Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CA: Governor, Feinstein warn fast action needed on Sacramento levees
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 2/22/06 | Erica Werner - ap

Posted on 02/22/2006 7:39:37 PM PST by NormsRevenge

SACRAMENTO (AP) - Sacramento could suffer catastrophic flooding unless the river levees in the region are repaired quickly, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and other officials warned Wednesday after a helicopter tour.

"We are literally today one storm or one big earthquake away from a major disaster," Schwarzenegger said at a news conference atop a levee separating the Sacramento River from a neighborhood just yards away. "Now we have seen what happened with Katrina - I think that woke everyone up."

Sacramento has less than 100-year flood protection, the lowest of any large urban area in the nation, according to the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. Large portions of the 2,300 miles of levees along the Sacramento, American and San Joaquin rivers and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta were built by farmers or settlers as much as 150 years ago and have been little repaired since.

Some improvement projects have been completed or are under way, including work on the Folsom Dam on the American River, but billions more are needed to shore up levees, map floodplains and complete other work, officials say.

Schwarzenegger's $68 billion public works bond plan would spend $2.5 billion in state money over 10 years on Sacramento-area flood control and assumes an additional federal contribution of $3 billion. The plan must be approved by the Legislature to go before voters on a ballot.

But Feinstein, D-Calif., told the governor that he should consider boosting the levee money in his bond plan because it would be difficult for her and other federal lawmakers to deliver the federal share he's anticipating. House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., and Sacramento-area Reps. Dan Lungren and Doris Matsui also were on the tour.

"The fact of the matter is we have a huge budget deficit and a huge debt and other encumbrances, so it's extraordinarily difficult. And there's 50 states - you're competing with everyone else," she said.

"California is really in a position to take a major leadership role in its own destiny and to step forward through this bond and put forward a substantial amount of money."

Schwarzenegger said the $68 billion he's proposed is already too much for some lawmakers. But he said he is open to boosting the $2.5 billion for levees and floods.

"I'm more than happy to go up with that amount because I think that, as Sen. Feinstein was saying, that it would be harder to get all of the money that we want from the federal government," the governor said. "I think that therefore we should maybe look for more money here in the state. And I think the people are ready for it. I think the people want to fix this problem once and for all."

The delta provides drinking water for two-thirds of the state and irrigation water for crops in the Central Valley.

Assemblyman Dave Jones, D-Sacramento, is pushing a bill to require flood insurance for people living within a 200-year flood plain. Current law requires flood insurance for structures in a 100-year flood plain - areas where a significant flood is expected once every hundred years.

Schwarzenegger said he thought purchasing flood insurance was an individual choice, while Feinstein said she agreed people should be required to buy flood insurance. Feinstein also said local jurisdictions should stop allowing people to build in unprotected floodplains, while Schwarzenegger said people should know the dangers involved in where they build.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: calbondage; california; calwaterworks; fastaction; feinstein; governor; levees; sacramento; schwarzenegger; strategicgrowthplan; tulebreakers; warn

1 posted on 02/22/2006 7:39:38 PM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Building levees is not necessarily the best way to "guide" a flood in a river valley.
2 posted on 02/22/2006 7:41:37 PM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I lived in Sac until about a year ago. Due to a paper change in the definition of the floodplain, they've spent the last 7 years building many thousands of homes and businesses in areas that were five to 10 feet under water less than 15 years ago.

Just about the stupidest thing I've ever seen.


3 posted on 02/22/2006 7:44:43 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Restorer

I'm sure they expect us to pay for it.


4 posted on 02/22/2006 7:53:22 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I'm sure we will see or hear soon that the Corps of Engineers and the federal government have let them down. Not provided for their safety. Or was too aloof and slow to respond.
5 posted on 02/22/2006 7:56:16 PM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
????? Why are they telling Washington DC?

Ohhhhhhh I get it. They want to tax everyone else for a state responsibility.

6 posted on 02/22/2006 7:56:28 PM PST by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I'm sure they expect us to pay for it.

Absolutely a Federal expense - submit the request to GWB and when the storm happens it is all Bush's fault - isn't everything? Building in a flood plane, and they probably don't carry flood insurance. /sarcasm

7 posted on 02/22/2006 8:00:24 PM PST by p23185
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
They said that last week. That was what post three was about. You would have thought that they could have had roads built as high as the dike to mitigate the flooding.

Doris has 80% approval from these people. A solid rat district.
8 posted on 02/22/2006 9:22:05 PM PST by Domangart (editor and publisher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

A buoyant flood road would solve the problem...


9 posted on 02/22/2006 9:44:07 PM PST by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Anyone know why people choose to live below sea or river level? Anyone know why we should be paying to preserve their "below river level" environment?


10 posted on 02/22/2006 9:45:57 PM PST by kimosabe31
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimosabe31
Anyone know why we should be paying to preserve their "below river level" environment?

If there is some logical rationale for that, I'd sure love to hear it. I come up empty.

11 posted on 02/22/2006 9:57:23 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
Due to a paper change in the definition of the floodplain, they've spent the last 7 years building many thousands of homes and businesses in areas that were five to 10 feet under water less than 15 years ago.

Given the dropping prices in the area, all those houses will soon be underwater financially at least. ;-)

12 posted on 02/23/2006 4:29:28 AM PST by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson