OT Just how bad is the drought? Just curious OT

"I voted against the measure. - DMT"

"Gov. Jerry Brown (D) called on the legislature to replace the previous $11.14 billion bond (Proposition 43) with a cheaper $6 billion bond on June 25, 2014. Brown called the previous water bond "a pork-laden water bond… with a price tag beyond what’s reasonable or affordable." The legislature passed the new $7.12 billion bond on August 13, 2014. "

I didn't study the thing, but it looked like there was a big time lack of specific projects. Like it was a typical gov't "we'll toss a couple billion on groundwater purification here, and another billion or maybe 2 billion on a pipeline over there" bs, which means what exactly?

I hope water resource officials responsible for doling out the dollars are more accountable than Homeland Security, for example.

It specifically does not allow spending any of the money on the two tunnel project bypassing the delta.

that's only for optics. the compromise language let the delta folks say it was "tunnel neutral," but it's not. almost everything in it is part of the mitigation to make it easier for EPA to approve the tunnels project.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) offered support for Proposition 1, despite some environmental groups opposing the measure. The following is an excerpt from a post on why the group supported the proposition:
“ NRDC fought hard to ensure that legislators crafted a bond that’s good for California’s environment and economy. And while it’s not perfect, it has broad bipartisan support and is backed by conservation groups, local water districts, business and labor leaders, editorial boards all around the state… because we all know that this bond does as much as it can for as many people and groups as possible, while ensuring that our tax dollars go as far as possible to address California’s water needs.
So here’s why we support Proposition 1:
1. Prop 1 will strengthen California’s water system by investing in much-needed local water supply projects like water recycling, groundwater cleanup, stormwater capture, water conservation, and other regional water supply projects around the state. The vast majority of these funds will go to local water districts (Prop 1 generally requires a local match for projects). Using a transparent and competitive grant process will help ensure we get the most bang for the buck and create significant new, sustainable water supplies for communities around the state...
2. Prop 1 will help provide safe drinking water for all Californians, with an emphasis on disadvantaged communities. It’s estimated that more than 1 million Californians (and possibly as many as 3 million!) cannot safely drink the water that comes out of their tap because of contamination from arsenic, nitrates from agricultural pollution, perchlorate from industrial pollution, and other toxics. Most of these households rely on groundwater in rural communities and are not connected to a water treatment plant or water district.
3. Prop 1 invests in environmental restoration projects around the state, including funding for the San Joaquin River, the Salton Sea, the L.A. River, and coastal habitat, as well as water supply to the state's wildlife refuges. Prop 1 would make significant investments to help restore the health of rivers, wildlife, the coast and watersheds across the state, in many cases working through local conservancies that have a strong track record of success. This helps sustain salmon and other native fisheries (and the thousands of jobs that depend on them), helps provide healthy rivers for the public to enjoy, and can help create new water supply (for instance, through mountain meadow restoration or through floodplain restoration that helps with stormwater capture and groundwater recharge)...
4. Prop 1 does not advance the State’s $25 billion flawed Bay Delta Conservation Plan, the proposal to build two massive tunnels under the Delta and divert unsustainable amounts of water...
5. Prop 1 is not earmarked for new dams. Critics cite concerns about funding for surface and groundwater storage, but this simply isn’t the case...
Ultimately, NRDC is committed to making sure that Prop 1 funds are well spent. We’ll continue to watch over bond spending and work to ensure that economically infeasible and environmentally harmful dam projects like Temperance Flat are not funded from the bond or built.[6]
”
—Natural Resources Defense Council[19]