An editorial on recent fate of flood control legislation, but the non-mentioned item of dams that central valley legislators had requested be part of the legislation also played a role.
An excerpt.
Editorial: Senate's cynical ploy doomed flood legislation
Failure of flood bills shows the public Legislature's gamesmanship at its worst
Published 12:01 am PDT Sunday, September 3, 2006
A headline in The Bee Friday may have left readers with the impression that the Assembly killed legislation to reform flood control in the Central Valley.
While that's technically true, the flood legislation really died at the hands of the Senate when Pro Tem Don Perata -- trying to save face — approved a badly hatched omnibus bill containing provisions he knew would be D.O.A. in the Assembly.
There was a lot of drama in the final hours. Democrats sparred against Democrats. Environmentalists were divided on what to do. Everyone pointed fingers at each other.
The California Building Industry Association and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger did a masterful job of playing one group off against the other, all in the cause of maintaining the CBIA's ability to build in floodplains with dangerously weak agricultural levees.
Assemblywoman Lois Wolk confronted that recipe for disaster. Her measure, Assembly Bill 1899, required cities to show they have levees with 100-year flood protection -- and a plan for doubling that protection -- before they could expand into agricultural areas.
Perata first said he supported the bill. Then he held it up with other pieces of flood legislation just as the CBIA was giving one of his campaign committees a $500,000 donation.
Perata took a lashing from this page and Wolk's supporters, among others. So he and his fall guy, Sen. Mike Machado of Linden, cobbled together a face-saving omnibus bill designed to ensure infighting among Assembly Democrats. The package included some of Assemblyman John Laird's attempts to improve flood mapping and local evacuation plans and Assemblyman Dave Jones' attempts to make local government share liability with the state following flood disasters.
Jones and Laird then became reluctant advocates for the Senate amendments. Yet there were problems with the amended bill, Assembly Bill 1665. The Senate introduced new liability language that, in the eyes of cities and counties, might have made them assume all liability when a levee breaks. And Machado inserted a provision that would have required cities to demonstrate that their local levee work wouldn't displace flood waters and cause risks for downstream areas.
