Unexpectedly, East Bay water officials Friday granted Amador County effective veto power over a Pardee Dam project that would flood an extra 2 miles of the Mokelumne River canyon.

East Bay Municipal Utility District's John Coleman told supervisors, "EBMUD has no intention of proceeding independently. It will only be done in partnership with Amador."

Coleman is vice president of the agency's governing board. Saying the same thing were Dennis Diemer, general manager and Alex Coate, director of water and natural resources.

"You should get that in writing," Sutter Creek resident Brian Jobson told supervisors. "Incorporate it into (environmental documentation). I think it's a genuine commitment, but I urge you to solidify it in writing."

When details surfaced two months ago on a long-term water plan for EBMUD including a new, taller Pardee Dam, protests broke out in Amador and Calaveras counties. Some 350 people jammed a pair of meeting h halls where EBMUD officials spoke. Technically, EBMUD did not need to concede a veto power.

During a break in the session, Coate said, "Theoretically, we could proceed without support, but in California these days, we won't make it."

Even a diminished likelihood of federal funding for a dam project that lacked local support was not crucial in EBMUD's decision to concede Amador a pivotal say in the matter.

"Even with federal funds, it would be impractical (without local support)," Coate said. "You'd get sued. In terms of David and Goliath, David's got a lot more power these days."

Supervisors quizzed the Bay Area water officials on the basis for a projected need to flood more of the Mokelumne, on a stretch that has been declared suitable for federal protection from damming under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

Diemer said the basis is data compiled from East Bay cities' general-plan growth projections.

District 1 Supervisor John Plasse said, "The way things are going in California, it's hard to project that high a growth rate."

Unmollified by EBMUD's concession of a local veto power, some supervisors and several clear opponents of the Pardee proposal said EBMUD directors caved in to political anxiety when they voted 6-1 recently to exclude from water-supply alternatives a new agency reservoir to flood Buckhorn Canyon in Alameda County. The canyon is home to wild species listed for federal protection.

"Your own ratepayers rejected a dam to increase storage - in Buckhorn Canyon," District 2 Supervisor Richard Forster said.

Coleman said he was the sole dissenting vote on the water-district board. He said his fellow directors fairly could be said to lack "political backbone" on the Buckhorn alternative.

Pete Bell, vice president of the Foothill Conservancy non-profit, said, "I drove to Oakland for that meeting. Buckhorn was too controversial. Pardee - that's up in the hills. Rather than make the politically difficult decision - 'ration our customers at 15 percent' - they voted to make customers like them, and said, 'People in the hills don't count. They can't vote (in EBMUD board elections).'"

Katherine Evatt, conservancy co-president, said, "If EBMUD had put the foothills on a citizens' advisory board, this all would have come out two years ago. Their Freeport project (on the Sacramento River) was supposed to take care of dry year needs. EBMUD is an insatiable beast. And, you can't mitigate loss of a river - they're just not making them any more."