
As billionaire agribusiness tycoons Stewart and Lynda Resnick and other agribusiness interests continue to dump hundreds of thousands of dollars into Jerry Meral’s Yes on Proposition 3 campaign, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, offers her analysis of the controversial water bond.
Her critique points out three major flaws of the water bond: (1) the percentage of money allocated in the $8.9 billion dollars to help with environmental justice water community needs is a “pittance”; (2) the money in Prop 3 marked for Delta restoration is tied to the construction of the Delta Tunnels; and (3) taxpayers should not be on the hook for the needed $700 million in repairs to fix and expand the Friant-Kern Canal as earmarked in Prop 3.
Here is her analysis:
Restore the Delta has been working on so many issues this year that we have not weighed in with our members on Proposition 3, the $8.9 billion dollar water bond, on the November ballot. Additionally, we did not open a PAC and lead an opposition campaign opposing Prop 3, as we did against Prop 1 in 2014, because we knew that even if we could raise the money, we didn’t have the mental, physical, or spiritual bandwidth to lead an opposition campaign on top of all the other work we have undertaken this year in our advocacy to stop the Delta tunnels and to ensure that adequate flows are restored to the Delta estuary for all Delta communities.
We can, however, make a statement evaluating Prop 3. So here we go.
Our first problem is that the percentage of money allocated in the $8.9 billion dollars to help with environmental justice water community needs is a pittance. It is about 10% of the overall bond. This is the problem we see.