By Nancy Vogel
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO -- With California reservoirs low and a second dry winter sure to trigger rationing, Republican lawmakers demanded Wednesday that California's next water bond include new dams.

Like Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Republican legislators insist that California needs to immediately begin the eight-to-15-year process of dam construction to supply millions of additional residents as global warming shrinks the all-important Sierra snowpack.

That puts the Republicans at odds with Democratic lawmakers, who say less grand projects can capture more water more cheaply. If Democrats don't budge in the coming weeks, the Legislature could fail to craft a water bond for the February ballot to fund projects that would stretch the state's water supplies, because Republican lawmakers said they would rather have no bond than one without new or expanded reservoirs.

"No surface storage, no deal," said Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines of Clovis at a Capitol news conference."The idea that we let millions of acre-feet of water every year run to the ocean, totally wasted, is insanity," he said.

Schwarzenegger and Republican lawmakers seek a $9-billion bond, $5 billion of which could be used to expand or build reservoirs in Glenn, Contra Costa and Madera counties. Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) proposes a $5.4-billion bond that will not mention specific reservoir projects but instead allow local water districts to compete for state money to offset some dam costs.

Lawmakers have yet to spend $10 billion that remains from previous water bonds passed by voters.

Both houses of the Legislature plan to hold water bond hearings today and Monday, and Perata has told senators to convene Tuesday for a possible vote.

Still, the two sides appear far from agreement.

Assemblyman John Laird, the Santa Cruz Democrat who is leading water bond negotiations in the Assembly, said the key question about dams is who pays. He called the governor's proposal "a record level of public financing."

The legislative debate comes as the state's biggest reservoirs are 30% or more below normal levels.