A proposed deal ending decades of lawsuits between one of California’s most powerful irrigators and federal regulators is drawing intense scrutiny from critics.
The deal would write off debts and boost water deliveries to the Westlands Water District, a politically connected irrigation district in the western San Joaquin Valley, in exchange for the district assuming costs associated with draining toxic soils. Critics pounced immediately, calling the deal a bad one for taxpayers and other water users.
The biggest proposed change however involves contract renewals. Under the proposal, the amount of water allocated to Westlands would be reduced by a quarter, but that loss is largely on paper. As a junior rights holder, Westlands seldom receives their contracted amount. Instead the district would be entitled to nearly 900,000 acre feet, a year — and no longer have to reapply every two years.
Congressman John Garamendi said that should concern everyone as the new supplies are going to have to come from somewhere.
“Somebody is going to be giving up water,” he said. “If Westland’s going to get a guarantee of water somebody is going to lose water, so who?”
The proposal forgives $340 million the district owes toward building the system of canals, pumps and pipes known as the Central Valley Project. In exchange, Westlands would assume responsibility for disposing of selenium and salt rich agricultural run-off.
In an official statement, Westlands called it the “best path forward for the federal government, and Westlands and its landowners.” Under the proposal, at least 100,000 acres within the district would be permanently fallowed. Critics noted that more than that is already out of production.
Reaction among California’s congressional delegation is mixed. Garamendi said there may not be enough votes to stop it.
“We may not have the votes, but we will have the outrage,” he said.