Our Policy Analyst Tim Stroshane: "First, the Draft Order as written is unacceptable. We incorporate comments of NRDC, The Bay Institute, San Francisco BayKeeper, and Defenders of Wildlife into our remarks on the Draft Reconsideration Order. (1/ 
"We agree that the Water Board’s Order states conclusions that are not based on actual findings contained in the Order. Please align the conclusions with the findings NRDC et al have identified to have a morally just and ecologically reasonable Draft Order before adopting it. (2/
"Second, on page 40 in its Draft Order, the Board defined “legal users of water” to justify privileging of propertied water users over non-propertied. We don’t believe such a definition can be found in the California Water Code. (3/
"More importantly, the Order’s authors picked this nit to avoid addressing a much larger issue: why do Petitioners DWR and the Bureau and the Water Board narrowly privilege potential harms or injuries primarily to propertied water right holders rather than a more (4/
"inclusive reading that would embrace concerns of Delta environmental justice and other communities given numerous water quality concerns rife with the TUCP? The Order’s argument on this point implicitly and improperly rejects such concerns about the TUCP. (5/
"The Board must do better. (6/
"The Board has long used the unique water rights of the CVP and SWP to implement water quality objectives in both temporary urgency change petitions as well as D-1641 and the Bay-Delta Plan. (7/
"Because of the dual role of these particular water rights in Delta affairs, it is logical and reasonable that the phrase “legal users of water” include both propertied and non-propertied water users and their protection from harms stemming from this type of change petition. (8/
"This was done during the WaterFix proceeding. Board rejection of this understanding does not make the realities of waiving water quality objectives go away, realities like spreading harmful algal blooms, near extinction of native fish, and increased Delta salinity. (9/
"By defining away non-propertied beneficial users of water like environmental justice communities, your recent racial diversity, equity, and inclusion resolution becomes empty words when the Board addresses water rights and the big projects. (10/
"Please revise your Draft Reconsideration Order to align your conclusions with the facts the Order describes. Please Include non-propertied legal beneficial users of water in your accounting of injuries and harms, don’t erase them." (11/11)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
