Campaign Contributors, Blank Checks
and Toilet-to-Tap's Spot Bill  AB 562

[Introduced 2/18/03 while Task Force's Report is not due till July, 2003]

How could Assemblymember Spitzer introduce AB 562 on 2/18/03, endorsing what has yet to been seen:  the Task Force's final report which is not due till July, 2003?

How about first holding well-noticed, official public hearings, throughout the state, by the appropriate legislative committees?

Perhaps amendments may be suggested that the Task Force never even considered. Or maybe such enhancements were rejected outright, as the Task Force's composition is so heavily industry-oriented.

When and where will the questions be asked: Who benefits and who pays?

Right now, it looks like the developers will definitely benefit, by securing their required 20-year supply of water in order to commence construction.

And, the rest of us will undoubtedly pay, through a decline in the quality of the water we receive.  And, with increases in our water rates, to pay off the facilities being built to produce this inferior product -- inadequately treated and inadequately

monitored, reclaimed sewage effluent.

"Veto of Early Releases Bill Sought: 11 Democrats who helped win passage of the measure have second thoughts about who is included and ask Gov. Davis to spike it."

Here's a quote from Assemblyman Todd Spitzer (R-Orange) who "criticized the rushed way in which the bill was passed, with little debate: 'Mistakes are being made in the Legislature because we have not been involved in the debate,' said Spitzer. 'This has got to stop,'" he added.

Here are the e-mail addresses of Assemblymember Spitzer and the e-mail addresses and fax numbers of the members of the Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee most likely to hear this bill: