In a stunning rebuke to her environmentally minded supporters, Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva has signed a letter of support to the California Coastal Commission on behalf of Poseidon Water’s plans for a desalination plant in Huntington Beach.
The proposed plant has provoked fierce opposition from, among others, the Sierra Club, who endorsed Ms. Quirk-Silva’s successful campaign…
Another dangerous vote? Vern?
Yes it is, but not in the same direction and the others.
Unions are pressing hard for Poseidon. That’s probably what she (and, to be fair, Daly as well) are reacting to. (I can’t blame them for wanting to create jobs in the building trades; the question is just whether that tail, however worthy the cause of job-creation is, can be allowed to wag the dog.)
Environmentalists need to be better organized and active — and proactive. Grousing and casting a pox on both houses is not actually doing much. I’ll be publishing much of the anti-Poseidon website here sometime between tomorrow or Thursday.
Frankly, though, you or any one of a hundred people, if they chose, could prepare such a story instead so that I don’t have to take two hours out of my already packed weekend to do. So why isn’t anyone else stepping up? You want to blame Democrats for responding to a very active interest group, but what are you doing before the fact to make it harder for them to do so?
I’d call that “dangerous inactivism.”
I don’t have an opinion on Poseidon other than that the usual collection of con men and bag men are cheerleading for it – which makes me suspect a taxpayer rip off is in the works.
I don’t find it at all unusual that Sharon Quirk is for it.
Vern?
GRR… Sharon is going to deserve her own negative post, from me, about this. Stay tuned.
The subject of desal didn’t come up during your coffee meeting with her, Vern?
Why haven’t you had a coffee meeting with her, Matt, where you could have brought it up?
Absolutely not. It was the last thing I was thinking of when we were talking about state legislation. It pisses me off. Does our full-time job need to be educating these idiots?
I’m of a mind to bring Debbie Cook over to rip her damn head off.
Then…. how about these Republicans? I expect nothing better from Tom Daly, the corporatist. But I thought Travis Allen was supposed to be some “new kind of Republican?” From what I can tell, he’s been the biggest whore for Poseidon, and probably initiated this letter. Did we really do better choosing him over the whorish Troy Edgar?
Again, though, this is just a dumb little letter of support, no more substantive than all of Travis’ saber-rattling over HB’s fire pits.
I have it on good authority, Vern, that communications between Surf City and Fullerton have taken place.
I remember speaking against Poseidon to Sharon when she was on Council, in case they came to Fullerton to support it. Honestly, it wouldn’t have occurred to me to talk to her about this issue with her on the legislature because I didn’t see her as having a role in it. Obviously, that was a bad assumption.
(My only defense for that lapse is that, unlike the people working for Poseidon, I’m unpaid and am working on hundreds of issues rather than being tasked with focusing specifically on one. Congratulations to Poseidon’s strategists for lobbing an effective stink bomb.)
I didn’t like her from the beginning. Call it women’s in tuition. I didn’t trust her.
Seems she needs to be kept on some sort of citizen’s GPS.
I do have an opinion on Poseidon: I’m very much against it (for the reasons you suggest) despite that it will (I presume) create some good jobs. (I presume that they will be unionized. If not, then the unions are being used and abused — again.)
I also think that politicians respond to political information and political pressure. With the exception of the No Water Deal site and some limited work by the local LCV and Sierra Club, where has that information and pressure been?
Sharon, like her political matron Loretta, usually votes the right way and occasionally doesn’t. When she doesn’t, it usually involves a calculation that she can’t withstand the political consequences of doing otherwise given her (moderate) district. I’ve been fighting this political battle right now within the Democratic Party, to give her and others some room to do the right thing without sacrificing office. What are her critics here doing besides grousing and saying “told ya so”?
If you don’t give a goddamn about electing anyone to office, if you’re perfectly happy complaining about what people in office do and how morally inferior they are to you and your buddies, then politics is easy. If you actually want to be able to do more than fail to effect change or block bad proposals, then politics is very hard. You want to block Poseidon? Prepare for some much harder work than just sitting in an armchair expressing contempt.
Greg, her actions speak for themselves. No need for coffee.
Oh, then your question to Vern was merely rhetorical.
If you think that Sharon’s actions speak for themselves, Matt, what do you think is her justification for the vote?
Beyond that, why do you think she came to that conclusion? Where was our political pressure to push back against Poseidon’s?
Sorry if this seems out of line; these are the sorts of questions one asks if one actually wants to affect policy.
We have never met. Save your faux outrage.
I never said that we’ve met — but OC politics are littered with people who love to complain about politicians and don’t care much about actually affecting politicians’ choices. As Matt says about about coffee with Sharon, no need to meet you.
If you think that this outrage is faux, that just proves that we haven’t met.
Uh huh. Sure.
Take a look at my response to Ryan’s (useful) comment below. When you have done anything halfway as useful, let me know.
Vern where on Earth did you discover this howler monkey?
Cynthia says that you are a good guy, so I won’t respond to that bon mot.
Sorry Greg, but I have to correct you. Zenger has been around fighting the good fight for a lot longer than you and I have been involved in OC politics combined. He is one of the most principled guys I know, and you come across sounding a little cranky tonight. Take a break, this issue will still be here in a day or two. And I don’t know why anyone is surprised, Poseidon has been laying it on thick in OC, serious money and pressure being dropped on any elected they think they can sway, look at who their lobbyist is! There are very few leaders willing to stand up to that level of power and funding, and God bless those who will. What a monumental piece of crap this project is, what is with our leadership lately, have they run out of really useful projects to put our money into?
I’ve actually spent more of my day that I’d have liked on it, Cynthia. I doubt that I’d agree with Zenger about very much, given that he until recently worked for Shawn Nelson, but since he appears to be of the anti-ripoff school that brings you and I (and others here) together, I’ll strive to tolerate him. (I started my involvement in OC politics in about 1974, by the way. Bolsa Chica, Seal Beach Weapon Station, among others.)
SQS didn’t report receiving any money from Poseidon (or Pringle) as of her July 15 report, which is good. If “Poseidon has been laying it on thick” recently, which had not crossed my radar while I’ve focused in other things, then in the absence of much pushback she may well have thought that the furor had died down. (Seriously, people do have to write her — or at least call her office.) She’s the only one of those dozen signatories that I’d even spent an ounce of effort to try to convince on this, though. She’d also probably have equal weight with the Coastal Commission to at least five of them, as she’s the only one from the dominant wing of the state’s dominant party.
Educate Sharon on the issue and you have a shot with her. It will not be easy, as she’s already staked out a position (while no one from our side was talking to her about this, which is apparently not the fault of anyone here other than me and perhaps Vern, as it was apparently only our responsibility to do so.) Emitting ex cathedra proclamations from the pulpit of small local blogs will probably do about as little as a reasonable person would expect. Rather than asking her to rescind her support, it would be better to ask her to send a supplementary letter asking that the Coastal Commission do a conscientious job of investigating A, B, C, and D through Z prior to its decision. That’s probably both gettable and all that’s needed.
So that raises the question: who here is prepared to do some real work on this?
Ha, poor Greg who never met a rhetorical flourish he didn’t like unless it was someone else’s.
Oh, nipsey — you’re such a lovable rogue. I could just eat you up with a spoon.
I miss Gus. Too bad Vern is wrapped up in Anaheim while other places need progressive and passionate activism and an advocate for the people of Orange county.
And what are you wrapped up in? You know how to type; write something.
It’s not a vote, it’s a signature on a letter. I’m still unhappy with it, but let’s get the facts right.
And stop writing on your monitor with ink!
Have the issues been addressed since this posting?
Poseidon: The Garbage Barge of the Desalination Industry.
BY LA FEMME WONKITA – SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2010/09/poseidon-the-garbage-barge-of-the-desalination-industry/
Trapping of fish?
Subsidized operations benefitting Poseidon?
etc
This OJB post answers some of the questions:
Huntington Beach respectfully asks Coastal Commission to shitcan Poseidon.
BY VERN NELSON – JULY 2, 2013
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/07/huntington-beach-respectfully-asks-coastal-commission-to-shitcan-poseidon/
Greg, I have spoken to Sharon Quirk-Silva many times about many issues, and never once did she ever say anything to me that was supportive of Poseidon’s desal plan. There was no press release from her about this letter, no email update about it from her office, nothing. It’s not up to me to find out why she made this decision, just to express an opinion about why it’s a bad one. You go have coffee with her and tell us all why she decided to say FU to HB and the rest of OC, including all of the activists who have been trying to stop this awful plan for years. And while you’re at it, introduce her to Soaky.
“It’s not up to me to ….” That’s so pathetic. Yes, Matt, it is up to you — and to us generally, to express our views to politicians.
Your view is probably that one shouldn’t have to because they are our servants. Well, if your main goal is to look down on them when they take some act you don’t like, they you’re right. If your main goal is to affect public policy, then you’re derelict.
Maybe you should have talked to Sharon about this one of those many times.
So…
Matt was supposed to be clairvoyant?
How was anyone to guess that Quirk-Sylva, whose district is far away from the proposed plant, would spring such a bonehead move on us?
I spoke to her about desal when Fullerton might have been voting on it. That does not take clairvoyance.
Her district is not far away from the ratepayers; that’s why it made sense for them to try to include her in a letter signed otherwise by only Republicans and ConservaDems. We should have foreseen this possibility. I’m as guilty of not seeing it as anyone else. It IS up to us to take responsibility to be proactive in talking to our elected officials about these things. Who ELSE is going to do it if not us? I don’t think that we’re really blameworthy here, but we did take our eyes off of the ball.
“Yes, Matt, it is up to you — and to us generally, to express our views to politicians…”
That’s what I did, Greg. Read the story.
And Sharon has addressed the desal issue before. She just wasn’t in favor of it back then.
Do you think that you did even a good portion of what you could to ensure that SQS, if asked, would not support Poseidon? Condemning her after the fact does not really do much (aside from supporting the “all Democrats suck, even the good ones” narrative, which you may consider to be more than even Poseidon.)
So it’s Matt’s moral obligation to hound Sharon Quirk into taking good political positions? Is she really that lame?
Oops. Asked and answered. Apparently she needs constant oversight.
Oh, I see.
One is not allowed to criticize a public figure for having done something without having first warned them not to do it. You’ve NEVER done that, have you, Greg?
“all Democrats suck, even the good ones”
Spoken like a true party hackling. Thanks. I’ve got you all figured out. You’re afraid of a Jane Rands candidacy to the left of Quirky – somebody who actually believes in something other than political expediency.
I guess I’ve got my blue collar Anaheim neighborhood yard sign picked out. Maybe the open primary isn’t so bad after all!
Why the hell would I be afraid of a Jane Rands candidacy against Sharon given a top two primary system? Bring it on.
Actually (and quite seriously), though, I’d rather see Jane run for a county office on an anti-corruption ticket. That’s good grist for the mill. You, as the county’s rat droppings expense expert — I just looked you up — would be in a good position to help her.
Nice to meet you, recently fired policy aide to Shawn Nelson. Write a nicely detailed story for us about PDI and all is forgiven.
She would show conscience Democrats just what they’re missing – an intelligent, principled liberal – even in November when she’s not on the ballot.
Something tells me your candidate is going to need every vote in 2014.
Supporting Poseidon is just following after the money crowd. She didn’t think anybody was watching.
She doesn’t seem to be making any money from it, so your last speculation seems inapt. My guess is that it’s a combination of “there is a need” and “it would provide jobs” informed her decision to sign a letter with the rest of the county’s delegation, which probably didn’t seem as consequential at the time.
Am I correct when I speculate that the “worked as an aide for Shawn Nelson” history suggests that you are not a Democrat, David? (I presume Republican, but possibly Libertarian or Green, this being one of the few places in the world where they overlap.) If so, why do you (or others described above) think that you’re able to assess what “conscience Democrats” — whatever you mean by that term — think? We already know not to expect perfection from our representatives — we’ve been well trained on that — and there’s no question that Sharon would be both the better candidate and worth our active support in 10 months. (If Bruce Whitaker somehow beats Young Kim for the nomination, then I expect that Vern and I will argue over the “better candidate” question, but I’m comfortable with that.)
By the way: you show me an “intelligent, principled liberal” and I’ll find you a compromised vote or political position from them. Though I’m disappointed here, I can tell the difference between this and a career-ending act of betrayal.
Matt, apparently it is up to you to chase Sharon Quirk around – just like the lobbyists!
*Silva
There’s no reason not to have the text of the letter here in full, so here it is. Among the points of interest are that Lou Correa signed the letter as well as Daly and Quirk-Silva and that every member of the state delegation except for Ron Calderon, who represents only central Buena Park and may not have been asked, did so as well:
Ms. Mary K. Shallenberger, Chairwoman August 1, 2013
California Coastal Commission
45 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2219
Re: SUPPORT – Huntington Beach Desalination Project
Dear Chairwoman Shallenberger:
As Orange County’s bipartisan Sacramento legislative delegation, we are unanimously writing to urge the California Coastal Commission’s approval of the Huntington Beach Desalination Project. The Project’s permit application is anticipated to be on the Commission’s meeting calendar this fall and your approval will move this critical water infrastructure project one step closer to construction.
Today, due to enhanced conservation efforts, the County’s three million-plus residents are using less water per capita than at anytime in recent history. These conservation efforts coupled with our internationally-renowned Groundwater Replenishment System have made Orange County a leader in sustainable water reliability practices. Still, Orange County must import 50 percent of its water from the Colorado River and the State Water Project in order to meet the demands of our constituents and to keep our economy strong.
The Municipal Water District of Orange County’s (MWDOC) Urban Water Management Plan identifies seawater desalination as a critical component of its plan to diversify the County’s water supply and reduce demand on imported water. The Huntington Beach desalination Project has undergone more than 10 years of planning and research. On September 7, 2010 the City of Huntington Beach certified the Project’s Environmental Impact Report and approved Coastal Development Permit (CDP) 10-014, concluding there are no significant impacts for both the construction and operation of the project related to thirteen different areas studied, including coastal and marine impacts. On October 29, 2010 the California State Lands Commission unanimously approved the project through a land lease agreement. And on February 10, 2012 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board unanimously approved the project’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
The Project will not only provide Orange County with a new, drought-proof water supply, it will also create over 2,000 jobs during construction while providing approximately $500 million in local economic stimulus. All of the water will be appropriated for public use through a long-term water purchase agreement with one or more public water agencies. The water purchase agreement will provide important ratepayer protections by guaranteeing the quantity, quality, reliability and price of the water.
In conclusion, in 2007 the California Coastal Commission voted to approve Poseidon Resources’ seawater desalination project in the city of Carlsbad, CA. Orange County deserves the same opportunity granted to San Diego County to address drought conditions and regulatory constraints on imported water by building a locally-controlled seawater desalination plant.
The Huntington Beach Desalination Project is a critically-needed and environmentally-responsible solution to the County’s water supply needs. We urge your immediate approval.
California Coastal Commission staff has received a copy of this communications
Sincerely,
State Senator Robert Huff
29th District
State Senator Lou Correa
34th District
State Senator Mimi Walters
37th District
State Senator Mark Wyland
38th District
State Assemblyman Curt Hagman
55th District
State Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva
65th District
State Assemblyman Don Wagner
68th District
State Assemblyman Tom Daly
69th District
State Assemblyman Travis Allen
72nd District
State Assemblywoman Diane Harkey
73rd District
State Assemblyman Allan Mansoor
74th District
cc: Mr. Steve Kinsey, Vice Chair, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Danya Bochco, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Mr. Brian Brennan, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Mr. Robert Garcia, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Carole Groom, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Martha McClure, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Wendy Mitchell, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Mr. Mark Vargas, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
Ms. Jana Zimmer, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission
The Hon. Jerry Brown, Governor, State of California
The Hon. Darrell Steinberg, State Senate Pro Tem, State of California
The Hon. John Perez, Speaker of the Assembly, State of California
Mr. John Laird, Secretary, Natural Resources Agency
Mr. Charles Lester, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission
Mr. Tom Luster, Environmental Scientist, California Coastal Commission
While I agree that the paragraph you cite is unpersuasive, Ryan, I think that to play in this league you (like others of us) have to up your game. Conclusory assertions are good enough for blogs, but this is a bigger fight — to impress a public agency. I don’t think that “this is all lies” suffices.
Let’s break down their claims:
(1) “will … provide Orange County with a new … water supply”
It would presumably provide OC with some new “water,” so to that extent it’s true; but we should question is whether that constitutes a “water supply” that is (1) of sufficient quantity, (2) of sufficient quality, (3) at sufficiently reasonable cost, (4) without expensive environmental consequences and (5) not likely to impede spending on better and safer technologies as they arise.
(2) “It’s drought-proof”
I’d think that is probably true. There’s plenty of water in the ocean. If the plant turns that water into unusable brine, technically that wouldn’t be an effect of “drought.” (I wonder if it’s “rising ocean levels” and “tsunami” proof, too.)
(3) “Will create 2,000 jobs during construction”
I’m not saying that this would make a decisive difference, but if those are not iron-clad union construction jobs then the Building Trades should have a frank talk with their leaders. What’s the local track record on such estimates, anyway?
(4) “Will create ___ jobs after construction”
Oops. Forget it. That’s not in there.
(5) “[Will provide about] $500 million in local economic stimulus”
Yeah — what’s the track record there, too? Is this a guarantee? If it doesn’t happen, we get to reduce the rates, right?
(6) “All of the water will be appropriated for public use”
I see no reason to think that this is a lie. Does that include commercial use?
(7) “through a long-term water purchase agreement with one or more public water agencies”
See, that’s definitely not a lie!
(8) “The water purchase agreement will provide important ratepayer protections by guaranteeing the quantity , quality, reliability and price of the water.”
Funny thing about “guarantees”: they’re contracts. Contracts can be broken; findings of public agencies that the assumptions in a given model can preclude liability by displacing the blame for the unexpected on the (potentially bought-off or hoodwinked) regulatory agency. Contracts can limit the ability to collect upon breach. Contracts can be voided in bankruptcy. Tell you what — make Poseidon a non-limited partnership in which each investor is jointly and severally liable for these promises, with sufficient money in untouchable reserves and the rest bonded by companies with enough clout to impede wasteful decisions in the meantime, and maybe I’d be impressed. As for a guarantee of price — we do get to read that bit, right? I can write you a price guarantee that will guarantee I own all of your mitochondria.
Meanwhile, Ryan, you say:
(9) “This is a project designed to do one thing.”
No, that’s hyperbole. It doesn’t help us. It’s designed to make ocean water potable. The problem is not that it’s designed to do roughly what it says it will do; it’s that it may be designed poorly and without attention to the negative effects.
(10) “No more drought-proof than any other water supply”
I really doubt that it’s as vulnerable as the most vulnerable one. Up your game!
(11) “Provides no benefit to the economy”
It’s supposed to, which doesn’t mean that it will. Pumping money into jobs is one example. Warding off the prospect of drought would be another one.
(12) “a utility, by definition … does not provide economic benefit”
Not true. Not profit for investors and managers beyond a reasonable amount, that is true.
(13) “a guarantee that rates will go up”
You have the kernel of a good point there, but it requires a detailed explanation. It sounds like hyperbole.
If we’re going to fight this battle we’re going to need to do more than throw out confident slogans. I think that we’re up to it.
Of course not, Ryan. That’s my job.
Why are Hagman and Mansoor’s names blanked out?
That’s just the equivalent of an ellipsis. You can find the full letter at the link on the second line of the story.
Mr. Diamond is absolutely correct in that we have to step up our game and not rely on hyperbole. I might add that personal attacks don’t help persuade electeds either. The early flyers we had stating 5 billion dollars in increased water costs over 30 years had such flawed math it makes us look like sensationalists and not to be trusted. A similar “tripling” of water rates claim also makes us look bad when they can confidently show only a 7 per cent increase in total costs. Work with real numbers because as Jill said, if you lie to us once then I will not believe what else you tell us. Unfortunately, they will think the same way of us when we, uh, err in our stated facts.
*Kind of reminds us election night 1994. Somebody from on top of the mountain calls and asks if we want a quick $10 Grand….to pay off our campaign debt. We said, we would wait for the final count. Yes, we had won on election night…..we even won for three weeks….until the last votes were counted. Plenty enough to defeat us…even though they were mailed a week after the election. SQS….got a phone call…from someone…..and made her decision. We didn’t vote for her,..so we are not disappointed. In fact, we support Desalination and know it is necessary. But then, that is just our opinion.
Matt’s article, if anyone clicks to read the rest of it, ends, “Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva should immediately rescind her support for this unsustainable, expensive, and exclusionary project that will not provide a long term solution to Fullerton’s water needs, or anyone else’s.”
So I’ll be on that detail, and so should Greg and Matt and David and Ryan. *sigh* Why does this have to be so much work? Doesn’t Sharon read this damn blog?
*Chairman Vern,
So soon they forget………The scent of forgetfullness …must be in the air!
Well, look what we have here: Sharon Quirk-Silva and Kris Murray on the same side of this issue!
Exactly.
Yes, I’m sure that you’re all giddy over it. What broad lesson do you draw from her signature on this letter, GSR?
I can agree with many of the objections to this desalinization plan, but the fact remains that the availability and cost of the Colorado River water that we rely on (50% of OC’s water) is a HUGE and looming issue. The CR is in dire straights and so will be the states/counties/cities that use its water.
Water rates are going to go through the roof.
It’s already happening, take a drive through any of Riverside’s or San Diego’s agricultural areas and look at all the groves left to die due to the high cost of water.
And it’s going to get worse, farmers in the Imperial Valley (where water is cheap) are being offered huge sums to sell their water rights and leave the land to fallow. Same with water rights on the CR, while always very valuable, now they’re being valued exponentially more than what they were even a few years ago. Those costs are going to be passed on to the ratepayers and that’s if we can even get the water.
Interesting article on the future of water;
http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/coming-water-wars
If it’s so critical, why isn’t the government doing it by itself, putting out bids and bonds, rather than trusting a demonstrably untrustworthy middleman? Why are we leaving ourselves vulnerable to a corporation intent on maximizing investor value? A corporation like that can use outdated (but cheaper) technology, cut corners on waste (in this case brine) disposal with negative environmental impacts, string out any legal settlement of any dispute, induce local politicians to favor corporate over county interests in settling, and try to go bankrupt if need be, leaving the county holding the bag? This proposal is not actually a cure-all. The county should know this routine by now.
*As was point out to us this afternoon by a great guy at Dana’s HB Office:
“90% of California water goes to farmers and industry in this state!” “That
leaves 10% that we are supposed to conserve…..meaning we might be able
to conserve 10% of the 10%…meaning 1%……”
Kind of puts it all into perspective doesn’t it?
California water wars, sure to provide fertile debate ground for another hundred years!
People
Rice
Cotton
What should come first?
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/08/quirk-silva-rescinds-poseidon-support-will-hold-water-townhall-with-debbie-cook/