Money for Temperance Flat project lost in bond negotiations. Valley lawmakers may protest.

By E.J. Schultz / Bee Capitol Bureau

Hopes for state bond money for a Fresno-area dam appear to be drying up. But that's not stopping San Joaquin Valley lawmakers from making what could be a final plea.

A bipartisan group of seven urged support for the proposed $1 billion Temperance Flat project at a Capitol news conference on Wednesday, saying the dam could help supply water and stop flooding in many of the Valley's poor farming towns. The pleas came as legislative leaders said they are working on a bond deal that does not include water storage money.

"I will be hard-pressed to support a bond that leaves cities like these out in the cold," said Assembly Member Nicole Parra, D-Hanford, flanked by officials from Fresno, Madera County, Orange Cove, Delano, Firebaugh and Fowler -- all in town to lobby for the dam.

Orange Cove Mayor Victor Lopez, speaking with a raised voice, said, "I am asking our governor, our state Legislature, especially our speaker, we must not put the people out to dry. Give us water!"

But prospects appear dim, at least for November's ballot.

Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman of Fullerton and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, in an interview Wednesday said that Republicans have agreed to drop water storage demands. In return, they said, Democrats will back off on money for parks and natural resources. The leaders said they were discussing a package of about $30 billion that would include money for levee repair, school construction and transportation.

Ackerman stressed that there "is no deal at this point," but he added that it is "doubtful" that water storage would get put back on the table. He added, however, that it could be taken up down the road for a bond that would go on the ballot in 2008.

Assembly leaders are being less specific.

"There's a lot of moving parts to this," said Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Assembly Speaker Fabi?n N??ez, D-Los Angeles. "It's premature to say what's in and what's out."

Gov. Schwarzenegger originally called for a $222 billion infrastructure plan to be funded in part by $68 billion in bonds. A deal to put a bond measure on June's ballot fell apart in March in part because of Republican demands that water storage money be included. The focus has now shifted to November.

Perata and Ackerman said the current deal has $1 billion for Highway 99. That's up from the $750 million that the Senate had settled on at the tail end of March's discussions. Perata also said the deal contains $1.4 billion for air quality initiatives, noting that the Central Valley could stand to get a "huge amount" of that money.

Most of the San Joaquin Valley lawmakers speaking Wednesday stopped short of guaranteeing that they would withhold a vote for a deal without water storage. But each suggested it would play an important role.

"I won't comment on whether I will withhold my vote," Parra said. "But like my position in the last bond negotiations, water storage to me is that important to perhaps not support a bond."

The sentiments were echoed by the six other Valley lawmakers attending the news conference: Sen. Jeff Denham, R-Merced; and Assembly Members Juan Arambula, D-Fresno, Mike Villines, R-Clovis, Bill Maze, R-Visalia, Barbara Matthews, D-Tracy, and Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto. Assembly Member Doug LaMalfa, R-Chico, also attended and spoke in support of water storage.

Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who did not attend, said in an e-mail that the "jury is still out whether a dam will help us capture water the quickest, safest and the most cost effective way."

Florez has pushed for money for below-ground storage facilities, or so-called water banks. Sen. Chuck Poochigian, R-Fresno, who in the past has voiced support for above-ground storage, did not attend because of a scheduling conflict, according to his office.

If the Valley lawmakers were to vote as a bloc, they could wield power because passage of a bond deal requires two-thirds approval in both the Assembly and Senate. Denham said support for water storage was growing.

But Perata cautioned that if lawmakers make water storage a "drop-dead issue," then "you're in a position of saying that the rest of this stuff and the benefits to the broader community isn't as important as that dam."

He questioned the public good that would be served by a Temperance Flat dam, suggesting that "big Ag" and "big property owners" might be the ones to gain most.

The Friant Water Users Authority and other Valley officials have lobbied for at least $500 million in state bond money to be dedicated to the Temperance dam, which would cost an estimated $1 billion. The so-called "upper San Joaquin River" site is one of five sites being studied by the state and federal government for a possible dam.

Mario Santoyo, assistant general manager of the Friant water authority, said that the authority, which represents east Valley growers, was willing to pick up the tab for some of the dam costs, though he said the agency has not determined how much.

The idea is that state and federal money could be used to pay for the "public good" portion of the project with users picking up the rest, Santoyo said.

Dam supporters say the added storage capacity will be needed to help replenish water supplies that could be lost as a result of restoration of the San Joaquin River. A legal settlement now under negotiation would refill dried sections of the river by increasing flows from Friant Dam. Several Valley cities, including Fresno, use water from behind the dam, as do many farmers on the San Joaquin Valley's east side.

A new reservoir is needed, proponents say, because Millerton Lake -- behind Friant Dam -- is too small. They point to the recent heavy rains and flooding and say that more storage could have been used to store the water, rather than lose it as runoff.

To recover costs, Santoyo estimated that water from the proposed dam could be sold at $350 to $450 an acre-foot. Water from Friant Dam, built a half-century ago, is sold for about $70 an acre-foot, he said.

But Barry Nelson, senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the Temperance Flat water cost estimate "hopelessly optimistic," adding, "the truth is no one knows what the cost is" because studies haven't been completed.

The Temperance Flat study is expected to be completed in the summer of 2009, according to the state Department of Water Resources.

The reporter can be reached at eschultz@fresnobee.com or (916) 326-5541.