This fall, voters will decide whether California should authorize a $10 billion bond to help the state respond to climate change. Below, a longtime farmworker housing manager says Proposition 4 would help provide a clean and safe water supply in long-overlooked communities. The opposing view: The state’s highest-ranking Republican legislator argues California can’t afford additional debt to pay for questionable infrastructure programs.

Guest Commentary written by

Horacio Amezquita

Horacio Amezquita

Horacio Amezquita is the former general manager of the San Jerardo Housing Cooperative. He is currently working on a Salinas Valley farm and serves on the Community Water Center Board of Directors.

High on the list of things most Californians take for granted is the ability to confidently drink water that comes from their kitchen taps, or to safely bathe in water from their bathroom faucets. Take it from me and the dozens of farmworker families who lived in the housing cooperative that I managed and lived in for years: It’s not something that should ever be taken for granted.

To live without a safe, clean water supply is to be constantly aware of its absence. There are the itchy, painful rashes and illnesses caused by showering in contaminated water. There are the constant trips to purchase bottled water. There are the soaring water bills to pay for the drilling of ever-deeper wells that sometimes provide temporary relief.

About 1 million Californians live under such circumstances and about a million more are served by water systems the state classifies as at-risk. Given the rising threats to our water supply caused by a changing climate, all Californians should be very concerned.

This is the time to invest in proven solutions, rather than accepting these outrageous, inhumane conditions or allowing them to spread. California voters can authorize such an investment this fall by approving Proposition 4, a $10 billion bond measure with a principal focus of improving the amount and quality of drinking water.

It would fund grants and loans to local water agencies to help them provide safe and reliable drinking water. It would fund projects to reduce or treat contaminants in groundwater, to recharge aquifers, to build infrastructure to access clean water, to expand services to communities now poorly served, to protect and restore our rivers, lakes and streams.

While there are failing water systems up and down the state, they are clustered in the Central Valley and along the Central Coast, home to the housing cooperative I managed near Salinas. Most of the people who have been denied what California declared as a fundamental right to clean water live in low-income communities.

Prop. 4 recognizes this inequitable fact of life and requires that at least 40% of its funding gets directed to disadvantaged communities. The money will go to where it’s needed most.

Voters are rightfully cautious about authorizing borrowing that must be paid back over time. In this case, there is every reason to spend now so that taxpayers can save later. That is true with protecting our water resources and it is also true for Prop. 4’s other main focus: wildfire prevention and mitigation. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, every $1 spent to improve resiliency today saves $6 on disaster relief tomorrow.

In addition, in its most recent climate change assessment the state Natural Resources Agency estimates that the cost of climate change to the state will exceed $200 billion by 2050 unless we take action.

We must not defer all these costs to our children and grandchildren. If we don’t respond now, the cost to taxpayers will be astronomical.

I serve on the board of a nonprofit organization that works full time with communities determined to solve their water challenges. We see families that have been sickened by water fouled with arsenic and other contaminants. We see families that must spend 15% of their incomes just to have access to safe water. We see communities struggling with conditions that just should not exist in California.

We have the ability to make their lives better, and to address the climate effects that threaten our clean drinking water supplies and our ability to breathe clean air. It will take resources, political will and a resolve to act before things get worse.

Now is the time to unleash all those tools. The fight for clean air and water is one we can’t afford to lose.