funding

Search Results

Browse All Documents

Achieving State Goals for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Achieving State Goals for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Legislative Analyst's Office | January 15, 2015...
Summary
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) is a biodiverse ecosystem that covers about 1,150 square miles and supports over 700 species of fish and...
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) is a biodiverse ecosystem that covers about 1,150 square miles and supports over 700 species of fish and wildlife. The Delta is an important source of water for the state and is used to convey water from Northern California to Southern California. The Delta faces several significant problems, including: (1) a decline in key native fish species, (2) reductions in the amount of Delta water available for use elsewhere, (3) water pollutants that cause harm to species and increase treatment costs, and (4) levees at significant risk of failure. The state has engaged in numerous efforts to address these problems and achieve its "coequal goals" for the Delta: water supply reliability and ecosystem restoration. There are many opportunities for the Legislature to improve the success of these efforts. We identified several issues for its consideration, including (1) demands for Delta water, (2) uncertain funding sources and slow implementation of some key activities, (3) limits on the effectiveness of governance in the Delta, and (4) challenges to restoring the Delta ecosystem. By addressing some of these issues, the Legislature can improve the likelihood that its goals and objectives for the Delta will be realized.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Beyond Water Pricing: An Overview of Water Financing Options in California
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Beyond Water Pricing: An Overview of Water Financing Options in California
Pacific Institute | November 21, 2013...
Summary
California’s social and economic well-being is directly tied to financing for reliable, sustainable water. A new study from the Pacific Institute explores stable...
California’s social and economic well-being is directly tied to financing for reliable, sustainable water. A new study from the Pacific Institute explores stable and sustainable sources of funding for water projects as a key to long-term solutions, and finds California’s increased dependence on general obligation (GO) bonds in funding water systems is unreliable and costly to both the state and taxpayers.

Current water rates often do not fully cover the cost of providing water services and rarely reflect the full costs of the water itself, such as the ecosystem impacts related to extracting water. California ranks at the top of the EPA’s survey of infrastructure needs in terms of the investments required to maintain aging water systems over the next two decades. Climate change, continued population growth, and restoring critical ecosystems will add further to these costs.

“Various financing options are used to invest in existing water systems and services, develop new ones, and mitigate environmental impacts, but there are serious economic and financial challenges,” said Dr. Newsha Ajami, lead author of the report. “The water sector needs a more comprehensive and stable financing portfolio.”

According to the California Department of Water Resources, nominal annual debt service for outstanding general obligation water bonds in California has increased four-fold since 2000. This shift to greater use of bond funding can be linked to the decreased ability to raise government revenues through taxes and fees as a result of voter-approved initiatives like Proposition 13 and 218. General obligation bonds, however, are not a steady and reliable source of funding for long-term planning and decision-making because they require voter approval if they survive the legislative process, which is sensitive to economic ups and downs.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
California’s Water: Paying for Water
$0.00
Add to Downloads

California’s Water: Paying for Water
Public Policy Institute of California | October 1, 2016...
Summary
Sustainable solutions by state and local leaders are needed to close serious funding gaps in a number of critical areas of water management—including...
Sustainable solutions by state and local leaders are needed to close serious funding gaps in a number of critical areas of water management—including floods, water quality, and aquatic ecosystems. This brief describes the state’s major water funding gaps and proposes ways to fill them.

This publication is part of a briefing kit that summarizes a dozen of the state’s most pressing water management issues.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
California’s Water: Preparing for Floods
$0.00
Add to Downloads

California’s Water: Preparing for Floods
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | October 1, 2016...
Summary
One in five residents and billions of dollars in assets are vulnerable to flooding. Climate change brings new vulnerabilities. This brief describes new...

One in five residents and billions of dollars in assets are vulnerable to flooding. Climate change brings new vulnerabilities. This brief describes new tools and approaches that can reduce these risks.

This publication is part of a briefing kit that summarizes a dozen of the state’s most pressing water management issues.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (2012)
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (2012)
California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | June 12, 2012...
Summary
The Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (CVFPP) is a critical document to guide California’s participation (and influence federal and local participation) in managing...
The Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (CVFPP) is a critical document to guide California’s participation (and influence federal and local participation) in managing flood risk along the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River systems. The CVFPP proposes a system-wide investment approach for sustainable, integrated flood management in areas currently protected by facilities of the State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC).

The CVFPP will be updated every five years, with each update providing support for subsequent policy, program, and project implementation.

The State of California (State) conducted planning and investigations for the 2012 CVFPP from 2009 through 2011, representing the most comprehensive flood evaluations for the Central Valley. Following the anticipated adoption of the CVFPP in 2012 by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (Board), preparation of regional- and State-level financing plans will guide investments in the range of $14 billion to $17 billion during the next 20 to 25 years. These financing plans are critical to CVFPP implementation, given the uncertainty in State, federal, and local agency budgets and cost-sharing capabilities.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Clean Water, Clean Beaches Water Quality Funding Measure*

Add to Downloads

Clean Water, Clean Beaches Water Quality Funding Measure*
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Flood Control District | September 21, 2012...
Summary
The Problem: Stormwater and runoff rushes down the street, picking up trash and toxic pollutants. On a rainy day, over 10 billion gallons...

The Problem: Stormwater and runoff rushes down the street, picking up trash and toxic pollutants. On a rainy day, over 10 billion gallons of contaminated stormwater flows directly — untreated — into rivers, creeks, lakes and our bay and coastal waters. Polluted stormwater and urban runoff include toxins and pathogens that can affect our health, drinking water supplies, and the health of marine life. Contaminants include: Industrial solvents, paints and chemicals; heavy metals like lead, mercury, chromium and arsenic; infection-causing bacteria; pesticides and fertilizers; and trash like plastics, cigarette butts, candy wrappers and syringes.

*The proposed solution, a parcel tax to fund stormwater remediation and capture projects, failed before the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in 2013.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Costs of Ecosystem Management Actions for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Costs of Ecosystem Management Actions for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | April 22, 2013...
Summary
California is at a critical juncture on policy for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. This report summarizes the results of a wide-ranging study of...

California is at a critical juncture on policy for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. This report summarizes the results of a wide-ranging study of cost-effective ways to improve the health of the Delta ecosystem. It highlights the need for science-based, integrated management of the many sources of ecosystem stress. The report also recommends improvements to the highly fragmented system of oversight that now involves dozens of federal, state, and local agencies.

Several companion reports contain related findings:

Aquatic Ecosystem Stressors in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Mount et al. 2012) summarizes the science of Delta ecosystem stressors for a policymaking audience.

Integrated Management of Delta Stressors: Institutional and Legal Options (Gray et al. 2013) lays out proposals for institutional reform of science, management, and regulation.

Scientist and Stakeholder Views on the Delta Ecosystem (Hanak et al. 2013) presents detailed results of the two surveys conducted by the report’s authors.

Stress Relief: Prescriptions for a Healthier Delta Ecosystem (Hanak et al. 2013) summarizes the overall research project and the recommendations it generated.

Where the Wild Things Aren’t: Making the Delta a Better Place for Native Species (Moyle et al. 2012) outlines a realistic long-term vision for achieving a healthier ecosystem.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Delta Levee Investment Strategy: Final Report
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Delta Levee Investment Strategy: Final Report
Delta Stewardship Council | August 4, 2017...
Summary
In the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta), levee failure could cause catastrophic flooding, potentially causing injury or loss of life, and possibly damaging...
In the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta), levee failure could cause catastrophic flooding, potentially causing injury or loss of life, and possibly damaging property, water supply, infrastructure, and environmental resources of importance to the entire State of California (State). Though levee maintenance and improvements over the past three decades have reduced the frequency of levee failures, the State has no comprehensive method to prioritize its investments in Delta levees operations, maintenance, and improvement projects.

The Delta Plan, adopted on May 16, 2013, recommends that the Delta Stewardship Council (Council), in consultation with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB), the Delta Protection Commission (DPC), local agencies, and the California Water Commission, implement California Water Code (CWC) section 85306 by developing a Delta Levees Investment Strategy (DLIS) to identify funding priorities for State investments in Delta levees.

The DLIS is an innovative approach for determining priorities for State funds for levee improvement in the Delta and Suisun Marsh. The DLIS, which considers the assets protected by levees, the threats to levees, and the multiple beneficiaries of levee investments, uses a risk analysis methodology to recommend priorities for State investments in levee operations, maintenance, and improvements.

This methodology was developed in close coordination with State agency partners, local and regional flood management and emergency response planning agencies, and other interested parties. In total, the Council worked with 113 different stakeholders and conducted 10 public meetings, 60 stakeholder outreach meetings, and 60 interagency coordination meetings. The Council also discussed DLIS issues at 38 Council meetings and workshops, which provided opportunities for public comment.

The DLIS team developed a Decision Support Tool (DST) to enable the Council and stakeholders to review and update the data and analysis that form the basis of the risk evaluation. The DST supports deliberations by summarizing information about baseline and future risks, aggregating and displaying risks, and then identifying portfolios of investments that have the potential to reduce risk to State interests. The data components in the DST are designed to be updated as new information is collected or identified.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Delta Reclamation District Financing and Budgets
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Delta Reclamation District Financing and Budgets
Delta Stewardship Council | August 16, 2016...
Summary
This report explains the financing of the 93 reclamation districts that maintain the Delta’s levees. Reclamation districts’ primary method for raising funds is...
This report explains the financing of the 93 reclamation districts that maintain the Delta’s levees.

Reclamation districts’ primary method for raising funds is through assessments, which are levied on a per-acre basis upon property owners within a district’s boundaries. Assessments are subject to Proposition 218 procedures, and they must be approved by a vote of the affected people. A second financing tool that reclamation districts have is charging fees for services, such as irrigation or drainage services for landowners. In addition to relying on these direct financing tools, reclamation districts can also receive funds from the State or from other entities.

According to data from the State Controller’s office, the median Delta reclamation districts have annual budgets of around $370,000, with property assessments serving as the primary source of revenue. Typical assessments in these districts are about $32 per acre. State funding is a supplementary source of revenue for these districts, making up about 30 percent of total revenues. On the expenditure side, more than 80 percent of typical reclamation districts’ expenditures are for “services and supplies,” which includes levee work, but also other expenses. Only 12 Delta reclamation districts have long-term debt, so State funding appears to have been successful in helping Delta reclamation districts avoid overly burdensome debt levels.

The State has concentrated its reclamation district funding on certain strategic islands. Ten reclamation districts have received 62 percent of state funding over the past five years. These 10 reclamation districts that receive the most state funding also tend to have much higher property assessment rates compared to other reclamation districts. This suggests that reclamation districts are increasing their assessment rates as the State steps up its funding.

Finally, reclamation districts receiving a large amount of state funds also spend much more on services and supplies, even after controlling for the size of the reclamation district. This difference suggests that reclamation districts that are not receiving significant funding from the State are primarily paying for levee maintenance projects rather than undertaking large-scale levee improvement projects.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Economic Incentives— Loans, Grants, and Water Pricing (Resource Management Strategy)
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Economic Incentives— Loans, Grants, and Water Pricing (Resource Management Strategy)
Department of Water Resources | July 29, 2016...
Summary
Economic incentives include financial assistance, water pricing, and water market policies intended to influence water management. Economic incentives can influence the amount and...
Economic incentives include financial assistance, water pricing, and water market policies intended to influence water management. Economic incentives can influence the amount and time of water use, wastewater volume, and source of water supply.

Examples of economic incentives include low interest loans, grants, and water rates and rate structures. Free services, rebates, and the use of tax revenues to partially fund water services also have a direct effect on the prices paid by water users. Government financial assistance can provide incentives for integrated resource plans by regional and local agencies. Also, government financial assistance can help water suppliers make incentives available to their water users for a specific purpose. Assistance programs can also help align the economic and financial drivers affecting local, regional, and statewide water management decisions to minimize unintended consequences and maximize the benefits of working cooperatively with consistent goals and objectives. As opposed to incentives, penalties are a type of economic disincentive that can be used to discourage undesirable water use behavior.

Incentives can be created or enhanced by facilitating water market transfers, by creating market opportunities where they did not exist, by expanding opportunities where they currently exist, or by reducing market transaction costs. In each case, new or enhanced market opportunities can influence water management decisions.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details