37 



lutions. Water users can't be expected to endorse long-term rem- 

 edies when they face open-ended CVPIA obligations whose costs 

 and consequences are unknown. 



The customers of the CVP strongly support H.R. 1906, but we ac- 

 knowledge that it can be improved. For example, the ideas put for- 

 ward by the Urban Coalition are very good, and we look forward 

 to working on them with the coalition and the committees. We will 

 work with any and all parties who want to rise above the rhetoric 

 and make a genuine effort to ensure that the Central Valley 

 Project fairly meets the needs of all Califomians. Thank you, Mr. 

 Chairman and the committee. We will have some additional writ- 

 ten material that we would like to submit for the record later. 



[Statement of Mr. Nelson may be found at end of hearing.] 



Mr. DOOLITTLE. Thank you very much. I would just like to ob- 

 serve as a member of this committee, when the original CVPIA was 

 put through, I would never have thought of the term consensus as 

 applying to that because there wasn't a consensus. There was a 

 majority vote, and they had the votes, and we lost. And I wouldn't 

 represent there is a consensus now either. The fact of the matter 

 is these water issues are highly contentious, but I think some 

 things have been brought out that show the need for change. 



I would like to address this question to either Mr. Quinn or Mr. 

 Smith. In your written testimony, you state on page three the fol- 

 lowing, "The Urban Coalition believes that if allowed to continue 

 along its current path, CVPIA implementation will continue to de- 

 teriorate and eventually polarize Bay-Delta interests to such an ex- 

 tent that comprehensive resolution of long-term Bay-Delta prob- 

 lems will slip from our grasp." 



Would you elaborate further upon that statement? What did you 

 mean? I mean, we have gotten the impression — we have heard ba- 

 sically representations being made that, "Hey, this is a new law. 

 Don't get involved, and yet give us time to work it out." But we 

 have had the law, I think, about two and a half years on the books, 

 and there are some real problems. And you say in your testimony 

 that if we continue to allow the natural course of events, then 

 things are going to get worse, not better. 



Mr. Quinn. Well, Mr. Chairman, the urban interests in Califor- 

 nia over the last five years have done a lot to change California 

 water politics. We now work very closely in the coalition interests. 

 We are feet-on-the-ground, got-proi*ects-to-operate entities. We have 

 to supply water to people and the businesses that employ them. We 

 view ourselves as problem solvers. 



As I think our statement indicates, we are strong proponents of 

 the change in direction that CVPIA resulted in. We still believe 

 that that change was fundamentally important. But there have 

 been problems identified by those of us who are working within 

 this process on a day to day basis, and we would like to see those 

 problems addressed. 



If you don't address problems in this format, on the State Water 

 Resources Control Board format, or on the ESA format, we think 

 those problems, if left unattended, would also lead to an unraveling 

 of consensus and solution finding. Our Coalition statement essen- 

 tially recognizes that we believe there are problems to be solved, 

 and we would like to take a responsible position to try and draw 



