
In spite of massive opposition by fishermen, family farmers, environmentalists and Delta residents who packed a room in the Holiday Inn in Sacramento on June 22, the Delta Stewardship Council endorsed controversial conveyance and storage amendments to the Delta Plan that project opponents say will hasten the approval of the California WaterFix.
Only one member of the Council, Solano County Supervisor Skip Thomson, voted against the amendment that promotes dual conveyance, a euphemism for the Delta Tunnels Plan, as the preferred conveyance option.
He cited voting for the amendments, in the face of broad opposition, as an example of the Abilene Paradox, when a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many (or all) of the individuals in the group. A common phrase relating to the Abilene Paradox is a desire not to rock the boat.
Before the decision, Thomson commented, The amendment is too narrowly focusing on Delta Conveyance. What happens if the conveyance doesn't work? I’ll be voting no on the amendment, he stated.
After the decision, Mike Brodsky, lawyer for the Save the Delta Alliance, responded, The Delta Stewardship Council is headed for self-destruction. The previous Delta Plan was struck down by the courts. These amendments to the plan will also be struck down by the courts and will lead to the abolition of the Delta Stewardship Council.
Restore the Delta noted that their organization, environmental groups and Delta residents have requested the Delta Stewardship Council to follow Delta Reform Act mandates to reduce reliance on the Delta, invest in existing levees, protect fish, and stop the damage from operation of the state and federal water pumps near Tracy.
Instead, the DSC chose to promote dual conveyance systems in order to aid the Brown Administration and special interest water districts attempting to fast-track the Delta Tunnels proposal, RTD said.
Responding to the decision, Executive Director of Restore the Delta Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, said, I’m not surprised. While the Council improved their amendment some by requiring new conveyance and