Assembly committee hears months-long fight over pit dewatering near San Joaquin River; bill advances to appropriations

Assemblymember [author name not specified in transcript] introduced Assembly Bill 14 25, a narrowly tailored measure to prohibit pit dewatering in parts of the San Joaquin River Parkway where groundwater is shallower than 50 feet, saying the restriction is needed to protect groundwater, the San Joaquin River and culturally important lands.

Supporters told the committee the draft environmental review for a proposed new mine near the river failed to analyze how blasting and a 600-foot pit would change groundwater and flood risk. Sharon Weaver, executive director of the San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust, said the river has been mined for more than a century and that the proposed project, a 200-foot set back from the river with plans for blasting and deep excavation, could set a precedent that invites more projects close to the river. “We think this bill is critical to protecting the future health of the river,” Weaver said.

Indigenous speakers described the river as sacred and said tribal consultation and access have been insufficient. A representative who identified herself as indigenous to the lands testified that the Dumna people have been displaced and lack access to the river; she urged lawmakers to consider alternative sites the project developer identified.

CEMEX and dozens of unionized employees and contractors opposed the bill. A company representative said CEMEX has been through CEQA reviews for seven years, spent about $5 million on studies, and that dewatering is a long‑standing practice used for dust control. A CEMEX employee said the company supports hundreds of local jobs and that prohibiting dewatering at the proposed site could force the plant to close when a conditional use permit expires in 2026.

Committee members pressed both sides on technical details: how much water is pumped from the pit, whether the pumped water contains contaminants, and whether the lead agency’s draft EIR incorporates expected future restoration flows in the San Joaquin River restoration program. Supporters said the draft EIR did not incorporate future restoration flows, which they say could underestimate future floodplain and groundwater interactions. Opponents said the draft EIR is still in public comment and the process should be allowed to finish.

After public testimony and questions, a motion to pass AB 14 25 to the Appropriations Committee was made and carried, with the committee recording its action as “due pass to appropriations.” The author requested reconsideration on the floor for absent members; the record shows the item was left open for absent authors later in the hearing.

Why this matters: the San Joaquin River Parkway has substantial state investments, cultural significance to local tribes, and neighbors who testified about health, water and ecological concerns. The committee’s action advances the bill to a fiscal committee where its job, budget and legal effects will be reviewed.

Votes at committee: the chair called the roll after discussion; the committee recorded a “due pass to appropriations” recommendation for AB 14 25 and left the item open for absent authors and possible reconsideration.

What’s next: AB 14 25 will be considered by the Assembly Appropriations Committee; if it passes that committee, it will move to the Assembly floor for further action.