Lost Hills and other Kern residents tell board drinking water is contaminated, unaffordable

Residents from Lost Hills, Shafter and surrounding communities delivered emotional testimony Sept. 5 in Bakersfield, telling the State Water Resources Control Board that household tap water is often discolored or foul‑smelling, that families purchase bottled water to drink, and that high water bills and limited access constrain low‑income households.

Speakers described long‑standing local problems. Saúl Ruiz, a Lost Hills resident who said he has lived in the community about forty years, said the tap water changed around 2010 and became brown or yellow and that household plumbing corrodes quickly. Multiple residents reported skin rashes and other health concerns in their families and cited community memories of cancer cases; speakers requested agency action but did not assert a causal medical link between water and particular illnesses, instead asking for testing and mitigation.

Residents also described economic hardship. Several speakers said households spend roughly $150 to $350 a month on purchased drinking water on top of utility bills and that many families cannot afford that burden. Panelists and local advocates said the community often lacks timely interpreter services and easy, trusted pathways to file complaints or request mitigation assistance.

Community groups and witnesses asked the board to place the subbasin under the “probation” or conditional referral process so the Department of Water Resources will maintain heightened oversight while local GSAs finalize mitigation measures. Testimony emphasized three practical needs: guaranteed emergency potable water for affected households, a clear and funded pathway for replacing or remediating impacted domestic wells, and prioritized attention to vulnerable sites such as schools.

Why it matters: Lost Hills, Shafter and nearby towns are inside a large agricultural watershed where domestic wells and small systems supply many residences. Residents said they often receive less information and assistance than larger water users and urged GSAs and state agencies to prioritize vulnerable communities when implementing mitigation programs.

What residents asked for: Faster notification when a nearby monitoring well exceeds a water‑quality threshold; outreach and sample collection with translators; clear instructions on how to apply for mitigation; and funding commitments to ensure replacement wells, point‑of‑use treatment or emergency bottled water for households that lack safe tap water.

Speakers at the hearing included local residents and community organizers from Clean Water Action and the Central California Environmental Justice Network. Board members acknowledged the testimony during deliberations and cited the comments as a major reason to keep strong conditions on any referral back to DWR.