WSPC03421 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

002007 . 10 A:;lSEMBLY INTERIM COMMITTEE of WATER At this time the opinion of the court in Ariz)na v. California, which was released on June 3, 1963, has been follo~"d by a final decree. Pro- posals are now before Congress for a region:tl solution to the problems of the Pacific Southwest. In this report"this committee attempt~ to "ot.npP t"ITPt.np.r 011 TIPrtinpflt motpriol .elated to the Colorado RIver 0----- --0----- ---- r------- - ----------- . decision in a comprehensive presentaticn and to comment speCIfically upon proposals for solution of the more jmportant aspects of Southwest water problems now pending. { Chap~er VI includes a brief sum~aE o~ theco~mittee's recom- mendatIOns. . j' f . As is developed in this report, a r(gio~al wogram. to develo:p :w~ter for the Pacific Southwest and the west IS by. neceSSIty a multIbIllIOn- dollar program involving ,many of th~ states of. the West. Commitment of the State of California (or any othi,r individual state) to any specific water development proposal represent~ a majoripolicy decision by that state. As an area of need and an area of potential replacement snpplies for the Colorado, California must be deeply involved in regional plan- ning\for the Pacific Southwest and the <West. .; . The- committee believes that the Legislature mns~ have an .important role in the formulation of state water poliqy, partIcularly, with regard to regionill development. The record o( the Il,esources Agency and its constituent. departments during the. past two years with regard to regional planning has not been satisfactory. , ':" The committee was particularly disturbed b1 tJ.!.t.unusual events which culminated in a modification of Senators<Haytlell. and Gold- water's original Central Arizona Proje~t Bill, S. 1658, into' i~power Colorado River Basin Project Act, ", through the'" Abbott Gohlil\lrg Amendment." . . ; . ..1 "" In mid-May 1964 California water interests were first. apprised of the fact that for some four weeks, representatives .of the Department of Water Resources including Mr. Abbott Goldberg;.the Chief Depnty Director, and Mr. Wesley Steiner, the chief adviser ~on Colorado River problems, had been secretly negotiating in Washington with representa~ tives of Senator Hayden to develop compromiseJegislation to authorize the Central Arizona Project. 'l'his clandestine period of negotiation was in sharp contrast to the highly publicized solicitation of comments from all California interests on the original Pacific Southwest Water Plan. The first official explanation of this unprecedented method of solving California's Colorado River problems was given by the Resources Agency Administrator at the committee's hearing. in Santa Monica in July 1964: - At the request of President Johnson that Arizona and California negotiate their differences and at Senator Hayden's invitation, Governor Brown assigned Abbott Goldberg, Chief Deputy of the Department of Water Resources, and Wesley Steiner; departmental staff expert on Colorado River matters and staff adviser to the agency administrator, to negotiate with staff counterparts from Arizona. These negotiations resulted in a regional approach which the administration of both states and apparently a majority of the members of the [U.S.] Senate subcommittee believe should prove acceptable? ..',.. II Heat'jug transcript, July 23. 1964, at 10.