Concerns about flood control in California, accelerated by a key court decision and the inundation of much of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina, appear to be trapped in a whirling political vortex, as a legislative hearing last week demonstrated.

There is, as everyone testifying and lawmakers themselves agreed, a great and growing danger as ever-more of California's ever-expanding population settles in floodplains behind levees that were originally built to reclaim farmland and whose maintenance has been neglected. Studies indicate that fast-developing floodplains such as Sacramento's North Natomas could be under more than 10 feet of water should key levees fail.

The specific issues abound, such as who should control development near levees, who should bear responsibility for levee maintenance, who should be liable for damages should a levee break, and whether homeowners should be required to carry flood insurance and/or be assessed for levee upkeep. But every suggestion to resolve one of the issues runs into opposition from those who would lose authority, or be burdened with more costs.

The most important Central Valley levees, those along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries, were built by the U.S. Corps of Engineers. But thanks to that recent court decision, the state is liable should a levee fail and homes be flooded. The state, in fact, is paying out nearly a half-billion dollars to victims of a 1986 levee break along the Feather River in Yuba County.

Despite that liability burden, the state now wields almost no power over how much development can occur near levees. Suggestions that it assume that authority run into very strong opposition from developers and local governments. But neither are developers and local officials willing to assume the liability for damages to their floodplain developments.

In theory, the Legislature and the governor could step into the swirling political waters and make some tough decisions on who is responsible for what. While Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Water Resources and Reclamation Board have moved in that direction, however, the Legislature has talked much and done little. Bills that would begin the process of mapping potential flood dangers and make it easier to finance flood control projects were shunted aside this year even after Katrina pounded New Orleans and the city's key levees failed.

The lawmakers who attended last week's hearing kept repeating, like so many iPods set on continuous play, that something must be done ("We certainly do have a problem," Assemblywoman Lois Wolk said at one point), but they appeared to be waiting for someone else to come up with approaches that would be politically feasible, rather than taking assertive action themselves.

The water resources agency has a blueprint for action, published earlier this year - more accurate mapping of the potential danger from levee breaches, critical assessment of the conditions of 1,600 miles of major levees, mandatory flood insurance for those living in danger zones, and assessments on property to pay for upgrading and maintaining the levees. And inferentially, state officials want to assume some control over land uses near levees, perhaps by requiring local governments and developers to obtain Board of Reclamation certification of a project's flood protection.

It's uncertain whether the administration will push that blueprint aggressively, and whether the Legislature is willing to act or is content to wait in vain for a painless consensus.

One of last week's witnesses suggested that while Katrina has put flood control in the media and political spotlight, attention is likely to fade quickly and therefore the more prudent strategy may be to draw up detailed plans but wait until California faces its own flood emergency, as it does every decade or so, and enact them during the ensuing media frenzy.

As cynical as that strike-while-the-iron-is-hot approach may appear, it also may be the only one that will work, given the reluctance of those in politics to upset the status quo.

This is cache, read story here