Cohen's Framework and the City of Oxnard Water Recycling and Desalination Act of 2009

Values

The City of Oxnard’s Water Recycling and Desalination Act of 2009 deals with the problem of public health and environmental safety due to tremendous water contamination. There is a clear consensus that new water treatment facilities are necessary, but the municipal economic values seem to slightly heed the implementation of this project.

Oxnard is an economically depressed city that has struggled to battle issues of environmental health and safety due to a lack of tax dollars and a greater value of economic development. This bill allows for federal involvement in the design and implementation of the new water treatment facility with a federal commitment to pay for 25% of the project. The proposed solution doesn’t require a tradeoff between ecological well-being and human well-being, nor does conflict with ethical or religious precepts.

Politics

The bill was referred to House Subcommittee on Power and Water from the House Committee on Natural Resources on February 4th. The stakeholders in this issue are the Secretary of the Interior, the House Representatives from California, the Oxnard Local Public Officials, the Oxnard Water Department Employees and the Oxnard City Residents. The Secretary of the Interior is involved based on the interest of design, funding and implementation. The house reps and local public officials are involved based on implementation and to what percent of the project will be funded by local vs. federal government. Employees in the water department are involved based on to what level they will have control over the design of the facility. The residents of Oxnard are involved based on their interests to have the water treatment facility successfully implemented

The politics of this issue are primarily a concern over what level of fiscal responsibility and authority will be shared by the federal and local government. All stakeholders involved are committed to the establishment of the facilities. This bill only addresses the specifics of ownership, so there are really no potential winners and losers. It appears that the Oxnard Local Government is considered primarily responsible for addressing the issue. There is a high level of consensus and little controversy surrounding this bill.

Science and Technology

There is absolute scientific certainty that the City of Oxnard water quality is very poor and, if no action is taken, would result in harmful health effects. The current practices to treat the water are substandard and contribute significantly to the problem. There are several examples of highly successful water treatment facility programs that provide a technological blueprint for the city to model its new program after. Although Oxnard’s water quality is in very poor shape, the execution of technology used by cities with successful water treatment facilities would drastically improve the problem.

Policy Design

This bill doesn’t offer any incentives of disincentives to influence behavior pertaining to water quality. It does, however, demonstrate strategic thinking based on stakeholder compromises. The bill divides up responsibility based on funding, allocating no more than 25% of the project cost to be paid by the federal government. It seems that, in return for funding, the Secretary of the Interior is allowed a certain level of influence in the design of the facility and is given authority over the project for a certain level of time. This clearly demonstrates stakeholder tradeoffs. It isn’t clear if the other unregulated stakeholders support the policy design in its entirety but it would seem that, as long as the facility is constructed and improvements are made, they are satisfied. The policy design is likely to generate a significant progression in water quality for the City of Oxnard.

Management

It would appear that the organizational capacity may not exist yet. The bill, however, will release funding to develop whatever organizational capacity is lacking in order to build and operate the facility. It would appear that the quality of leadership is relatively good due to the fact that the planning of the project seems to be collaborative. It is clear, however, that local leadership may be relatively uninformed on the best practices for water quality. This makes the involvement of the Secretary of the Interior an optimal solution. It would appear that the federal government is committed to a certain level of funding until the local capacity to manage the facility has been established. Standard operating procedures will need to be established immediately and tests will need to be done to evaluate their effectiveness.