SAN FRANCISCO – With a five-year drought and then a winter of floods having exposed the limits of California's vast network of reservoirs, dams and canals, voters are likely to have the chance next year to decide whether to pay for major upgrades to the state's waterworks.

Two multibillion-dollar bonds are expected to go before voters that promise to boost water supplies, offer flood protection and restore rivers and streams. One measure, sponsored by the Legislature, would also fund new parks and hiking trails. The second, privately backed initiative modernize the infrastructure that moves water to cities and farms.

Regardless of whether voters approve either measure, a handful of reservoirs will be built or expanded with billions of dollars from a previously approved water bond.

Supporters of the new initiatives say the need to upgrade the state's water-storage system has been apparent for some time, and that with the near-failure of Oroville Dam last winter and drought-induced water shortages still fresh in voters' minds, now is the time to fund long-term improvements. But with two measures likely to add a combined $14 billion-plus to the state's bond debt, some skeptics say the would-be water overhaul is an overreach.

"It's a great time to be talking about California water needs and funding," said Sara Aminzadeh of California Coastkeeper Alliance, an advocacy group. "But there's a danger that the political capital for water projects is misappropriated and we have a missed opportunity."

With only so much voter goodwill and competing demands on the state budget, familiar fault lines are re-emerging among those invested in how the state stores its water. Some argue the priority should be improving water infrastructure by upgrading dams and aqueducts; others push for alternatives such as recycling and conservation programs.

The proposed bonds would commit money to both, though in different proportions. The Legislature's $4.1 billion measure on next June's ballot was forged as a compromise among several interest groups, with the support of Gov. Jerry Brown. Its water-related components lean away from traditional infrastructure projects and toward funding for recycling, construction of flood-control levees and cleanup of polluted waterways.

Close to half the bond money, however, would have little or nothing to do with water projects. Some would go to park acquisition and maintenance, much of it in Southern California.

The other bond measure is being headed by Jerry Meral, a former deputy director of the California Department of Water Resources. He supports the Legislature's bond but says it wouldn't go far enough. He's leading a signature drive to qualify an $8.9 billion bond for the November ballot, and appears to have the support, largely from farmers, to get it there.

Like the Legislature's measure, Meral's proposed bond would support recycling, groundwater and cleanup programs. But it would also pay for traditional water projects such as improved canals for farm irrigation. The measure wouldn't fund new dam construction but would include $200 million for Oroville Dam repairs.