Rainwater spills over a clogged storm drain Tuesday, Jan 5, 2016, in San Leandro, Calif.

In 2017, Stanford researchers discovered a link between water usage and media coverage. It turned out that people in California used less water when the news was full of stories about the drought.

The researchers scraped the internet for news stories containing terms like “California drought.” Then they collected data from utilities. Then they compared the volume of news to the volume of water.

It probably wasn’t necessary to pay for a study to find out that if you scare people to death, they’ll do anything you tell them to do. Governments have known this since the dawn of time.

It used to be called “tyranny.” Today it’s called “sustainability.”

You can decide for yourself which term better describes two bills just passed by the Legislature and now sitting on the governor’s desk.

Assembly Bill 1668 by Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, D-Glendale, and Senate Bill 606 by Sen. Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, would empower state water regulators to impose permanent rules for water efficiency, penalties for violations and complex reporting requirements for water suppliers.

The plan is to limit Californians to using 55 gallons of water per person per day, ratcheting down to 50 gallons by 2030. In January, Californians used about 71 gallons per person per day.

State regulators could impose fines of $1,000 per day on water agencies that don’t comply with orders to meet conservation targets.

If Gov. Jerry Brown signs these bills, Californians will be forced to live with drought-emergency restrictions all the time.

The legislation has been the subject of negotiations for at least a year, and the final bills were amended — supporters say weakened — by amendments demanded by water districts. The changes led San Diego Coastkeeper’s executive director, Matt O’Malley, to say he now has “serious doubts that it’s going to reduce water use or lead to more efficient use.”

If he’s right, the bills should be vetoed by the governor because they’ll just impose a lot of complicated and expensive regulation for nothing.

But maybe the reduction of water use is not the true purpose of the legislation.

Maybe the purpose is to create the means to scare people, every day, all the time. The legislation accomplishes that very well. It won’t be long before Californians have to think about how many times they’re allowed to flush the toilet before they’re hit with penalty charges.

AB1668 and SB606 will generate daily news stories on a perpetual water crisis. Somewhere there will be a threat of huge fines, somewhere else a crackdown on rose gardens. There will be so much talk about water shortages that people will start to think they have to bathe with a Dixie cup and an eyedropper.

That’s when the true purpose of the laws will become clear.

Your water bill is going to go up. Quite a lot. But if you’re consumed with water-guilt because you flush the toilet every time, you’ll probably just pay it without complaining.

And then your government officials will merrily spend billions of dollars on massive infrastructure projects that no one will dare question. Think of the campaign contributions that will flow like wine. Think of the wine. Champagne, mostly, especially if you’re one of the contractors or union leaders who will push up the cost and reap the windfall.

Wait until you get the bill for the wildly expensive projects to capture stormwater and clean up groundwater. Then there’s the monstrous California WaterFix, two huge tunnels that will convey money from your checking account to the Metropolitan Water District.

Don’t ask how much all of this will cost the average water user in Southern California.

And don’t ask how much it already costs to do without the billions of gallons of drinking water spilled into the ocean to comply with laws that protect two species of fish.

Just feel guilty, and pay the bills.

That’s the goal that AB1668 and SB606 will accomplish. Sure, the extra regulation and reporting will cost a lot of money, but it will be built into the cost of water, so you won’t know how much. And don’t ask.

State officials would much prefer that Californians never ask why their utility bills are so high, why their taxes are so high or how other states provide better services at a lower cost.

But voters may prefer state officials who don’t run the place like a rigged carnival game.

Susan Shelley is a columnist and editorial writer for the Southern California News Group. Susan@SusanShelley.com. Twitter: @Susan_Shelley

blog comments powered by Disqus