Analyst: Feds Would Have To Pay One-Third Of $16 Billion Delta Tunnels Plan

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) –¬†Giant tunnels that Gov. Jerry Brown wants to build to haul water across California are economically feasible only if the federal government bears a third of the nearly $16 billion cost because local water districts may not benefit as expected, according to an analysis that the state commissioned last year but never released.

The findings counter longstanding state pledges that the local agencies that would get water from the tunnels would bear the full cost. Restore the Delta, a group opposing the project, obtained the fall 2015 cost analysis and subsequent state emails on revising the report through open record laws and provided them to The Associated Press on Wednesday.

The analysis and its new assumptions of shifting some costs to taxpayers are likely to heighten debate over Brown’s proposal to build two 40-foot-high tunnels to carry water from Northern California’s Sacramento River, just above its delta with the San Joaquin River, 35 miles south for use by politically influential agricultural and urban water districts, including in the state’s top population center of Los Angeles.

Conservation groups and project supporters disagree over whether the tunnels would hurt or help dozens of threatened native fish and other species in the delta, which leads to the San Francisco Bay and is part of the largest estuary on the West Coast.

The cost-benefit analysis by economist David Sunding of the University of California, Berkeley, for the first time raises the prospect that funding from the federal government would be needed. U.S. officials have not publicly said they would share in the price tag.

Further, no local water districts have publicly agreed to pay their slated share of the tunnels because of uncertainty over regulatory approval of the project and whether it would be worth the expense for them. The project, which is still in the planning phase, became the subject this year of ongoing state and federal audits.

State spokeswoman Nancy Vogel said in an email Wednesday that officials still were sorting through the project’s costs, benefits and financing options.

California’s Natural Resources Agency commissioned the study from Sunding, who works as an economist with Brattle Group consultants. It looked at the share of costs that rural and urban water districts would pay and whether they would get enough water consistently to make the project’s price worthwhile for them.

However, even if the federal government or another party steps in to pay a third of the costs, the tunnels as proposed now would pay off only for the urban water districts involved, not for the rural districts, Sunding wrote.

If the water districts have to pay all the costs, as the state has said it intends, “then the net benefits of the project are even more negative” for the rural districts that would help pay for it, Sunding wrote.

Brown’s administration is pushing for state and federal approval to build the tunnels, which would replace part of a half-century-old water system built by his father, Pat Brown, when the elder Brown was governor.

The report builds in an assumption that the delta in coming years will see a magnitude-6.7 quake, which Sunding predicts would knock out the current water system for up to 30 months but leave the tunnels, if they were built, untouched. Geologists and engineers differ on the impact of such a quake on the state’s water system.

Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla of Restore the Delta said the project’s sponsors “have to put inflated numbers in the economic analysis … to try to create the economic justification” for the tunnels.

Copyright 2016 The Associated Press.

Comments

One Comment

  1. Chris Gilbert says:

    Good job Barbara and the folks at Restore the Delta. You guys should get some kind of award for all you’ve been doing to ferret out the details on this albatross of a project.

  2. Joe Taxpayor says:

    Shouldn’t we be focusing on restoring the flow of the San Joaquin river to the ocean like god intended instead of sending water to Los Angeles at our expense. Why not just make Los Angeles pay for desalting plants in their area for the water they need so they can continue to grow and leave Northern California Rivers alone. If this tunnel project goes thru northern California will suffer permanent water shortages like the Owen’s valley LA drained. Oh what about the Colorado river which no longer follows to the sea. Humm seems the Brown’s have a historical record of destroying habitat for greedy interests.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Sacramento

Sign-Up Now For Our 2016 Knockout Pool
Tickets to aftershock now on sale

Listen Live