Gov. Gavin Newsom wants to fast-track the Delta tunnel that critics contend will have a devastating impact on the environment and body slam San Joaquin County’s $3.22 million crop production as part of his plan to address a $12 billion state budget deficit.
Newsom proposes cutting red tape to:
*Eliminate permit deadlines designed to protect water rights and ensure fair process;
*Drastically reduce judicial review, making it harder for communities and Tribes to challenge harmful impacts;
*Expand eminent domain authority to seize land for tunnel construction;
*Cement funding mechanisms without transparent oversight or accountability to taxpayers.
His plan was immediately pounced on by San Joaquin County representatives.
San Joaquin County has an oversized stake in the ripple effect of diverting water via a tunnel. That’s because 43 percent of the Delta is within the county and supports roughly 30 percent of the ag output that makes San Joaquin the seventh most fam productive county in the nation.
It is also widely expected among water experts that it would make water on the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced river watersheds vulnerable as replacement water that could be commandeered by the state or the courts when Delta diversions start undermining the fragile ecological system.
As such, it poses a potential threat — especially during droughts — to the South San Joaquin Irrigation District that supplies water to Tracy, Manteca, and Lathrop as well as area farms.
That threat extends to the entire Northern San Joaquin Valley that relies on the three rivers’ watersheds for much of its water needs.
“Governor Newsom’s proposal to fast-track the costly and destructive Delta Tunnel Project in the state budget is a poorly conceived plan that the Legislature should reject,” State Sen. Jerry McNerney, D-Stockton said.
“The Delta water tunnel is expected to cost at least $20 billion — and likely much more — and will destroy nearly 4,000 acres of prime farmland in the) fragile Delta, along with salmon fisheries and tribal resources. Plus, the tunnel’s costs would have to be shouldered by (Los Angeles area ratepayers who are already overburdened by skyrocketing utility bills.”
The 36-foot wide, 45-mile tunnel would divert water from the Sacramento River near Hood.
It would dump it into Clifton Forebay northwest of Tracy where it would be pumped into the California Aqueduct for delivery to Los Angeles basin water users and large corporate farms on the southwest portion of the San Joaquin Valley.
Environmentalists note the water now sent south via the California Aqueduct benefits the Delta as it flows toward the intake pipes at Clifton Forebay.
The loss of that water, they contend, will do irreparable damage to fragile Delta ecological systems.
McNerny believes the governor — who in his first month of office toyed with the idea of killing the original twin tunnel project but then supported a one tunnel version — is taking a myopic approach to the state’s water needs.
“California should develop a sustainable water system instead of the expensive and damaging tunnel that will not add a drop of new water to the system,” McNerbey said/ “The Legislature and governor should pursue alternatives that would cost far less and would safeguard California’s main water supply system without inflicting major harm to it, such as fortifying Delta levees and increasing water recycling and groundwater storage.”
Congressman Josh Harder, D-Tracy, was equally dismayed about the fast-tracking move by Newsom.
“This $20 billion boondoggle won’t create a single drop of water for anyone, yet Sacramento is doing everything they can – including ducking the law – to force its destructive effects and ballooning costs on Delta families,” Harder said. “The Delta Tunnel is a direct attack on the region's economy, and it’s clear that politicians care more about lawns in Beverly Hills than protecting the fruit and nut basket of the world. I’m going to fight this project tooth and nail because our very way of life is at risk.”
The Restore the Delta organization indicated the “proposal strips Californians — especially those in the Delta region — of their right to be heard on one of the largest, most environmentally risky infrastructure projects in state history. It’s a power grab disguised as climate adaptation.”
The group noted the $20.1 billion tunnel price tag was before Trump-era tariff inflation and construction overruns or interest being factored in.
As such, Restore the Delta indicated the tunnel could cost up to $60 billion — for a system “that would sit dry frequently due to climate-driven water scarcity.”
To contact Dennis Wyatt, email dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com