Reforms to water rights could soon hit California farmers

halt to diversions and fine violators up to $10,000 a day. Bauer-Kahan described AB 460 as a simple clarifying measure, arguing “all it does is say you’ve got to follow the law” and targets “people who want to take water that doesn't belong to them.” Yet she asserted the reforms would draw significant progress in combating climate change.

“Our future is really, really frightening,” said Bauer-Kahan, pointing to research showing the state’s snowpack could disappear within 24 years.

Asm. James Ramos of San Bernardino added that the “modest, common-sense reforms” prevent irreparable harm to tribal communities.

In policy committee hearings, State Water Contractors (SWC) contended the bill would expand the agency’s authority without any checks and balances and allow it to establish new rules for legal diverters. SWC General Manager Jennifer Pierre said that creating such uncertainty over water rights would disrupt investments in climate resilience as well as commitments already in place for a set of voluntary agreements over freshwater flows for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

During floor debate last week, Asm. Vince Fong of Bakersfield warned the bill would “completely overhaul California’s water rights system” and put an end to family farms. Fong argued the new powers would allow the board to stop legal diversions and deny water users the right to challenge the board’s actions in court. Fellow Republican

Asm. Heath Flora of Ripon added that the board would have “absolute authority to be the judge and jury” over senior water rights established before 1914. Minority Leader James Gallagher worried that any interest group could draft a petition to halt a diversion, and he claimed the impacts would extend beyond agriculture to urban water districts. Gallagher also raised alarms over expanding the agency’s authority for issuing curtailments.

“Who makes the decision?” he said. “It's not the elected people of the state. It's an unelected water board that now gets to make that decision with limited information, on a short time period and with very little due process.”

See 'Water' Page 2