Lecture 21 Human Right to Water in California

Presented by Dr. Kristin Dobbin, Environmental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM)
Acknowledgements: Parts of this presentation developed by ESPM postdoc Jenny Rempel

Definition:
"It is hereby declared to be the established policy of the state that every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes."

Years of Advocacy:
- Formation of the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water.
- Introduction of AB 1242, which was vetoed, followed by the introduction and passage of AB 685.
- UN Special Rapporteur's visit to California.
- The release of the "Thirsty for Justice" report in 2006 led to increased advocacy.
- Recognition of governance changes in 2010 with the formalization of the Safe Water Alliance.
- AB 685 faced almost a year of suspense in committee before passing.

As of October 2025, 710,718 Californians are served by non-compliant public water systems.
Over 6.5 million individuals have experienced primary drinking water violations since 2012.
Approximately 1.5 million Californians rely on domestic wells or unregulated small systems likely providing poor water quality.
Data Source: State Water Resources Control Board, SAFER dashboard.

A total of 6,047 household water outages reported statewide.
More than 150 public water systems requested emergency assistance.
Significant financial investments made in drinking water assistance.
83% of counties have not implemented mandatory drought plans for rural residents.

17% of California's water systems have unaffordable rate estimates according to the State Water Board.
A 2021 survey indicated that ~12% of Californians are overdue on water payments, contributing to a collective water debt of $1 billion.
No low-income rate assistance programs exist for water compared to other utility sectors.

Low-income communities and communities of color are significantly impacted (Balazs et al., 2011, 2012; Pace et al., 2022).
Unincorporated communities also face disproportionate impacts (Allaire et al., 2024; Pannu, 2012).
Water access characterized by spatial, racialized, and socioeconomic disparities.

Example: In the San Joaquin Valley:
- Low-income and unincorporated communities challenged in accessing community water systems.
- Data indicates 189 designated unincorporated communities (DUCs) that are not served by a community water system; populations affected range from 26,205 to 247,134.
- Some community water systems lack defined spatial boundaries.
- Map data aligns with demographics and populations of affected communities.

Emphasis on the systemic factors contributing to water inequities, citing Balazs & Ray (2015) and others.
Relationship dynamics that shape water access inequities.

Regional Factors:
- Climate influences.
- Hydrogeology.
- Soil composition.
Community & Household Factors:
- Climate impact variability.
- Hydrogeology and soil relevance.

Regional Impact:
- Agriculture types (e.g., citrus production).
- Land use patterns.
- Reliance on groundwater.
Community Aspects:
- Infrastructure vulnerabilities.
- Economies of scale in water systems.
- Technical, managerial, and financial (TMF) capacity of water systems.
Household Condition:
- Age and quality of pipes.
- Type of wastewater treatment systems employed.

Regional:
- Planning policies and regulations (e.g., prioritization tiers).
- Historical settlement patterns affect current governance.
Community-Level Issues:
- Social vulnerabilities withstand political disenfranchisement.
Households:
- Vulnerabilities persist in forms such as linguistic isolation.

Mechanisms include the source of pollution, exposure concentration, health effects, and coping mechanisms at different levels (State, County, Community, Household).

Utilizes the Drinking Water Disparities Framework to analyze local issues:
- Natural Environment: Favorable climate and shallow water table.
- Built Environment: Large-scale citrus production leading to groundwater reliance.
- Impacts: Poor water quality due to nitrate exceeding maximum contaminant levels (MCL).
- Sociopolitical Environment: Historical disempowerment related to mutual water company operations.

Concept: Consolidation refers to the formal merging of governance, management, and financial functions of drinking water provision between two or more water system entities.

Questions Explored:
- Where and why are consolidations occurring?
- What outcomes are associated with consolidations?
- What opportunities and limitations exist for consolidation as a solution to the human right to water?
Methodology:
- Development of a dataset on 206 completed consolidations.
- Conducting a representative survey of water systems involved with recent or ongoing consolidation projects.
- Completing 11 in-depth qualitative case studies.

Between 2015 and 2021, California completed more than 200 consolidations across 47 counties, with insights into common reasons for consolidation such as water quality issues and disaster impacts.

Increased investment in infrastructure tends to follow consolidations, promoting improvements in water quality and supply.

Higher resource areas consolidate at twice the rate of lower-resource communities, complicating access.
- Receiving systems are sometimes also out of compliance.
- Many consolidations occur between systems situated less than one mile from each other.

Emphasis on the shift from undemocratic structures (e.g., mutual water companies) to city and district managed services.
The applicability of AB 685 signifies broader support and activism principles connected to environmental justice.
Sociopolitical factors require concerted efforts beyond built environment challenges to ensure the human right to water.
Diverse policy strategies imperative across various scales to advance these rights.