California’s $20.1 Billion water grab: Critics say Newsom’s tunnel plan sacrifices ecosystems for Big Ag

Sacramento, California – Governor Gavin Newsom’s controversial plan to fast-track a $20.1 billion water tunnel through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is facing growing backlash from state legislators, tribal leaders, and environmental groups. They say the project threatens ecosystems, local communities, and public accountability.

Newsom unveiled his proposal last week as part of a revised state budget plan. The legislation seeks to expedite the long-delayed Delta Conveyance Project. This 45-mile tunnel would divert water from the Sacramento River southward to serve 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland, mainly in Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley.

The governor’s proposal includes sweeping changes to environmental permitting, litigation timelines, eminent domain procedures, and water rights laws. Supporters, including Southern California and Silicon Valley water agencies, say the tunnel is crucial for ensuring water reliability as climate change shrinks snowpack and increases drought risk.

“We’re done with barriers,” Newsom said. “Our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future. Let’s get this built.”

But critics say the tunnel threatens the Delta’s fragile ecosystem, would harm local economies, and could set a dangerous precedent by overriding environmental protections. On Tuesday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers from the 15-member Legislative Delta Caucus held a press conference at the Capitol to denounce the plan.

“Shifting water from one farming region to benefit another doesn’t solve our water crisis — it only makes it worse,” said Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City). “This fast-track plan directly attacks our region’s environmental integrity, economic stability, and public trust.”

The lawmakers accused Newsom of using the budget process—specifically, “trailer bills”—to bypass normal legislative review and public input. They warned that the project could lead to skyrocketing water rates for Southern Californians and irreparable environmental damage.

State Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Stockton) said the plan would burden ratepayers “already overburdened with soaring utility costs” and could “set a precedent for bypassing well-established environmental laws.”

Tribal leaders also raised alarm. Malissa Tayaba, vice chair of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, said the tunnel would desecrate sacred lands and ancestral burial sites.

“To Governor Newsom, our culture and our environment are worth less than funneling more water and money to commercial interests,” Tayaba said.

A 2022 state analysis warned the tunnel could jeopardize salmon populations, already suffering from reduced freshwater flows. This spring marked the third consecutive year of cancelled salmon fishing seasons.

Environmental groups argue that Newsom’s proposal guts long-standing protections. “What the governor calls barriers, we call laws,” said Jon Rosenfield, science director with San Francisco Baykeeper.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office echoed concerns, warning that the fast-track approach “does not provide sufficient time” to consider the proposal’s sweeping implications.

With the Legislature facing a $12 billion budget deficit and significant service cuts looming, lawmakers indicated tunnel-related legislation would likely be delayed until after the June budget vote.

“These conversations take time,” said Assemblymember Steve Bennett (D-Oxnard). “Given the magnitude of this issue, policy committees may be the only way to move forward transparently.”

For now, the tunnel faces choppy waters ahead.