLION AND THAT CAN BE IN
IN ARGUES FOR THINGS LIKE GROUND
WATER RECHARGE PROJECTS WHICH
THAT'S SO CRITICAL. OH
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLANS AND
THINGS LIKE SALT WATER INTRUSION
AND ON IF SENATOR MONEY WAS HERE
HE WOULD NOT THAT THAT'S AN
ISSUE YOU KNOW IN THE CENTRAL
SOUTH ORANGE SIXTY EIGHT ACTUAL
NEW SUBDIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
INCORPORATED AS NEW SUBDIVISIONS
OF GOVERNMENT.
THEY MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
THEY ARE LOCAL AGENCIES.
SO WE WENT FROM 400-080-0408
SUBDIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
CALIFORNIA FIVE THOUSAND ONE IN
SIXTEEN IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING
AND REALIZE WHAT WE WERE JUST MY
NUMBERS.
BUY THE SIGNAL REQUIRED THEM TO
BE FORGET ANNOUNCED JUST TRY TO
KEEP COUNT THAT'S ALL.
SO SO THAT'S THE COMMENT ON ON
GRAND WONDERS ON MANAGEMENT.
SO IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I'LL
CONCLUDE THERE AND CLAD TICKET
TO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION
I'M INTERESTED IN THAT ME LOOK
CLEARLY AYE I GET THAT THAT.
THAT YOUR ORGANIZATION WOULD
SUPPORT DESPONDENT COURSE I GET
WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
IS IF YOU HAD AS THE LA DOES
SAYS.
AN ANNUAL ALLOCATION THAT WENT
TO YOU.
OF THAT WENT TO WATER RESOURCES.
OF WHAT'S NUMBER FOUR HUNDRED
AND WHAT I HAVE YOUR FORGOTTEN
HOW MUCH MILLION A YEAR FOR
THIRD.
BORN THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS A
YEAR.
JUST HOW YOU'D SPEND.
SO THAT'S THAT'S A VERY GOOD
QUESTION ALSO TELL YOU THAT BACK
BEFORE PROP ONE NIGHT IN I
HAVEN'T YOU KNOW YOUR SIDE
THOUGH YOU CAN ANSWER THE
QUESTION BUT I I'M BUT I'M DOING
ON PURPOSE SAY YES SO YOU'D
SPEND THE ANSWER IS NO.
HOW 2% NO YOU LOOK GREAT IDEA
THIRTIES COULD ARGUE WITH A
QUESTION THE ANSWER ON THAT?
YEAH GOOD THANK YOU.
SO.
YOU KNOW WHEN PROP ONE WAS BEING
--
WELL BEFORE PROP ONE WAS.
BRITAIN WE HAVE THE TWO THOUSAND
NINE WATER BOND WHICH OF US IN
ELEVEN POINT ONE FOUR BILLION
DOLLAR BOND.
AND THERE DURING THE RECESSION
THE LATE AND EVERYONE KNEW THAT
THE BOND THAT BOND NEEDED TO BE
DOWNSIZED FROM ELEVEN POINT ONE
FOUR BILLION DOLLARS.
AND SO AT AWKWARD WE CREATED A
BOARD LEVEL TASK FORCE THAT MATT
IN TWENTY TWELVE AND TWENTY
THIRTEEN AND TALKED ABOUT WHAT
SHOULD GEO BONDS BE USE FOR IN
WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE
AMOUNT FOR THAT BOND WHAT WOULD
BE THE APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES.
AND THE BOARD DID CONCLUDE THAT
SHE'LL BOND FUNDING WAS AN
APPROPRIATE SOURCE OF FUNDING
FOR WATER.
ON ISSUES IT AND YOU TO ONE OF
THE ISSUES THAT WE PRIORITIZED
WHEN WE CAME UP WITH WHAT WE
SUGGESTED ON FOR THE BOND WAS
MONEY FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER.
IN WE WERE SUGGESTING FOR
EXAMPLE THREE HUNDRED FIFTY
MILLION ORIGINALLY BUT WHEN THE
BOND INCLUDED FIVE HUNDREDS ON I
THINK WAS FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY
FOR SAFE AND CLEAN TOGETHER.
AQUA BOARD SUPPORTED THAT IS BUT
THEY DID VISIT THE ISSUE OF
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND ONE
OF THE ISSUES WAS THAT.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT REPAYMENT
WHICH GENERAL FUND MONEY THAT IS
UP OUR PROGRESSIVE BASIS SO THAT
PEOPLE HO ARE MAKING MORE MONEY
PAY MORE FOR THAT SOLUTION AND
THEY THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS?
AN APPROPRIATE MEANS SO THAT
THAT WAS A DISCUSSION BACK IN.
TWENTY TWELVE TWENTY THIRTEEN
BUT DOES THAT FUNDS THAT WE
ANSWER THE QUESTION I ASKED
GOLD.
STARTING NEXT NEXT FISCAL IF YOU
HAD FOREIGN THIRTY MILLION
DOLLARS IT WOULD YOU ALLOCATE
FOR EXAMPLE I MEAN I'VE BEEN A
NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH YOU AND
OTHER REPRESENTATIVES SAYING YOU
SUPPORT --
MISTER MONIES LEGISLATION TO
DEAL WITH THAT CONTAMINATED
WATER BUT YOU WANT.
YOU DON'T WANT TO FEEL IT TO BE
BASED UPON FEES YOU WANT THE
GENERAL FUND TO PAY.
FOR THIS IS ALLOCATION OF
GENERAL FUND THE FEW BALANCED
OUT THIS BOND AND COULD SHRINK
IT BY DEBT SERVICE OF WHATEVER
THE COST IS FOR THE FEE WOULD
YOU BOOM.
WHAT WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING
UNLESS YOU SUPPORT CUSHION OF
THE CAPACITIES OF IS SOMETHING
YOU ENTERTAIN?
I IN THIS REGARD AGAIN I KNOW WE
CAN'T DO IT.
BUT I JUST TRYING TO MAKE A
POINT AND THE POINT IS THAT.
YOU KNOW ITS OUR FAULT TOO AND A
BUNCH OF REASONS AND I WE MIGHT
OBJECTIVE HERE IS.
TO GAUGING A RESPONSIBLE
LEGISLATIVE ASPECT AND YOU CAN
SEE A VAST A ARE BILLION STAFF
TO SCRUB THIS THING.
BECAUSE THAT'S OUR OBLIGATION TO
NOT JUST TO A ONCE OVER BUT
DESCRIBE BUT NO REFERENCE EVERY
CODE SECTION TO FIND EVERY
INCONSISTENCY.
AND THAT --
I STILL THINK YOU'LL PASS OUT
[inaudible]
RIGHT BUT WE HAVE TO ASK THE
QUESTIONS AND AND TO THE SAME
THING WITH RESPECT TO WHAT
SENATOR MONEY WAS ASKING ABOUT
PRIORITIES.
AND WHAT WOULD WE DO AND I THINK
THAT WE NEED TO THE LESSON OF
IS CERTAINLY SPENT A CHAIR
CHAIRWOMAN KEWL TRIED TO DO IT
BY SETTING UP PRINCIPLES THAT
WERE SIMPLY IGNORED IN LARGE
MEASURE --
BUT CHAO HOW TRIED TO CREATE OUR
FINGERPRINT ON THIS IN A WAY
THAT MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS
IS MORE INCLUSIVE.
THAT THE PUBLIC PUBLIC POLICY
PERSPECTIVE.
THAT -- WE
LOOK THROUGH THE BIG PICTURE
FRAME WORK AND TRY TO GET
THROUGH THE INFLUENCE ALL THE
ACTORS. TO IN ANY WAY THAT'S
APPROPRIATE TO GET THE BEST
PUBLIC POLICY ACROSS THE BOARD
AND THIS PROCESS DOESN'T REALLY
DO THAT.
AS MUCH ALTHOUGH I WILL ADMIT
THAT I WITH GREAT ENTHUSIASM
THAT THIS PROCESS TO PRODUCE
SOME EXTRAORDINARY ADVANCEMENTS
FOR CALIFORNIA [inaudible]
YEAH.
I WANT TO ASK THE CONTINUOUS BY
OF THE QUESTION BUDGET GRF TO
CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATE USE
YOUR OF FUNDS. FOR SPECIFIC
AGENCIES IN YOUR MEASURE AND
THEIR COST OF COMPLYING WITH A.
B. THIRTY TWO UNDER SECTIONS
SEVEN I'M STARTING ON PAGE FORTY
NINE STATE WATER PROJECT AND
BIBBIDI CONTRA COSTA MET WATER
DISTRICT.
AND ST LOUIS AND DELTA MENDOTA
CAN NOW WHEN YOU GET YOUR
INSIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THAT
THROUGH THESE AGENCIES ARE
PRESENTLY HAVE --
TO HAVE ALLOWANCES UNDER A. B.
THIRTY TWO BECAUSE THEY TO SOME
EXTENT USE FOSSIL FUELS TO PUMP
WATER FROM THE DELTA.
AND THE OBLIGATION THEY HAVE TO
MITIGATE THE EMISSION OF
GREENHOUSE GASES IS NOT REDUCED
BY THIS MEASURE WHAT IT DOES IS
IT TAKES THE FUNDS THAT THEY
CURRENTLY HAVE TO PROVIDE.
AND REQUIRES THEM TO SPEND IT ON
WATER AND ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAMS THAT WILL COMPLY WITH
A. B..
THIRTY TWO BUT WITH THE EXTRA
CAVIAR THAT THEY HAVE TO TRY AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO BENEFIT
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AS
THEY EXPEND THOSE FUNDS SO WATER
CONSERVATION ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAMS IN DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES.
WOULD BE ELIGIBLE REWINDING
TURBINES THE COMMON WAY OF
IMPROVING ENERGY EFFICIENCY BUT
THE PURPOSE OF AB THIRTY TWO
WHICH IS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS IS
MAINTAINED VERY STRONGLY IN
THIS.
IS JUST SIMPLY TELL THE AGENCIES
HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY THAT THEY
ALREADY ARE GOING TO SPEND ON
THOSE PARTICULAR PROGRAMS YRDSB
AHMAD.
THEY DON'T REALLY PUMP WATER
FROM THE DELTA THERE BUT ENERGY
GENERATOR THEY ACTUALLY GENERATE
ENERGY AS THE WATER ENTERS THEIR
SYSTEM.
BUT EDU A TELLING US THAT YOU
LOOKED AT ALL THE ANTI DE AS
THOSE.
THOSE ENTITIES ARE SONY SITUATED
IN YOU TO THEM ALL EQUALLY.
AS BEST WE COULD I I'M SURE
THERE SOMEWHERE SOME AGENCY THAT
ACTUALLY IS AN ENERGY A USER BUT
BY AND LARGE IN CALIFORNIA MOST
OF THE BIG SYSTEMS.
LIKE LADWP HETCH HETCHY USED
EARLY ENERGY GENERATORS BECAUSE
THEY'RE STORING WATER UP IN THE
MOUNTAINS AND BRING INTO THERE'S
THESE ONES THAT YOU MENTIONED
ARE THE MAIN ONES THAT WE'RE
AWARE OF WHERE THERE ACTUALLY
HAVING TO YOU.
OF THE ALLOWANCE IS HOW MUCH
THEY CURRENTLY PAY AND TO THE
JUDGE ABOUT TOTAL ABOUT TWENTY
MILLION DOLLARS [inaudible]
DON'T.
AND AND WHEN WHY DO YOU THINK
THAT THESE INVESTMENTS AGAIN
LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE
FRAMEWORK WHY DO YOU THINK THAT
THESE INVESTMENTS.
OF HAVE A GREATER IMPACT ON
REDUCING GHGS THAT OTHER
INVESTMENTS THAT IT WAS MORE A
MATTER OF ONE YEAR SIR IT WAS
MORE A MATTER OF CONSISTENCY
WITH THE OF THE UTILITIES THE
UTILITIES UNDER AB.
THIRTY TWO ARE WERE TREATED
DIFFERENTLY THAN THE OTHER
IMITATORS --
CHEVRON OR SOMEONE LIKE THAT
THEY WERE ALLOWED TO RETURN
THEIR BENEFITS THEY'RE PAYMENTS
TO THE RATE PAYERS WE ALL SEE
THAT OUR BILL WE GET A CERTAIN
REBATE.
THE WATER UTILITIES ASK FOR THE
SAME TREATMENT AND ACTUALLY OF
CHAIR NICHOLS AND OTHERS WERE
SYMPATHETIC TO TREATING THE
WATER UTILITY IS THE SAME AS THE
ENERGY.
UTILITIES BUT IT NEVER JUST
REALLY ACTUALLY HAPPENED MW DE
AND OTHERS ASKED FOR SO THIS IS
MORE A MATTER OF CONSISTENCY IN
TREATING UTILITIES WITH MILLIONS
OF CUSTOMERS IN A SIMILAR
FASHION.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE OF CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS --
I NOTICED IN THE LATE FILING
REPORTS FROM SECRETARY OF STATE
THAT THERE'S A SERIES OF
CONTRIBUTIONS TOTALING FOUR
HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM
MEMPHIS TENNESSEE FROM DUCKS
UNLIMITED.
HERE AND YOU.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA AS TO WHY
THIS SUPPORTING US THIS MEASURE
HAS MORE BENEFITS FOR WATERFALL
THAN PROBABLY ANY PREVIOUS
MEASURE THAT'S APPEARED ON THE
CALIFORNIA BALLOT.
O. WE HAVE.
BUT YOU KNOW CALIFORNIA'S
BLESSED WITH A BOUNTIFUL
WATERFALL POPULATION BIG IT'S
BECAUSE WE'VE INVESTED AND
EVERYTHING CALIFORNIAN WETLANDS
IS MANAGED WE HARDLY HAVE ANY
NATURAL WETLANDS AT ALL.
YOU BRING IN A WATER SUPPLY YOU
MANAGE IT THROUGHOUT THE FIELDS
THE WATERS DISCHARGED VARIOUS
PLACES WE JUST DON'T HAVE
NATURAL HISTORIC WETLANDS AND IT
COST SO WHAT THE STATE HAS
INVESTED A LOT PREVIOUSLY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVESTED ALL.
AND THIS CONTINUES THAT BUT IN A
STRONGER WAY I CAN'T SPEAK FOR
DUCKS UNLIMITED BUT I THINK THEY
SAW THE BENEFIT OF THAT.
OF BUT IT'S A GENERAL PROGRAM IS
A PRETTY SPECIFIC BENEFIT TO
THEM AS AN ORGANIZATION THEY ARE
CONTRIBUTOR.
I THINK TO TO ALLOW THEMSELVES
TO CONTRIBUTE MORE IN A SENSE
BECAUSE THEY SIMILARLY INVEST IN
THEPROJECT WITH THEIR OWN MONEY
THEY'VE VESTED.
TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
THESE PROJECTS THEMSELVES.
I KNOW BUT I WISH I COULD BE
WRONG AND THAT ONLY MAKES A
DECISION WHAT SOMEBODY PUTS UP
THAT KIND OF MONEY IN THIS
HUNDRED THOUSAND FIFTY THOUSAND
ARE CONTRIBUTIONS YOU GO TO THE
REPORT --
THERE HAS TO BE SOME COST
BENEFIT ANALYSIS BEING MADE BY
THE PEOPLE IN MEMPHIS TENNESSEE.
IN MAKING THAT DETERMINATION AND
CERTAINLY THERE'S A LOT OF DUCK
CLUBS.
I'VE ONLY BEEN THE ONE THAT
ACTUALLY GO BUY IT ONCE IT'S NOT
MY AREA OF EXPERTISE BUT BUT
JOHN.
YOU KNOW CLEARLY THAT THAT THAT
THEY THEY IF THE EXPENDITURE
PRESERVING MORE AREA TO BRING IN
MORE WATER AND OTHER THINGS THAT
IMPACT THEM.
SPEC THAT THE COST BENEFIT
ANALYSIS IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
IN TERMS OF THE BENEFITS THAT
THEY GET.
VERSES WHAT THEY PAY TO PUT SOME
AT THE TO RISK GETTING A BOND
PASSED.
BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE IS NO THE
WAY.
NOW WITH RESPECT TO THE AYE AYE
SPECIAL YOUR TESTIMONY AND IN
TERMS OF ON AND I SEE WAS I WENT
TO THE LARGE CONTRIBUTOR LIST
WHICH MEANS UNDER THE LAWS
ANYBODY OVER FIVE THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
ON IT ALMOST A LOT OF MURATSUCHI
ASIANS WATER FILE ASSOCIATIONS A
HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
AND VARIOUS OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
ARE SOME THAT I JUST DON'T KNOW
LIKE MAX CHO SUPPLY MAY BE A
GREAT COMPANY FIFTY THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
AND I'M JUST TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND.
YOU KNOW WHY A LOT OF THESE
GROUPS WOULD DONE.
WOULD FUND THIS I AM LOOKING FOR
THE YOU KNOW CURRENT MACHINERY
COMPANY TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
HELLO WESTERN POWER PRODUCTS
INCORPORATED TWENTY FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS.
A A AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS
DIFFERENT COMPANIES ARE WRITING
FAKE CHECKS.
A POEM WHICH IS SIMPLY NOT THERE
WHEN POLITICS ARE NOT CATCHING
IT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS.
HE'S TRYING TO EXPLORE THE
CAUSAL CONNECTION BETWEEN.
THE CHOICES THAT WERE MADE ON
THE ONE HAND --
AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS ON THE
OTHERS AND THEN WE CAN DO.
THAT YOU CAN UNLOCK ANGELA TO
DEEPLY I THINK THE POINT'S BEEN
MADE.
BUT TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON THAT.
I WAS A LITTLE BIT AMAZED
FRANKLY HAVING WORKED IN
CALIFORNIA WATER.
FOR A DISTURBINGLY LONG TIME.
WHEN I WENT TO THE WATER
AGENCIES WHO WERE FIRST COME
CLEAN THIS A FEW YEARS AGO AND
SAID WHAT ARE YOUR PRIORITIES I
THOUGHT THEY WOULD SAY?
BUILDING DAMS BECAUSE
TRADITIONALLY THAT'S WHAT THEY
WANT OF ORDER EXTENDING CANALS
OR WHATEVER AND BUT SOMEWHAT TO
MY AMAZEMENT WHAT I HEARD IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY WAS SAFE DRINKING
WATER AS A TOP PRIORITY.
BECAUSE THEY RECOGNIZE THE
INTERACTION BETWEEN THEIR
ACTIVITIES AND GROW WATER
CONTAMINATION IN THE FARMWORKERS
THAT THEY EMPLOY AND SO ON SO
THAT.
WAS A REALLY BIG PRIORITY
IMPLEMENTING SIGMA WAS HUGE
BILLS THAT MAKE SENSE FOR THE
BIG OBLIGATION ON THEM.
AND REPAIRING EXISTING
[inaudible]
FOR THEY'LL.
AND WHAT YOU SEE THERE I THINK
RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT THIS
MEASURE REALLY DOES IMPLEMENT
THOSE THREE OR FOUR PROGRAMS
THAT THEY SAID WERE HIGH
PRIORITY.
THIS BOND IS PRETTY LATE ON
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ACTUALLY
COMPARED TO SOME OTHER ONES
PREVIOUSLY BUT THE THE
AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY IS
THINKING MORE HOLISTICALLY THAT
I'VE EVER SEEN BEFORE I MEAN
IT'S A DIFFERENT DAY OUT THERE
IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY GOOD.
IT'S EXCELLENT IT'S BEYOND THAT
IS ALL IT AND SO I THINK THIS I
THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THE
EGG INVESTMENT.
REFLECTS THOSE THREE PRIORITIES
THAT THEY HAD PRETTY MUCH.
FURTHER THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THANK YOU MISTER FILE JONES
SIERRA CLUB THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THANK YOU.
FOR SUBJECTING YOURSELF TO THE
HARD QUESTIONS YOU DO A GOOD JOB
AND I ON A PERSONAL LEVEL I
APOLOGIZE BUT I ADMIT ETHICAL%
OBLIGATION TO ASK TOUGH
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
SURE.
MORNING HOW JONES HERE
CALIFORNIA I ASKED MOST YOUR
QUESTIONS AND I MADE MOST OF THE
POINTS YOU MADE YOUR TESTIMONY
READY SAID HAD A SHORT.
GOING TO KNOW I THOUGHT YOU WAS
I TOLD YOU THE GREAT JOB THE
OTHER DAY I LISTENED TO IT.
DENNIS GAVE IT TO ME AND I
WATCHED IT ONE O'CLOCK IN THE
MORNING BECAUSE I HAVE NOTHING
ELSE TO DO.
THANK YOU I GUESS THAT'S A A
COMMON THING THAT HAPPENS AND
YOU -- WITH
ALL OF US IN HERE I AM I SO YEAH
LATE LIKE YOU MENTIONED YOU KNOW
WHAT MY POINT SO I JUST WANT TO
KIND OF ELABORATE ON A FEW
THINGS I WENT SHOULD JUST SURE
HAVE IT --
YOU KNOW YOU DID NOT THIS IS A
BET WITH TRADITIONAL PAY TO PAY
APPROACH AND I WE THINK THAT IT
THEN ENCOURAGES A LOT OF MONEY
TO GO TO WASTE WITH THINGS THAT
I EITHER HAVE RESPONSIBLE
PARTIES OR TO PAY FOR MORE YOU
SEE PRIVATE PARTIES THAT ARE
GOING. TO BENEFIT.
THEIR PROFITS OFF OF TAXPAYER
FUNDS WHICH IS AN APPROPRIATE --
IT'S ALSO WAS NEGOTIATED.
YOU KNOW IN A PRIVATE SETTING AS
OPPOSED TO A LEGISLATIVE BOND
WHERE.
THERE'S SOMETHING THERE SOME
CLOSED DOORS BUT FOR THE MOST
PART EVERYTHING'S OPEN
AND-TRANSPARENT AND STAKEHOLDERS
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WAY AND
THAT AND THAT'S JUST WHAT WE
PREFER OUR IT IT IT IS MORE
DEMOCRATIC.
YOU HELP US THINK THROUGH.
HOW YOU REFORM THAT RIGHT?
THE IN THE OBJECTIVE IS WE ARE
WE ARE.
IF TO ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS
MAYBE SOMETIMES WILL TO
ZEALOUSLY BUT WE ASK TOUGH
QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO DO THAT I THOUGHT
YOU REALLY JOB AT SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS I GOT.
I STOLE FROM YOU.
AND SO AFRAID TO FACE.
YOU WITH THAT POINTS.
BUT THE QUESTION NOW IS WHAT DO
WE DO GOING FORWARD.
THERE IS A BENEFIT TO THIS
PROCESS OF THE PUBLIC WANTS THIS
TO SOME EXTENT.
ON THE OTHER HAND IS THERE A WAY
THAT WE COULD REFORM THIS MY
ONLY THOUGHT WOULD BE. TO MAKE
QUITE SOME FINDINGS ARE CREATED
LA WILL REPORT BEFORE IT GETS
FILED OR DOING SOMETHING.
THAT LOOKS AT OPTIONS OR SOME
OTHER WAY TO PUT SOMETHING INTO
THE PROCESS BECAUSE I DON'T
THINK YOU YOU NEVER GONNA TAKE
AWAY INITIATIVE.
ARM CAN YOU ELIMINATE BONDS AS
PART OF THAT THERE ARE
CHALLENGES BECAUSE IN THE
LEGISLATURE THERE ARE STILL MAKE
SOMETIME WHEN IS REALLY BIG
NEED.
BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND
SOMETIMES IS PROCESS IS
NECESSARY TO GET PAST IT BUT
THERE'S A WHOLE THAT'S MISSING.
AND SO IF YOU HELP US THINK
THROUGH WOULD LOVE TO HEAR YOUR
SUGGESTIONS AND OTHERS.
WHO MIGHT BE INTERESTED --
TO IT BECAUSE I THINK OUR
RESPONSIBILITIES WE FIND A
PROBABLY TRY TO FIX IT.
IF WE CAN'T DO IT WE CAN'T DO IT
BUT TO IGNORE IT IS NOT THE
RIGHT THING TO DO.
YEAH I LOVE TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS
ON THAT YEAH AND AND AND I GUESS
IT WOULD TAKE MORE THOUGHTS ON
HERE BUT I AT YOU KNOW THERE IS
THE PROCESS BY WHICH YOU COULD
NEGOTIATE IN THE BOND COULD BE
PULLS OUT BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW WE
THERE'S JUST.
NOT ENOUGH TIME TO DO ANYTHING
LIKE THAT A LINK MITO INITIATIVE
PROPONENT WHO WHO WAS A LIFE SO
THAT BROWN MARROW WAS WILLING I
THINK HE WAS HE CAME TO OUR
OFFICE HE MET WITH OUR STAFF HE
WAS WILLING TO TRY TO DO IT
DON'T THINK THAT'S A QUESTION.
HE CAME TO US IN THIS PROCESS WE
JUST DIDN'T FEEL.
THAT WE COULD DO IT POLITICALLY
WAS TOO DIFFICULT TO TRY TO GET
THE PARTIES TOGETHER TO GET IT
PULLED OFF AND GET A VOTE TO PUT
ANOTHER ANOTHER BOND MEASURE
THAT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE
FOR THE PRIORITIES THAT.
THE LEGISLATURE SAW WERE DEAL SO
HOW DO YOU IS THE QUESTION WHEN
YOU HAVE THAT STALEMATE.
AND YOU STILL HAVE A PROCESS
WHERE PEOPLE COULD RAISE MONEY
AND PUT STUFF ON THE BALLOT.
IT'S EASY TO PASS WHAT DO YOU DO
IT SEEMS TO BE PUT AN
INTERMEDIARY STEP IN THERE.
THAT IF THE SYSTEM HAS A FAILURE
THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO DO THE
DIAGNOSTIC AND FORCES THE
PARTIES TO ALIGN INTERESTS.
RIGHT MAYBE HAS WITH THE THE THE
TRANSFERS YOU TALK ABOUT YOUR
TESTIMONY.
BUT ALSO MOVES AWAY AND EXPOSE
THE PAY TO PLAY PIECE RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW BUT WE NEED YOUR
HELP THIRDS THINK IT THROUGH AND
EVERYBODY ELSE YOU KNOW IT'S AN
HONEST ATTEMPT TRYING.
TO MAKE THE PROCESS BETTER
[inaudible]
WELL I IN I COULDN'T GIVE YOU AN
ANSWER TODAY BUT THAT IS
SOMETHING I CAN I CAN THINK
ABOUT THAT ONE I AM COME TO THE
COMMITTEE EVERY SINGLE TIME WE
GET TO SEE THEIR WE SHOULD.
I GOT IT I GOT FOR THE TO WORK
AT I WILL I WILL I WILL THINK
ABOUT THAT GOING FORWARD AND I
YOU KNOW I CAN POSE THAT TO IT
TWO OUT OF MY VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE
GOING ON YEAH BUT YOU KNOW
ANOTHER THING I THINK WHICH
SHOULD BE.
NOTED IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A
BOND ON THIS WAY YOU DON'T HAVE
THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH NECESSARILY
READY AND WILLING TO GO WITH
PROP SIXTY EIGHT WE SAW THE
BUDGET READY IT WOULD BEFORE THE
BEFORE THE VOTE HAPPENED IF.
WE HAD.
THINGS READY TO GO OUT THAT DOOR
--
WHEN I TALKED WITH AYE DAVID
WALL FROM THE HOWARD JARVIS
TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION HE
MENTIONS THAT THAT NINE BILLION
DOLLARS SCHOOL BOND THAT THE
GOVERNOR HAD OPPOSED?
A THAT WAS ON THE BALLOT NONE OF
THAT MONEY KNOW THAT THAT
FINANCE HAD BEEN SITTING ON
THOSE BONDS NOT ALLOCATING THEM.
AND SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE WHEN
YOU HAVE THIS PROCESS YUBA
LEGISLATIVE YOU OF THE
LEGISLATURE READY TO GO YOU HAVE
THE IDEA OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
READY TO GO I'M SMART YOU'RE
RIGHT -- BUT
YOU KNOW AND THEN YOU MENTION
THAT THE OF THE LACK OF
OVERSIGHT --
AND AND I WOULD ALSO JUST NOTE
THAT THERE IS A LOT OF
EXEMPTIONS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURES ACT --
THOSE WERE ALSO IN PROPOSITION
ONE BUT I THINK IT'S SHOULD.
BECAUSE YOU HAD THAT LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS IT IS IT ISN'T AS IT
DOESN'T GIVE US MUCH HEARTBURN.
I DO THAT --
YOU DID MENTION FRANCE I AND
THANK YOU FOR THAT --
YOU KNOW WE KNOW THAT THERE'S
POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
THOSE WHO PUMP THE GROUND WATER
INSTANCE SIGHTINGS AND MAYBE
MAYBE THEY THEY HAVE NO CAPACITY
TO FOR THAT BECAUSE THEY KNOW
ONCE TOLD THEM NOT PUMP YOU KNOW
WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE THE
RIGHT.
RAKES IN PLACE BUT IF WE'RE
GOING TO TO THINK A BATTLING
THEM OUT THAT SHOULD BE DONE
THROUGH I THINK A DELIBERATE OF
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.
AN HOUR OR TWO EXTENDED EVEN IF
WE USE THE BOND FUNDS IS A
CLAWBACK PROVISION [inaudible]
SUBJUGATION RIGHTS IT GIVES THE
GIVE GIVE RIGHTS GIVEN TO
CONTINUE SEE LAWYER WHO CARES
LET'S GET SOME OF THE MONEY BACK
WE WE TEND TO WRITE THESE CHECKS
AND DON'T REALLY.
ELEGANTLY THINK THROUGH HOW TO
PROTECT THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE
IT'S SO EASY TO PASS AND THE
NUMBERS ARE SO BIG AND WE LOOK A
HARD IS THE BUDGET PASS REFORM
THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR
FOR FORTY YEARS.
TRY TO ASK THAT NUMBER.
YOU KNOW EVERY YEAR ME LOBBY SHE
GOT A HIGHER WHAT YOU GOTTA DO
HOW DIFFICULT IT IS.
THIS IS A DEAL WHERE LITERALLY
THEY'RE TAKEN FOREIGN THIRTY
MILLION DOLLARS CONTRACTUALLY
UNDER THE UNITED STATES
CONSTITUTION WE CANNOT.
MESSED WITH THE THAT THE THE
CONTRACT RIGHTS RIGHT.
CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THAT AND
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS IN COMMANDED
ALLOW OSHA GET THAT MONEY OUT
THAT EASY --
YEAH A LOT AND AND AT NIGHT AND
I WOULD KNOW THAT THE REPAIR
COSTS FOR FRANK KERN CANAL BEEN
--
ESTIMATED BE ABOUT FOUR HUNDRED
MILLION US OF THIS KIND OF IS
OVERSHOOTING THAT BY AN EXTRA
THREE HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION
DOLLARS --
WHERE'S IT ISN'T FROM.
A THAT IS SOMETHING I HAVE.
GOTTEN.
BROUGH AN RTC WITH.
TALKING WITH THEM BUT I CAN I
CAN LOOK SURE DIED AND GET THAT
ROSES ARE NUMBER YOU KNOW --
BUT ORVILLE HAS RESPONSIBLE
PARTIES TO PAY AND I KNOW THEY
TALKED ABOUT --
BUT THERE'S A FLOOD CONTROL
BENEFIT IF IF WE NEED TO
REEVALUATE WHO IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR WHY THAT SHOULD BE DONE
THROUGH LEGISLATIVE I THINK
DELIBERATION NOT BY JUST HANDING
TAXPAYER MONEY OUT --
YOU KNOW AND ANY OUT LIKE YOU
SAID WITH THE BUDGETARY PROCESS
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PROBLEM THIS
IS PUTTING THE RESOURCES BUDGET
OVER 50% THE RESOURCE SPECIAL
BEAT THAT.
AND IF WE DO HAVE HARD TIMES
WHICH YOU KNOW WE WILL INFORM
WITHIN THIS FORTY YEAR PERIODS
--
YOU KNOW IT IS SPEAKING FROM ARE
YOU KNOW LOBBYIST PERSPECTIVE IN
THE BUDGET THESE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAMS ARE REALLY NOT.
EASY TO PRESERVE WHEN FACED WITH
YOU KNOW IS IT DO WE CUT OUT ON
THE LIST TO RECOVERY SOURCES AND
WE CUT THE EARNED INCOME TAX
CREDIT AND AND AND AND SO --
YOU KNOW PEOPLE.
AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN FOR
US IS WHAT GOOD PROGRAMS IN
RESOURCES ARE ON THE CHOPPING
BLOCK A BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS
LARGE OBLIGATION TO PAY --
WE THINK THE GREENHOUSE GAS BY
REDUCTION FIND OUT RAID IS
ENTIRELY INAPPROPRIATE IN THE
SENSE THAT --
THIS IS A BIG EXERCISER CRISIS
AND WE KNOW.
WE MIGHT NOT EVEN MAKE IT HAD OF
IT ALL AND AND SO WE NEED TO
VOTE THIS THIS MONEY ON THE MOST
COST EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS.
WATER CONSERVATION CAN AND AND
WILL REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS BUT IS IT THE MOST
EFFICIENT WAY TO DO THAT DOESN'T
PROVIDE THE MOST CO BENEFITS.
ARE AND AND YOU KNOW AS YOU
NOTED YOU YOU WORKED UP PART OF
LEGISLATION WE NEED A DIDN'T
ALWAYS SEE EYE TO EYE WITHOUT
BUT THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO GET
WATER CONSERVATION.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER GO
WRONG ON THE YEAH BUT YOU KNOW
YOU PUT THE CAP IN THERE IN THE
CAP IS GONNA GO DOWN AND I DO
THINK THAT THEY'RE HAVING A FREE
MARKETPLACE WILL MAKE IT MUCH
BETTER TO GET A MORE RESPONSIVE
MEASURE.
GOING FORWARD BUT WE'RE GONNA
HAVE ANOTHER DROUGHT THE PEOPLE
CALIFORNIA WILL STEP UP IN THESE
MEASURES WILL HAPPEN ANYWAYS --
THESE ARE YOU KNOW AND ANYBODY
CREATED AN OBLIGATION ON THESE
AGENCIES THAT NOW ARE ABLE TO
GET YOU TERRACE FUNDING TO TO
MAINTAIN --
INSTEAD IS THAT IS THAT FUNDS
THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE GOING
TOWARDS YOU KNOW PORTS
ELECTRIFICATION HER OR GETTING
YOU KNOW ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN
PLACE THAT CAN OTHER VICE REDUCE
CRITERIA POLLUTANTS THAT ARE IN
A REDUCING ASTHMA SAVING LIVES
--
AND YOU KNOW IF IF THESE ARE
CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED BACK
TO THOSE AGENCIES THAT THEY ARE
BIRTH THESE ARE GIVEN BACK HAS
AGENCIES UNLESS THINGS ARE
CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED.
I'D YOU KNOW THE OTHER.
ENTITIES NOW HAVE TO PUT A
BIGGER SHARE AND BUT AND SO.
YOU KNOW JUST A FEW MINOR THINGS
THERE SOME JUST LANGUAGE CHANGES
THAT WERE WERE BROUGHT UP.
EARLIER --
SOME SOME PROHIBITIONS THAT WE
DID WE WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE
IN THERE ARE THE LIMITATION ON
FUNDING FOR DAMS IS ONLY FOUND
IN TWO CHAPTERS AND YOU KNOW IF
IT'S INTO CHAPTERS THE
INFERENCES THAT EVERY OTHER
CHAPTER IT'S A OKAY --
AND WE DON'T THINK THE LANGUAGE
IS IS IS TIGHT ENOUGH AND AND
WITHOUT THIS KIND OF YOU KNOW
WITHOUT A DELIBERATIVE PROCESS
THESE KINDS OF CHANGES COULDN'T
GET MADE AND SO.
THERE COULD BE A AT ANY GIVEN
SOME OF THESE CONTRIBUTORS WE
CAN YOU KNOW WITH WHOM WE FEEL
ARE YOU KNOW BIG PROPONENTS FOR
THESE PROJECTS.
THERE COULD BE ENVIRONMENTALLY
DAMAGING PROJECTS ARE FUN AT
THIS PROCESS AND THERE'S NO
OVERSIGHT FOR THE AND SO WE WE
YOU KNOW WE UNFORTUNATELY
THERE'S GOOD IN THERE AND WE
DON'T WANT TO GO AGAINST OUR ETA
FRIENDS.
WHO SUPPORT THIS MEASURE BUT AS
WE WE THINK WE COULD DO A BETTER
JOB THERE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS?
THANK YOU PUBLIC COMMENT
[inaudible]
IT.
OKAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH
MINISTER INCREASE SHOULD VERY
MUCH THANK YOU VERY PATIENTS
[inaudible]
LOOKING