senior-spectrum.com

Last updated 1/17/06

Sacramento County Supervisor Ponders Her Political Future

Sacramento County Lawsuit Is About the High Cost of Homes

Recycled Wastewater Is Being Used for Irrigation in the Sacramento Valley

Senior Health: Avian Flu – What Can We Do to Protect Ourselves?

Stan's
Sacramento:
Remembrance, Rasslers and Hot Rods

Senior Beat:
Do You Remember the Real King Kong?

Dutch Treat: Wrapping It Up for Sanity

Guest Columnist: “Kids These Days... ”There’s Something You Can Do

Aging Lifestyle:
Graying Boomers Breaking the ‘Round Barrier’

The Great Republic of Rough And Ready

This Week's Columnists

SENIOR LINKS

If you would like to order a copy of a Spectrum photo, CLICK HERE

Flood Concern is a Top Priority Among Sacramento Valley Residents
Is Political Partisanship Threatening Our Flood Safety?

By Stephen Baetge
Spectrum Staff Writer

The need for greater flood protection in Sacramento County has become a top priority among residents, according to a public opinion survey conducted by the American River Authority (ARA) last month — prior to the winter storms that pummeled the Sacramento area over the last few weeks. The results were released last week at the ARA’s regularly scheduled board meeting in Placerville, and officials were not surprised at the widespread concern.

The Sacramento/San Joaquin flood control system is six times more prone to flooding than any other major water system in the country, and mostly due to political partisanship, sources say, any positive steps to remedy the problem, like funding the Folsom Dam expansion or building the Auburn Dam, are not likely in the near future.

“We knew that the Katrina disaster would open a lot of people’s eyes to the dangers of flooding, but we just weren’t sure if Sacramento County residents were taking the information to heart,” said Placer County Supervisor Bruce Kranz, who currently chairs the ARA and sat on its survey development committee.

“From the looks of these results, I think people are starting to understand the seriousness of the situation.”

The only issue that rated higher than flood protection was protecting our water supply from pollution and other contamination. In addition, residents were asked what they felt were the best ways to increase the area’s flood protection, and 42-percent favored building the Auburn Dam, 32-percent chose to strengthen local levees and 20-percent preferred to modify the Folsom Dam.

Over 70-percent of Sacramento County voters said they feel it would be a worthwhile investment by government to spend $400 to $600 million on projects that would prevent Katrina-level flooding in our area. Fifty-five-percent said they would be willing to pay at least $100 per year toward increased flood protection. According to the survey, however, Sacramento area residents do not have very strong opinions about our local levee system. Only five-percent said they were very confident in the levees, and six-percent said they were not at all confident in them.

“We plan to use the valuable information gathered from this research to develop a public education program that will address issues relevant to area residents and ultimately raise residents’ awareness of local flood control efforts and other important water issues,” said Kranz.

The ARA was formed in 1982 to support construction of the Auburn Dam, but it has since expanded its scope to include a variety of water issues. It is a joint powers authority comprised of Placer, El Dorado and San Joaquin counties and the Placer and El Dorado County Water Agencies.

Sacramento area flood control is achieved by matching storage behind Folsom Dam with the conveyance capacity of the area’s levees. Together these regulate the flow from the watershed feeding the American River. As originally built, the dam and levee system were thought capable of providing the necessary protection. Events subsequent to the Folsom Dam’s completion, most notably the storms of 1986 and 1997, indicate that the current flood protection is inadequate, and if a flood were to occur as a result of lack of capacity in the existing system, the results would be catastrophic.

The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) says that in the next 30 years there is a 32-percent chance that a catastrophic flood will occur in the area. The agency estimates that the operators of the Folsom Dam would have approximately 12 hours notice that a flood would occur. The 250,000 people living in the danger zone would have ten hours to evacuate, and the flood zone would be covered by as much as 15 feet of water. Estimates of the property damage exceed $1 billion.

The Army Corps of Engineers wants to considerably lessen the odds of a flood by improving the levee system, widening the water release gates at the dam and increasing the dam’s height by seven feet.

The Corps is in the process of improving the levee system, but due to the fact that exotic technology was involved in some of the improvements, the project has gone over budget and additional funding is required. Additionally, funding for the preliminary engineering and design work to raise the dam was reduced this year. The resulting financial crunch has significantly slowed the Corps of Engineers in its work.

Representative John Doolittle (R) said he wants a dam built at Auburn to supplement the dam at Folsom, and he opposes any project that is contrary to an Auburn Dam. Doolittle is considered to be the fifth most powerful Republican in the U.S. Congress, and he is now joined by 42-percent of those surveyed who want to build the Auburn Dam.

In the recent ARA survey, residents were asked what they felt were the best ways to increase the area’s flood protection — 42-percent favored building the Auburn Dam, 32-percent chose to strengthen local levees and 20-percent preferred to modify the Folsom Dam.

Congress has twice voted against building an Auburn Dam, mostly due to a nearby earthquake fault and environmental concerns, and a recent proposal by Doolittle regarding the Auburn Dam did not make it out of committee. Doolittle has made no headway in authorizing an Auburn Dam, but his influence has allowed him to limit the funding to the Corps of Engineer’s flood control project. Doolittle’s office has stated that the Corps of Engineer’s only interest is in getting something constructed rather than providing safe effective flood control for Sacramento.

Last year, former Congressman Doug Ose (R-Sacramento), wanted a bridge built near Folsom Dam, but funding for the bridge desired by Ose was faced with strong opposition because the bridge project has been linked with the Folsom Dam improvements. Ose had a record of supporting the Auburn Dam along with improvements in the Folsom Dam and the levee system. Portions of Ose’s district were within the area protected by the flood control system, and his district was impacted heavily by the closure of the Folsom Dam road for security reasons.

In an attempt to break the stalemate of both issues, Ose brokered a compromise with the late Congressman Robert Matsui, and in exchange for Ose support to reduce the Doolittle-led opposition to funding the Folsom Dam and levee projects, Matsui agreed to support Ose’s bridge project. The attempt at compromise was unsuccessful, however, and though Ose retired in 2005 and Matsui died that same year, the controversy continues.

Meanwhile, say sources, Congressional approval of an Auburn Dam is very unlikely, and the Sacramento areas flood protection remains virtually unchanged.