California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 565 — Water resources.

Last action — From Assembly without further action.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law generally prohibits the state, or a county, city, district, or other political subdivision, or any public officer or body acting in its official capacity on behalf of any of those entities, from being required to pay any fee for the performance of an official service. Existing law exempts from this provision any fee or charge for official services required pursuant to specified provisions of law relating to water use or water quality. This bill would expand the exemption to other provisions relating to water use, including provisions that require the payment of fees to the State Water Resources Control Board (board) for official services relating to statements of water diversion and use. (2) Existing law authorizes the board to investigate all streams, stream systems, lakes, or other bodies of water, take testimony relating to the rights to water or the use of water, and ascertain whether water filed upon or attempted to be appropriated is appropriated under the laws of the state. Existing law requires the board to take appropriate actions to prevent waste or the unreasonable use of water. Under existing law, the board makes determinations with regard to the availability of recycled water. This bill would authorize the board, in conducting an investigation or proceeding for these purposes, to order any person or entity that diverts water or uses water to submit a technical or monitoring report related to the diversion or use of water by that person or entity, if the report is in that person's or entity's possession or control, and would authorize the board to require specified persons and entities to prepare and submit technical and monitoring reports. The bill would authorize the board, in connection with the investigation or proceeding, and with the consent of the owner or possessor of the facilities or pursuant to a warrant, to inspect the facilities of any person or entity to determine compliance with specified water use requirements. (3) Existing law declares that the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass. Existing law authorizes the administrative imposition of civil liability by the board for a trespass in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which the trespass occurs. Moneys generated by the imposition of civil liability under these provisions are deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would provide that, for a first enforcement proceeding, a person or entity committing a trespass may be liable either in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs, if the unauthorized diversion or use does not exceed 1,000 acre feet, or, if the unauthorized diversion or use exceeds 1,000 acre feet, in an amount not to exceed the sum of either $1,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs or the economic benefit of the violation, as specified, whichever is the greater amount. For a subsequent enforcement proceeding, the bill would provide that the person or entity committing the trespass may be liable in an amount not to exceed either $5,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs, as specified, or the economic benefit of the violation, as defined, whichever is the greater amount. The moneys would be required to be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified. (4) Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires each person who diverts water after December 31, 1965, to file with the board a prescribed statement of diversion and use. Existing law requires a statement to include specified information, including, on and after January 1, 2012, monthly records of water diversions. This bill would establish a rebuttable presumption, as specified, in any proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that a right to appropriate water has ceased or is subject to prescribed action, that no use required to be included in a statement of diversion and use occurred unless that use is included in a statement that is submitted to the board within a specified time period. The bill would require certain statements submitted to the board, that are canceled for nonpayment of fees, to be deemed submitted for purposes of that presumption. The bill would require a person who files a statement of diversion and use, and certain petitions involving a change in a water right, to pay an annual fee, for deposit in the Water Rights Fund. The bill would include as recoverable costs, for which the board may be reimbursed from the fund upon appropriation therefor, costs incurred in connection with carrying out requirements relating to the statements of diversion and use and the performance of duties under provisions that require the reasonable use of water. (5) Existing law authorizes the board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements, including requirements set forth in a decision or order relating to the unauthorized use of water. Any person who violates a cease and desist order may be liable in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for each day in which the violation occurs. Revenue generated from these penalties is deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would increase, as specified, the civil penalties that apply to a person who violates a cease and desist order. The bill would impose civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for a failure to comply with various reporting or monitoring requirements. The bill would authorize the board to impose additional civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for the violation of a permit, license, certificate, or registration, or an order or regulation involving the unreasonable use of water. The board would be required to establish a schedule of penalties that applies to small farms for de minimis water right violations. Funds derived from the imposition of these civil penalties would be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Assembly without further action.

  2. Placed on inactive file on request of Assembly Member Charles Calderon.

  3. Read second time. To third reading.

  4. Read second time. Amended. To second reading.

  5. (Heard in committe August 12.)

  6. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 9. Noes 6.)

  7. Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  8. Joint Rule 62(a) file notice suspended. (Page 5989.)

  9. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  10. (Heard in committee on June 29.)

  11. From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 6.)

  12. Set, second hearing. Further hearing to be set.

  13. (May 20 amended measure version corrected May 24.)

  14. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.

  15. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.

  16. Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  17. To Com. on W.,P. & W.

  18. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  19. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 21. Noes 13. Page 1194.) To Assembly.

  20. Read second time. Amended. To third reading.

  21. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 5. Page 1072.)

  22. (Suspense - for vote only.)

  23. Set for hearing May 28.

  24. Placed on APPR suspense file.

  25. Set for hearing May 18.

  26. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  27. From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 679.)

  28. Set for hearing April 27.

  29. From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on EQ. (Ayes 7. Noes 3. Page 479.) Re-referred to Com. on EQ.

  30. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

  31. Set for hearing April 14.

  32. To Coms. on N.R. & W. and EQ.

  33. Read first time.

  34. From print. May be acted upon on or after March 30.

  35. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Huffman · Cosponsor
  • Pavley · Primary
  • Steinberg · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on · 3 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Pavley

Co-sponsors (2)

  • Huffman
  • Steinberg

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended.

Passed 9 Yea · 6 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9603
Total 9603
% of votes cast 50%33%0%17%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Fuentes — Yea
Conway — Nay
Gatto — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Nay
De — Not Voting
Leon — Not Voting
Miller — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torrico — Nay
Bradford — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Norby — Nay
Torlakson — Yea
Coto — Yea
Davis — Not Voting

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

Passed 10 Yea · 7 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9600
Democratic 1100
Total 10700
% of votes cast 59%41%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Fuller — Nay
Gatto — Yea
Huffman — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Salas — Yea
Tom — Nay
Fletcher — Nay
Anderson — Nay
Blumenfield — Yea
Yamada — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Nay
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Senate 3rd Reading SB565 Pavley

Passed 22 Yea · 13 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 211204
Republican 0100
Democratic 1001
Total 221305
% of votes cast 55%33%0%13%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Cedillo — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Cogdill — Nay
Florez — Yea
Hollingsworth — Nay
Runner — Not Voting
Kehoe — Yea
Ducheny — Not Voting
Liu — Yea
Ashburn — Nay
Dutton — Nay
Maldonado — Not Voting
McLeod — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Romero — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wiggins — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Aanestad — Nay
Alquist — Yea
Benoit — Nay
Harman — Not Voting
Huff — Nay
Leno — Yea
Walters — Nay
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Nay
Cox — Nay
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 7 Yea · 5 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7501
Total 7501
% of votes cast 54%38%0%8%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Runner — Nay
Cox — Nay
Kehoe — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Walters — Nay
Wolk — Not Voting
Leno — Yea
Corbett — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 13000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Runner — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Walters — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 565 do?
(1) Existing law generally prohibits the state, or a county, city, district, or other political subdivision, or any public officer or body acting in its official capacity on behalf of any of those entities, from being required to pay any fee for the performance of an official service. Existing law exempts from this provision any fee or charge for official services required pursuant to specified provisions of law relating to water use or water quality. This bill would expand the exemption to other provisions relating to water use, including provisions that require the payment of fees to the State Water Resources Control Board (board) for official services relating to statements of water diversion and use. (2) Existing law authorizes the board to investigate all streams, stream systems, lakes, or other bodies of water, take testimony relating to the rights to water or the use of water, and ascertain whether water filed upon or attempted to be appropriated is appropriated under the laws of the state. Existing law requires the board to take appropriate actions to prevent waste or the unreasonable use of water. Under existing law, the board makes determinations with regard to the availability of recycled water. This bill would authorize the board, in conducting an investigation or proceeding for these purposes, to order any person or entity that diverts water or uses water to submit a technical or monitoring report related to the diversion or use of water by that person or entity, if the report is in that person's or entity's possession or control, and would authorize the board to require specified persons and entities to prepare and submit technical and monitoring reports. The bill would authorize the board, in connection with the investigation or proceeding, and with the consent of the owner or possessor of the facilities or pursuant to a warrant, to inspect the facilities of any person or entity to determine compliance with specified water use requirements. (3) Existing law declares that the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass. Existing law authorizes the administrative imposition of civil liability by the board for a trespass in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which the trespass occurs. Moneys generated by the imposition of civil liability under these provisions are deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would provide that, for a first enforcement proceeding, a person or entity committing a trespass may be liable either in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs, if the unauthorized diversion or use does not exceed 1,000 acre feet, or, if the unauthorized diversion or use exceeds 1,000 acre feet, in an amount not to exceed the sum of either $1,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs or the economic benefit of the violation, as specified, whichever is the greater amount. For a subsequent enforcement proceeding, the bill would provide that the person or entity committing the trespass may be liable in an amount not to exceed either $5,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs, as specified, or the economic benefit of the violation, as defined, whichever is the greater amount. The moneys would be required to be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified. (4) Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires each person who diverts water after December 31, 1965, to file with the board a prescribed statement of diversion and use. Existing law requires a statement to include specified information, including, on and after January 1, 2012, monthly records of water diversions. This bill would establish a rebuttable presumption, as specified, in any proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that a right to appropriate water has ceased or is subject to prescribed action, that no use required to be included in a statement of diversion and use occurred unless that use is included in a statement that is submitted to the board within a specified time period. The bill would require certain statements submitted to the board, that are canceled for nonpayment of fees, to be deemed submitted for purposes of that presumption. The bill would require a person who files a statement of diversion and use, and certain petitions involving a change in a water right, to pay an annual fee, for deposit in the Water Rights Fund. The bill would include as recoverable costs, for which the board may be reimbursed from the fund upon appropriation therefor, costs incurred in connection with carrying out requirements relating to the statements of diversion and use and the performance of duties under provisions that require the reasonable use of water. (5) Existing law authorizes the board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements, including requirements set forth in a decision or order relating to the unauthorized use of water. Any person who violates a cease and desist order may be liable in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for each day in which the violation occurs. Revenue generated from these penalties is deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would increase, as specified, the civil penalties that apply to a person who violates a cease and desist order. The bill would impose civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for a failure to comply with various reporting or monitoring requirements. The bill would authorize the board to impose additional civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for the violation of a permit, license, certificate, or registration, or an order or regulation involving the unreasonable use of water. The board would be required to establish a schedule of penalties that applies to small farms for de minimis water right violations. Funds derived from the imposition of these civil penalties would be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified.
Who sponsors SB 565?
SB 565 is sponsored by Huffman, Pavley, and Steinberg.
What is the current status of SB 565?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 565?
Track SB 565 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 565

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 565

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →