LEADERS PASS WATER LEGISLATION AND NOW IT’S UP TO US.  The State Legislature put together a water plan for the state that could actually do some good for both northern and southern California. It may have a little bit of something for everyone to hate, but the all-consuming legislation certainly will move the state water policy in a positive direction. However, it requires the majority of us to approve a bond in the November 2010 election, and as we all know that will be quite a Herculean feat. We already have some unions and businesses complaining about the state measure. There is lots of pork in the legislation which will give some big windfalls to some Assembly and Senate districts in California; but that’s the price we pay in this state to get anything done.

I’ll be the first to tell you that I don’t yet understand the entire ramifications of the water plan, but I do know that without it passing next fall we (our state) will be sorely hurting. Thanks to Modesto Senator Dave Cogdill, this plan is now a reality; there were many moments last week when I thought the entire water deal was dead. He worked into the wee hours of the night and sometimes all night to help get the deal done.

Both Democrats and Republicans gave in a little during the negotiations, but business and agriculture will be better off with the deal than without it. IF it passes next November, that is!

Critics are already saying the plan is too easy on agriculture. The San Francisco Chronicle reported on Sunday that while cities were asked to decrease water consumption by 20 percent over the next decade, the agriculture industry “which consumes an estimated three-quarters of the water used in the state, won’t have to change its practices much under the new rules.”

Our city friends are a bit out of touch with agriculture. While cities had continued using more and more water with more and more growth, agriculture has been spending billions in drip irrigation and other conservation methods in order to stay in business. More and more tree crops have gone in as a result of our poor water deliveries over the years, and the farming community has sacrificed land as well to make it some years.

So agriculture needs to communicate better, or farmers will be denigrated by our city brethren.

Regardless of how some feel, this legislation is surely the biggest move forward in water policy in a generation and calls for several meaty changes in the way the state oversees, stores and delivers water. We will see this legislation as part of a bond come November, and I’m hopeful that everyone will see the need for the water plan. While the Sierra Club and others say “agriculture needs to do more,” I think it’s important that all agricultural organizations point out what they are doing now to conserve water and how farmers plan to continue these conservation methods.

Most pollsters are saying that barely 40 percent of us would vote for a water bond with the state in such a fiscal mess. So there is lots of conversation needed in order to convince a majority that the water bond is a good deal.

Stay tuned for more on water. We will be writing and talking about it for a year.

CONGRATS TO VICTORS. Both Newman and Gustine schools will have some new faces on their boards this year. In Newman challengers Kerry McWilliams and Paul Wallace won easily and will soon be part of the Newman-Crows Landing School District board. In Gustine challenger Melanie Gomes and incumbent Christine Parreira won seats. Congrats to all of you. Now the tough decision making begins!