More Six States melarkey

Don’t dismiss the Six States proposal, writes MoBee Opinion Page Editor Mike Dunbar.

” … In a nutshell (choose almond or walnut), what have we got to lose?” Dunbar asks. “The rest of the state already ignores us.”

Our state will be an economic basket case — but it’ll have the water, Dunbar writes.

“As a separate state, we’d have the San Joaquin River and its delta mostly to ourselves. … Wonder how much some of that would be worth to folks in Beverly Hills or Tiburon or Menlo Park?”

If only. Water is not a regional property. It is owned based on a senority system: first come, first served, dating back to the 1800s. How the rights allocated within one California would play out if the crackbrained Six States proposal actually passed is anybody’s guess, because Vision Guy Tim Draper hasn’t addressed that little issue.
 
Presumably, rights holders would want their rights grandfathered in, or no deal. The Delta tunnels would probably go away; but presumably, also, big, “out-of-state” money would start flowing to our state’s politicians to help water exporters commandeer our state’s Department of Water Resources as they have done in the one California. Prohibiting that had better be our constitution’s Article I. 
 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Rules. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or fill out this form.
  • Blog Author

    Michael Fitzgerald

    Mike Fitzgerald is The Record’s award-winning metro columnist. His column runs in the paper three times a week. Born in San Francisco, he was raised in Stockton. His column covers diverse beats including, sometimes, the offbeat. Read Full
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • RSS Related Content