Proposition 1E			00.10 10/21
	Opinion
	Submitted as: "Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Act of 2006"
	Measure 1E is a bond in the amount of $4.09 billion, to be used to pay for flood prevention and disaster preparedness.
	Bonds are not "free money".  They have a number of negative qualities:
		The money is borrowed, and must be repaid.  This makes the state a debtor, and the debt at some point can become dangerous to the state's credit rating.
		The borrowed money must be repaid with interest; for a 30 year bond at 5%, this about doubles the face value cost of the bond.
		Money to pay interest generally comes from the state General Fund, operating money, dollars that might have been used instead to pay for current projects.
	Consequently, we believe bonds should be used only as a last resort, in cases where the need is urgent and there are no other means of raising the necessary money.  The purposes should be well defined and responsibility for management should be clearly described.
	Unlike our recommendations in so many other cases, we believe 1E qualifies as far as responsibility goes.  If one reviews the table of expenditures that is provided in our Summary for this measure, one sees a very limited set of purposes defined.  The vast majority of the funding, $4 B, goes to support the State Plan of Flood Control, which predates this Measure by decades, defined as the state and federal flood control works, etc., of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project, and also of various flood control projects in the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River watersheds.  Each of the other funding categories also has a purpose which has been in effect for a long time, decades in some cases; no grand goal has been created out of nothing for the sake of this Initiative.  Responsible departments are in place, and are being asked to continue the same work they have been doing.  Nothing needs to be invented.
	That leaves the matter of urgency.  Much of the scope of the California Water Plan has to do with maintaining the integrity of the Sacramento River Delta and the irrigation systems feeding the San Joaquin Valley.  If they go, food supplies and drinking water also go.  We have been told that the system is badly in need of maintenance.  We choose to believe that, and on that basis we support the Bond.  We will, however, do the necessary research to determine the truth about this, and if it is false, will change the recommendation to NO.
	NOTE as of 10/21.  Back on 10/6, when we made our recommendation of a tentative yes on this initiative, we promised to do the research necessary to determine if the California Water Plan was actually in a state of crisis.  Regretfully, after checking various sources, including the state Department of Water Resources, we were not able to find ANY coherent plan, anywhere, for which the bottom line cost would be $4.1 billion, nor any detailed explanation of exactly what the crisis is.   Though the necessary agencies are in place, their job can continue to be done just as it is now, using General Fund money.  There is no urgency; therefore our recommendation changes, to a NO vote.
	[Back to All Initiatives]