« Newsom: Ballot Shenanigans? | Main | Hoover: When an Island Isn't. »

August 10, 2019


Barking Dog

Sunday's Chronicle Editorial...even they dont agree with restoring Hetch Hetchy.



Love the headline.


Here we go again with year 1 of the next drought.....tell me again about building 3.5 million new houses in California:

SAN JOSE (KPIX 5) — With hardly a drop of rain in the entire month of February, 59 percent of California is now experiencing abnormally dry conditions according to the Federal Drought Monitor.

“You know, it’s a dry year,” said Matt Keller of the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Keller said above ground reservoir levels are down to 59 percent of average for this time of year.

But underground wells — where most of the Valley’s water is stored — are full because of previous plentiful rainy seasons.
I'm looking forward to the next 5 year plan due next July.


I don't think my friend Matt Grocott would mind me excerpting a paragraph from his Daily Journal column today:

One of my Facebook friends often puts out articles about California water issues. She reminded me that almost two years ago, California passed a $7.5 billion water bond that was supposed to spend $2.7 billion on water storage projects. She pointed out how much has been spent to date in that category: zero. Furthermore, she highlighted what has been the state’s response to the federal government’s offer to help move along water storage projects like Shasta Dam. They’ve been blunt: “Stay out!” So basically my friend was questioning if California should be trusted with more bond money since it doesn’t spend it for things promised to the voters.



From today's SF Chronicle--this and building more storage capacity might just be more immediately important than sea-level rise in 2070 or banning natural gas hook-ups:

The Bay Area is dotted with at least 145 dams where failure or misoperation could result in death or property destruction, yet many lack required emergency plans, according to an analysis of state data.

Most of these “high-hazard” dams were built before 1960. While not at a higher risk of failure, they could endanger countless homes and businesses that rest below the aging facilities, making emergency planning and maintenance increasingly important, experts said.

Yet at least 47 of the risky dams in the Bay Area — nearly a third — reported no formal procedures for warning downstream residents of a breach or set up other plans for reducing loss of life and property damage in an emergency, according to data analyzed by the Associated Press and reviewed by The Chronicle. The figures came from state inspections between 2015 and 2018.


Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

About the Voice

  • The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. On it you can read and comment on important city issues.

    Note: Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice Blog are those of the poster and not necessarily the opinion of the editorial board of the Burlingame Voice. See Terms of Use

Contributing to the Voice

  • If you would like more information on the Burlingame Voice, send an email to [email protected] with your request or question. We appreciate your interest.

    Authors may login here.

    For help posting to the Voice, see our tutorial.