Here is my short summary of the 4 principles.
- Enhance ecosystem and reliably export water when it is available (the DSC's co-equal goals).
- Flexible to changing environmental conditions.
- Increase resiliency to risks of flood and earthquakes.
- Integrated with other projects, since tunnels alone don't do much for water supply.
Some state officials try to duck the cost issue by stating that it isn't their business and it is up to the water agencies to decide if they want to invest in the tunnels. That argument naively assumes that there is no link between paying the Tunnels' mammoth costs and all of the other DSC goals that are explicitly their concern such as operations, reducing reliance on the Delta, ecosystems, water quality, investment in levee integrity, and more.
Here are some constructive suggestions for edits/additions to these principles.
Revised #4: Must have a finance plan that clearly demonstrates that the cost of improving conveyance will not adversely effect the ability of agencies to finance other integrated water management projects, including enhanced storage and projects that reduce reliance on the Delta.
#5: Must have a finance plan that does not increase the incentive to export more water from the Delta. The plan must show that the project is cost-effective at levels of water exports that protect the Delta ecosystem.
#6 Benefits beyond the co-equal goals (e.g. public safety, recreation, Delta as a place) are recognized and encouraged.