State and federal officials early this summer released a "draft preferred alternative" for the Calfed Bay-Delta Program, which officials inside the process contend will overhaul the plumbing system on which most California residents, farms and businesses rely. Many observers outside the program, however, struggle to determine how significantly Calfed will alter water and land use policies. Although the full plan weighs in at 40 pounds, it is light on some crucial details that might have major implications for land use planning. The plan, for example, does not recommend whether or not to build new reservoirs, and it postpones for up to seven years a decision on an "isolated conveyance facility" — better known as a peripheral canal. Still, water policy and politics appears likely to get more attention in coming months, as Calfed leaders have scheduled 15 public hearings around the state from August 18 through September 22. Plus, Gov. Gray Davis is receiving pressure, from Sen. Dianne Feinstein among others, to get more involved in state water negotiations. Calfed is a five-year-old effort involving 15 state and federal agencies, including the Resources Agency of California, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Calfed is charged with developing long-term solutions to Bay-Delta system problems concerning fish and wildlife, water supply reliability, flood control and water quality. Calfed will not change local land use decision-making and it will not tie water supply to growth, Calfed spokeswoman Valerie Holcomb said. Still, she pointed to several aspects of the Calfed plan that should interest planners and developers. Enhancing water reliability and water quality remain a major part of Calfed's mission, which should affect local development decisions, she said. Byron Buck, executive director of the California Urban Water Agencies, said the argument within Calfed over additional surface water storage is a surrogate for the growth debate. Not even Buck's member agencies, which are the state's 12 largest water districts, can agree on how closely water should be linked to land use planning. Buck complained that the pace of traditional water development has slowed to a trickle, which could well affect future urban development. "We've been through five consecutive wet years, and that continues to mask the concerns we have with water in California," he said. Joan Dym, executive director of the Southern California Water Committee, said, "Let's recognize that growth will happen and let's plan for it. I think storage is obviously one way to do that. There are lot more underground storage opportunities than we are taking advantage of." Agriculture has an obvious stake in the debate, but other business interests are paying close attention, too. An extended shut-down of pumps in the Delta to protect the Delta smelt this spring raised water-delivery concerns among some Silicon Valley manufacturers. Businesses planning to relocate or expand are considering water reliability when weighing siting options for new plants, said Dym, who represents a coalition of businesses, cities, counties and water agencies. Dym said Calfed needs to go forward now on the peripheral canal. "We don't want to wait 10 years down the road and then say, oops, and have to start from scratch," she said. Peripheral canal proponents say a water delivery system that bypasses the Bay-Delta system would improve water quantity and quality for the central and southern parts of the state, and prevent fish from getting sucked into Delta pumps. Opponents, however, fear such a canal would take too much water, harming the Bay-Delta ecosystem and inducing Southern California urban growth. While delaying for now decisions on the peripheral canal and new reservoirs, Calfed's latest plan does address water transfers. Rather than relying on the overcommitted state water project or a local water district, some developers purchase agricultural water rights from another location. Thus, water that would have irrigated crops in one part of the state, instead flushes toilets and keeps lawns green elsewhere. Calfed proposes a water transfer clearinghouse and a process for protecting areas from which water is being moved. "We're not talking about prohibiting a free market," said Holcomb, "but putting in place some guidelines that make the free market work better and protecting third parties who don't have a say over the transfer." Leaders of far northern California's rural counties, which are at the beginning of the state's plumbing system, have committed money and staff to participating in the Calfed process "because of the threats to land use and property rights," said Patrick Minturn, Shasta County assistant public works director. Minturn said a number of land use measures are tucked away in the volumes of Calfed documents. Among the issues he sees are stricter grading and erosion controls, greater development setbacks from riparian areas, water-efficient development mandates, and tight restrictions on sewer and storm drain discharges. The erosion control mandates could increase the cost of development significantly, Minturn said. For example, "you may see a quarter-acre sedimentation basin next to the parking lot for the new Wal-Mart," he said. Whether friend or foe of Calfed, several observers are frustrated with the pace at which the process is moving. Dym, among others, said Gov. Davis and Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt need to take a direct role to speed things along. A final programmatic environmental impact statement is scheduled to be adopted in summer of 2000. Contacts: Joan Anderson, Southern California Water Committee, (909) 980-4700. Byron Buck, California Urban Water Agencies, (916) 552-2929. Patrick Minturn, Shasta County Department of Public Works, (530) 225-5661. Calfed Web page, http://calfed.ca.gov.