THE HETCH HETCHY water and power system – 167 miles of pipes that carry water from a dam in Yosemite National Park, along with a system of electric powerhouses, is quite possibly San Francisco's single most valuable asset. It's also – undeniably – crumbling, with a deferred maintenance tab running more than $4 billion.

But the move led by state assemblymember Lou Papan (D-Millbrae), along with Assemblymember Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), to allow the state control over the system is not only a bad idea – it's also probably a direct violation of the federal Raker Act and could help Pacific Gas and Electric Co. block public power in the city and preserve its lucrative private monopoly. It could also lead to the privatization of the entire water system, leading to higher rates for every one of the 2.4 million users in San Francisco and on the peninsula. San Francisco officials – particularly the mayor, the supervisors, and the city attorney – should immediately and vigorously oppose the plan.

And the Board of Supervisors should quickly move forward with a plan to put a version of Sup. Tom Ammiano's water and power agency charter amendment on the ballot in November.

Papan, for years a friend of big special interests, including PG&E, claims he's simply representing the interests of peninsula water users. His bill, A.B. 1823, would set deadlines for San Francisco to finish repairs on the system and provide for a state takeover if the city can't do the work in time. It also sets up the machinery for the California Public Utilities Commission to ultimately set wholesale water rates.

Most alarming, the bill would require San Francisco to make the delivery of water its first priority – meaning that the city could be barred from generating electricity during drought years.

As Savannah Blackwell reports on page 12, state senator Jackie Speier was at San Francisco City Hall last week, leading a delegation of peninsula water users lobbying the supervisors to expedite repairs on Hetch Hetchy – or else. The response of the city so far has been relatively mild: nobody in the Mayor's Office or on the board has denounced the Papan-Simitian bill. Beverly Hennessey, spokesperson for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, told the San Francisco Chronicle that "their point is well taken, and we need to get moving" on rebuilding the system. And while nobody disagrees that the long-delayed repairs are a high priority, the mayor and the supervisors need to make it very clear, publicly, that the city of San Francisco will never tolerate a state takeover of Hetch Hetchy – and won't accept any limits on its ability to use the dam as a source of electric power.

This is just the latest in a long line of attempts by outside interests to get control of Hetch Hetchy and to prevent the city from using the system the way Congress intended when it granted San Francisco the unprecedented right to build a dam in a national park. The Raker Act of 1913 mandates that the dam be used not just for water but also for power – and that the power be delivered to San Francisco residents and businesses through a locally owned public power system.

For most of this century, PG&E has used its political clout to block public power. More recently, Bechtel Infrastructure Corp. has been trying to privatize the Hetch Hetchy water system. The Papan-Simitian bill fits into both agendas: By preventing the city from making full use of the power plant, the bill would undermine public power efforts. And by pushing strict deadlines for repairs, the bill could help Bechtel argue that the city can't repair the aging system without outside help. (If the state did take over Hetch Hetchy, it's a safe bet that Bechtel would be lobbying furiously – and maybe successfully – to privatize the system at the state level.)

The threat of this disastrous heist of a public resource demonstrates how dangerous it's been for San Francisco to violate the Raker Act all these years. The federal mandate ought to protect the city from Papan and Simitian's designs, but as long as the City Attorney's Office refuses to move on Raker Act enforcement, that protection is compromised. New city attorney Dennis Herrera, who ran as a supporter of public power, needs to work with public power advocates to begin enforcing the law as soon as possible – and he should be prepared to go to court to block the Papan-Simitian bill if it becomes law.

Possibly the strongest counter to the bill is a strong local water and power agency, with a City Charter mandate to develop the city's energy resources and use some of the revenue from electricity sales to repair the water system. That's what Ammiano's Proposition F, which was narrowly defeated last November in an election marked by serious allegations of fraud, would have set up. If Prop. F were in place right now, the peninsula lawmakers would have no valid argument: San Francisco would be in the process of developing a long-term water and power plan, well-funded with a predictable revenue stream earmarked for system improvements. Prop F. would have required the city to enforce the Raker Act, which would set up an insurmountable federal obstacle to any takeover of the city's water and power. Instead, the city is scrambling to pass a bond measure to begin funding Hetch Hetchy repairs. Ammiano should use this as yet another good reason to move ahead on a new water and power initiative for November.