Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Delta Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Amendments to SB 872 narrow Water Code language as Delta levees funding case is made

Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee · June 30, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate bill SB 872, backed by reclamation districts and major water agencies, would create a Delta levees and canal subsidence fund and allow waivers of local cost-sharing; the committee agreed to late amendments changing a Water Code provision from 'may' to 'shall' and removing the word 'imminent.'

Chair Pappan opened the hearing on SB 872 and announced late, negotiated amendments to Water Code language; she said the author and committee had agreed to two changes to amendment 3 that would change a provision in the Water Code (described in the hearing as "1 2 9 8 6 8 2, subparagraph 2") by replacing "may" with "shall" and striking the word "imminent." The chair said she would put the changes on the record so colleagues arriving later would know what they were voting on.

Gilbert Cosio, a district engineer with River Delta Consulting, testified in support and described the long history of levee maintenance in the Delta and the limits of current subventions programs. "Without this subventions program, multiple levee breaches would impact local reclamation districts' billions of dollars of damages and the state with potentially billion dollars of damages," Cosio said, underscoring studies and past flood events. Glenn Farrell for the State Water Contractors told the committee the State Water Project supplies about one-third of Californians' water and warned that subsidence of aqueducts could sharply reduce delivery capacity if not addressed. Supporters urged consistent funding to protect infrastructure and communities.

The committee recorded the item for committee action and left the item on call for additional votes during cleanup. No witnesses spoke in opposition during the on-the-record testimony portion. The chair said the bill would be taken up when a quorum was present and noted the committee had agreed to accept the amendments the author had negotiated.