This past winter’s weather should serve as both a reminder and a warning.
It’s a reminder that the California climate cycles between long periods of extreme drought and short bursts of extreme rainfall, and it’s a warning that climate change is making this cycle more extreme. The Golden State must adapt to this “new normal” now – and that requires funding.
It’s long past time that our state had a serious discussion about how to fund the kind of water infrastructure we need now and in the future. Here is an idea: a public goods charge for water.
In 1998 California initiated a public goods charge was included on state energy utility bills and it helped fund many public-interest programs like effective energy conservation and efficiency.
Public support is there. A just released Public Policy Institute of California statewide survey states that 61 percent of residents say “…it is very important for California to spend more money on water and flood management infrastructure in their part of the state.”
There is a growing understanding that our water infrastructure is unable to adequately respond to a changing climate. The American Society of Civil Engineers recently found that California would need to spend $4.6 billion per year over ten years just to adequately fix and maintain aging and outdated state water infrastructure. Oroville Dam is the most recent example of this problem.
Beyond stop-gap measures however, we must ensure there is an adequate long-term funding source for the kinds of water infrastructure improvements and technologies we need.
One funding option is to pass another water bond, as some in Sacramento are planning for 2018. The $7.5 billion 2014 water bond helped inject money into the water system, but as the engineers’ society notes, we face a serious funding deficit, and passing the occasional bond is a short-term solution.
Alternatively, a public goods charge could help revitalize our water system – just as it has helped transform our energy system – while also advancing multiple state goals, including water conservation, efficiency and environmental protection.
A 2015 study by ReNUWIt and Water in the West found that a water public goods charge could be less expensive than bonds, which accrue interest and are costly to both the state and taxpayers.
Such a fee could also help advance a 21st century water system. As much as the recent weather and the drought demonstrate problems with our water infrastructure, it also highlights the need to use innovative data and technology solutions to help solve our problems.
Yes, we must invest in infrastructure improvements. But we must also ensure that these investments are informed by and equipped with new data and technology solutions.
At the very least, new infrastructure should be equipped with meters that collect water data. You can’t manage what you can’t measure. And today’s technology affords us the opportunity to have real-time data to better inform decision-making.
Existing and future problems with groundwater management, state water monitoring, agricultural sector water use, urban water shortages and water system leaks can now be addressed with advancements in remote sensing, drip irrigation, water recycling, leak detection, and other recently developed water technologies.
These tools will allow us to transform our outdated and deteriorating system into an integrated 21st century water system that allows us to better manage one of our most precious resources.
This won’t be easy. It would require legislation or a statewide ballot measure. But it is time to consider a charge that would fund water infrastructure and technologies.
Matt Mahan is CEO of Brigade and a member of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group Board of Directors. He wrote this for The Mercury News.