Bill Overview
Title: Tule River Tribe Reserved Water Rights Settlement Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes, ratifies, and confirms a specified water rights settlement agreement entered into by the Tule River Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation, the South Tule Independent Ditch Company, and the Tule River Association, thus satisfying claims to water rights in California. Additionally, the bill establishes and provides funding for a settlement trust fund.
Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the Tule River Indian Tribe and local stakeholders involved in the settlement
Estimated Size: 900
- The Tule River Indian Tribe, which resides on the Tule River Reservation in California, is directly impacted, as the bill addresses their claims to water rights.
- Other Native American tribes might be indirectly affected if they are in regions with similar issues, though this bill specifically addresses the Tule River Tribe.
- Local stakeholders, such as the South Tule Independent Ditch Company and the Tule River Association, who are part of the agreement, will be impacted.
- The general population within the region may experience indirect effects depending on changes in water management and distribution as a result of the bill.
Reasoning
- The policy budget and timeline suggest a concentrated impact over the next few decades. It mainly serves members of the Tule River Indian Tribe and local stakeholders.
- While members of the Tule River Indian Tribe will experience significant long-term improvement in resource access and potentially quality of life, indirect effects on other locals and broader regional impacts are expected to be minimal.
- Given the compacted area of impact and the focus on water rights and resources, dominant changes concerning government and social perspectives will rest within the target demographic.
- Interviews will reflect a range of impacted individuals from those directly within the tribe to nearby residents who could experience minimal to none effects, capturing a broad spectrum of perspectives.
Simulated Interviews
Tribal Council Member (Tule River Reservation, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The settlement is crucial for our tribe's future. It's been a long time coming, and we anticipate significant improvements in our community.
- I expect this to positively impact our agriculture and living conditions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Farmer (Visalia, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The resolution will streamline our water supply management. While we might see benefits, the impact will be more pronounced for the tribe.
- I am supportive as it seems fair and overdue.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Bakersfield, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who worked in this field, I see this agreement as a necessary alignment.
- I'm curious how this will develop in terms of local water governance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Teacher (Porterville, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic this will bring educational funding increases as the tribe grows economically.
- Our students could benefit indirectly from the tribe's improved position.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
State Water Board Consultant (Sacramento, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy marks a significant precedent for other tribal water right issues.
- I do not expect personal impact, but it’s interesting from a professional point of view.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
College Student (Tule River Reservation, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Growing up, access to reliable water was always an issue; I'm glad to see this being addressed.
- It provides security for my future if I choose to return.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Water Rights Attorney (Fresno, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Positive resolution sets a strong legal precedent but doesn't affect my everyday life directly.
- There may be client-related benefits in legal advisory capacities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Rancher (Rural Tulare County, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it stabilizes water distribution, it could be beneficial indirectly.
- I'm not directly affected without changes in agricultural water allocations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Modesto, CA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The agreement is interesting from an ecological perspective.
- Long-term water management could have influential downstream effects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Elder and Community Leader (Tule River Reservation, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This settlement is vital for our cultural preservation and future generations.
- I've seen many issues arising from poor water access resolved if the agreement is honored.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $110000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The primary beneficiaries are the Tule River Tribe members and local stakeholders involved in the settlement.
- The initial funding requirements may be substantial to establish the settlement trust fund and legal frameworks.
- Sustainable water management is critical to the success and long-term viability of any associated economic impacts.
- Potential environmental concerns related to changes in water allocation must be addressed.