Recommendation to act quickly to protect interests

An environmental policy analyst for California Farm Bureau Federation told a small gathering in Colusa that if they wanted their interests protected in what will be the first statewide flood protection plan, they better stand up now.

Justin Frederickson provided an overview of the proposed Central Valley Flood Plan at a Colusa County Farm Bureau meeting Thursday, a document born out of the Hurricane Katrina aftermath and growing fears of what kind of liability the state has given the aging levee system.

He noted the state was on the losing end of a major lawsuit filed after the 1986 flood that submerged Linda and other parts of Yuba County.

So part of the objective of the proposed plan, he said, is to shift that liability on to local jurisdictions by forcing them to decide whether to allow developments in flood plains.

The plan also calls for various levels of levee protection, including 200-year event protection in more populated efforts, and that could significantly impact farming interests.

"It was like a juggernaut. All the stars aligned together and it became possible politically and this is why we have that law (SB 5) on the books," Frederickson said.

The law was passed in 2007.

Now the document is only months away from being approved, and he said the grassroots agricultural interests — namely the farmers and ranchers — have not been heard from during the process.

"We have not seen a lot of people with John Deere hats and flannel shirts," Fredrickson said.

Fredrickson said the flood plan is divided into two basic areas: structural and non-structural interests.

Structural interests are essentially people and property, and focuses largely on urban areas and urbanizing areas that will have populations of at least 10,000 people in the next 10 years.

Nonstructural interest are mostly the rural areas, but includes environmental and ecological concerns as well. The document even addressed climate change.

He said the plan is designed to meet multiple objectives, and the process is supposed to prioritize the various interests.

What he is most concerned about is that the document does not directly state that the interests of people and property must be first.

He noted that the flood plan itself is about 80 pages. The conservation plan attached to it is nearly twice as many pages.

Ben Carter, the president of the flood board and a Colusa resident with ag interests, said Fredrickson's overview of the plan was a bit "draconian," and that every effort is being made by the group to represent all interests.

However, he agreed that farmers, ranchers and the rural communities in general should make an effort to be heard on their specific concerns.

Carter said it will be easier to convince the Legislature that the flood plan needs to be changed or to justify certain elements if the supporting documentation comes from public interests.

The board has set aside three dates to hear those concerns, and will schedule more as needed.

It will then hold a formal public hearing on April 20.

"Once the flood plan is in place on July 1, I think the local governmental agencies, within 24 months, must amend their general plan and zoning," Fredrickson said.

"That is why that is is very important that whatever happens with the flood plan the local governmental jurisdictions can live with it because it is going to be imposed on them."