State Proposed Solutions to California’s Water Quagmire June 6, 2014

1. State Proposed Solutions to California’s Water QuagmireJune 6, 2014 Water Forum The Honorable Bob Huff, State Senator By: Adán Ortega, Jr. Principal, AOA Inc.

3. Northern 8% 53% 52% Oroville Shasta Northern Reservoir ConditionsMay 13, 2014 53% Folsom 46% San Luis

4. State Water ProjectWater Allocation Allocation(as of 4/18)

5. Bay-Delta … the Hub of California’s Water 5

6. The Bay-Delta Hub of California’s Water Some regions up to 100% dependent Bay Area – 33% Central Valley – 23 to 90% Southern Cal – 30% 6

7. Salinity IntrusionFeb 2014 Sacramento San Francisco Bay Stockton State/Federal Pumps

8. Salinity IntrusionApr 2014 Sacramento San Francisco Bay Stockton State/Federal Pumps

9. Bay-Delta Conservation PlanOverview Multi-species protection Upfront regulatory assurances Habitat conservation, conveyance improvements, and stressors control

10. Key Delta Risks Fishery Declines Delta smelt Subsidence Sea Level Rise Seismic RiskBay Area Faults

11. Bay-Delta Conservation PlanSteering Committee Bay-Delta Conservation Plan • Water Agencies • Contra Costa Water District • Kern County Water Agency • Metropolitan Water District • North Delta Water Agency • San Luis & Delta Mendota WA • Santa Clara Valley Water Dist. • Westlands Water District • Zone 7 Water Agency • Environmental Org. • American Rivers • Defenders of Wildlife • Environmental Defense • Natural Heritage Institute • The Bay Institute • The Nature Conservancy • Fed & State Agencies • Cal Bay-Delta Authority • The Resource Agency • US Bureau of Reclamation • Cal. Dept. of Water Resources • State Water Res. Control Board • US Corps of Engineers • Fish Agencies • Cal Dept. of Fish & Game • US Fish & Wildlife Service • National Marine Fisheries Service • Other Organizations • Cal Farm Bureau Federation • Mirant Delta

12. Ecosystem Restoration & Preservation • 57 species conservation plan • 145,000 acres restored & preserved • Reduction of reverse south Delta flows

13. Bay Delta Conservation Plan Conveyance Alignment Options Sacramento Sac River West Canal East Canal Tunnels Stockton SJ River Through Delta SWP Pumps CVP Pumps 13 Preliminary Subject to Revision

14. Reducing Environmental Stressors Toxic pollutants, Invasive Species, etc. Pollutants Sacramento Predator Control Sac River Ammonia Stockton Invasive Species (Corbula amurensis clam) Illegal Poaching Hatchery Practices

15. Conveyance$ 14.6 billion – Capital$ 1.5 billion – O&M Habitat$ 5.2 billion – Capital $ 3.3 billion – O&M * Water users pay for conveyance; Public funds pay for habitat restorationOperations & maintenance costs over 50 years

16. Average monthly increase for Southern California ratepayers over 10 years $ 5 Investing now helps ensure a reliable supply and prevents an expensive emergency solution after a disaster has already occurred.

17. Costs – Water Portfolio Projects Metropolitan is committed to meeting future additional water supply needs through local resources and conservation $700 -3,500+/AF $1,600 -3,500+/AF $600 -2,600/AF $1,600 -2,300/AF MWD Tier 1 Treated with Delta Improvements = $985 to $1,013/AF * * MWD Treated Water ($847/AF) + Delta Improvements ($138 - $166/AF melded rate) = $985 - $1,013/AF Local project cost ranges are based on recent reports from member agencies (all numbers in 2013 dollars) 17

18. Sacramento River 100 mg/l Imported Water Quality Average Salinity Delta 300 mg/l Colorado River 650 mg/l 18

19. Sylmar Las Posas Groundwater Benefits Verdugo East San Fernando Raymond Six Basins Cuchamonga Main San Gabriel Chino • Bay Delta provides high quality water • Essential to reduce salt impacts • Critical for groundwater storage San Jacinto Orange County Elsinore Upper San Juan San Mateo & San Onofre Warner Valley 19

20. Project Schedule • Draft BDCP & EIR/EISDec 2013 • Final BDCP and ROD Winter 2014 • Habitat Restoration 2010-2050 • Tunnel Construction 2016-2026

21. Brief History of the Water Bond • 2009 State Legislature approved $11B bond for the 2010 state ballot • Legislature voted to delay until 2012 • In 2012, the legislature and governor again delayed the measure until 2014 • Overall dissatisfaction with earmarks and “pork” • Efforts began in 2013 to trim down from $11B to perhaps $6B • The drought has justified recent trends to adjust to about $9B • Balance between needs to meet regional calls for Storage, Groundwater cleanup, and local projects

22. Water Bonds

23. Water Bond Three Months Later • Hueso SB1250 – $9.45B ACWA Supported, No earmarks, something for everyone (but not enough for some) • Perea AB2686 - $9.25B Storage focus in balance with local projects and some groundwater cleanup • AB1Wolk SB848 – $6.4B Delta Stewardship Focus • Rendon 331 - $8B increased storage amount to $2.5B • The legislature must agree by June 26th if a new bond is to replace the one approved in 2009 on the Nov. ‘14 ballot

24. Hurry up and wait! Poll: Voters are aware of the drought but against using tax dollars for solutions (i.e. storage, mandatory conservation measures etc.) -- USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Water issues often take decades to resolve • Colorado River Quantification Agreement 75 years • Bay-Delta “Solution” 30 years in the making (so far) • San Diego vs. MWD rate dispute 20 years and counting • Can we wait any longer?

25. Thank You! • Adán Ortega 714 449-3397 Special acknowledgement to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California for Graphics throughout the presentation