What can you say other than ‘she’s right’!
You can say "be more specific".
She can make that generalized statement and be semi-correct, but its not accurate.
First off, there are already 1400 dams in CA so all of the best/better sites already have dams.
Which means new capacity is going to have a higher cost benefit ratio, and funding is going to be more difficult. Keep in mind that Prop 13 makes it harder to raise money and the feds don't lavish money on water projects like they used to(blame or praise Reagan for that).
If you combine higher cost, funding problems, and enviro opposition, then you have public opinion against it. But public opinion can change as the degree of the problem gets worse. So 3 years ago they scoffed at a project, but today the situation is worse so it seems more reasonable now.
And when you say enviro opposition or public opposition you need to recognize that there are projects that were rejected many, many decades ago before the enviro movement became strong so they are not likely to be approved today. It is not likely that Ah Pah dam or Auburn dam will be built in CA. Nor is likely Bridge Canyon dam on the Colorado River will be built because it would flood the Grand Canyon.
What else?
They already raised the dam height on Los Vaqueros and are talking about raising it again, but nobody wants to fund it. Maybe Congress?
The voters approved $7.5 billion last Nov that would partially fund 3 projects but they need additional money.
Temperance Flat dam got 2.7 billion of that and it is a new dam but an old location that will flood over two older dams/lakes.
Sites reservoir also got some of the money but it is not a dam. Putting in dikes for off stream water storage.
The third project is raising Shasta dam and it is opposed by enviros, tribes, and USFWS. Plus, it increases capacity by only 14 percent for a lot of money.
When they talk about putting the water to its highest beneficial use, I have a hard time seeing the growing of hay for export as beneficial use.
There are a lot of drier places around the world using drip irrigation that needs to be considered by growers in CA. But, because of the water rights laws in CA, the growers will always prefer more and bigger dams because those will be paid for by taxpayers and rate payers
I am always interested in hearing more about these projects being blocked by the enviros.
The voters can always try get rid of the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water act signed into law by a GOP Prez and/or the California Environmental Quality Act of 1968 signed into law by Guv Reagan