Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly committee advances bill to recognize tribal water uses as a statewide beneficial use
Summary
The Assembly committee voted to advance AB 362, which would add tribal uses of water to the State Water Board’s list of beneficial uses and require improved tribal consultation; supporters said it addresses long-standing injustices, while water agencies urged changes to avoid legal and programmatic uncertainty.
A California Assembly committee advanced legislation on a vote Tuesday that would add tribal uses of water to the list of statewide beneficial uses and direct state agencies to better consult with tribes when setting water quality standards.
Assemblymember Ramos, the bill’s author, described AB 362 as an attempt "to repair legacies of injustices faced by Native American tribes in the state of California when it comes to water policy," and said the measure would place tribal water uses “on equal footing with other statewide beneficial uses of water, such as recreation and agriculture.”
The measure drew packed public testimony. Melissa Tayaba, vice chair for the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians and the tribe’s director of traditional ecological knowledge, told the committee her people "have relied upon these waterways and the cultural landscapes connected to them since long before European colonization," and said degraded river conditions threaten tribes’ ability to maintain food sovereignty and cultural practices.
"AB 362 would place tribal water uses on equal footing with other statewide beneficial uses of water," Tayaba said. "A statutory designation would ensure that state regulators understand and act expeditiously to protect the water uses of all California tribes."
Robert Jeff, vice chairman of the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi‑Yokut Tribe, testified the bill would let tribes participate "on equal footing" in regional water planning and said returning Tulare Lake — "Ba'ashi," sacred to his people — would support cultural restoration.
Supporters also included environmental and conservation groups. Rebecca Marcus of the Union of Concerned Scientists, Michael Chen of Audubon California and representatives from the Sierra Club, Planning and Conservation League, Restore the Delta and other organizations voiced strong support for the bill.
But the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), which represents roughly 470 public water agencies, said it was “opposed unless amended.” Chelsea Haines, ACWA’s legislative representative, praised the bill’s intent to recognize tribal uses but warned language in AB 362 could give tribal uses primacy in determining "the highest water quality" and could insert unclear new requirements into the State Water Board’s Bay‑Delta Plan update.
"This provision should be deleted," Haines said, referring to language that ACWA staff said could put tribal beneficial uses above other established beneficial uses. ACWA also urged deletion of a provision that it said could impose unclear requirements on the State Water Board’s Bay‑Delta Plan update by 2027 and warned the change could trigger litigation and delay an ongoing, multiyear planning process.
Representatives of agricultural and local government interests raised related concerns. Bob Reeb, who was speaking for a coalition of irrigation and water districts, and other witnesses said the bill would introduce duplicative or constitutionally fraught language into CEQA-related analyses and expressed concern about a provision that would exempt adoption of tribal uses within a water quality control plan from CEQA review.
Ramos and tribal witnesses said they have been meeting with ACWA and others and that the author’s office intends to continue discussions. "We have reached out and we are having meetings," Ramos said during the committee exchange.
After questions from committee members and additional public testimony, the panel voted to advance AB 362 to the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee. The committee discussion emphasized both the bill’s equity goals — giving tribes a clear statutory pathway to protect cultural and subsistence water uses — and the need to resolve ACWA’s and others’ legal and implementation concerns in future amendments.
The bill now moves to the next committee, where lawmakers are likely to consider edits addressing the procedural and statutory concerns raised by water agencies and legal stakeholders.
