Support your right to haul water.

Share with:


Mail a signed personal letter to Assemblyman Obernolte supporting AB 366 and 367, to reinstate your right to have water brought to your property by a licensed hauler from a certified source. We may need to write in support again as the bill travels through legislative channels and byways.

Here’s the info his office sent about the bills, in case you did not see it :​ Last year, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill 1263, which prohibits the permitting of a single home or cabin where the source of water supply is hauled water. That bill was retroactive in nature, ultimately rendering the land worthless by taking away California landowners’ ability to build on land located in areas without adequate water infrastructure. Assembly Bill 366 would exempt property owners of existing parcels from this law and allow them to build on their property, even if legally obtained hauled water is the listed source of water.

“This bill [AB 366] is vital to protect those property owners who purchased land before the provisions in SB 1263  take effect. My constituents and other rural Californians should have the right to build a home on their own land,” said Assemblyman Obernolte. “It’s unreasonable for the state to punish these landowners for having property that isn’t connected to a municipal water system.”

Assemblyman Obernolte also introduced AB 367 which focuses specifically on ensuring a home destroyed by fire is allowed to be rebuilt.
“Last year my district was devastated by the Blue Cut Fire,” Assemblyman Obernolte said. “This bill is crucial to allow homeowners who rely on hauled water to rebuild their home if it is tragically destroyed by a fire.”

​Why write? THE BAN HURTS JOHNSON VALLEY. Denying building permits unless you drill a well discourages many newcomers from buying property at all. The increase in the number of wells drilled by current landowners was startling – a trend with unpredictable but possible ​adverse outcomes for the aquifer. And well owners are up the creek if well failure or power failure occurs. Who will bring water if water haulers are gone? The County? The State? The California Legislature? The prospect of piped-in water to a community so sparsely  ​populated and widely scattered has to be described as dim. Dividing astronomical bonded indebtedness among us has to be described as a dim prospect, also.

The “health reasons” often cited as the reason for banning hauled water won’t hold water, so to speak. Do town folks want to drive ​everyone out of the rural areas? What other motiv​es​ can you suggest for a ban so stupid and counter-productive in a State which encourages, no, requires us to conserve water? (Those who rely on hauled water are proven to be much more frugal in their use of water than well owners or those on a pipeline.)

Now that the formerly unwritten County ban is set down in writing by the State, every rural resident must get into this. So add your support to the letters for Obernolte now.

If you have a personal story of being denied a building permit, or a concern with what will happen to the value and/or sellability of your property, or what will happen when water haulers are all out of business, tell him!

Mail to:
Assemblyman Jay Obernolte,
State Capitol Office: Room 4116,
Sacramento, CA 94249.

By the way, if you have been denied a building permit or lost a prospect for buying your property because of this situation, let me know even if you have no written proof. I will forward the info to people ​to whom it may be useful.

Betty Munson

Share with:

Liked it? Take a second to support Cactusthorns on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

4 Responses to Support your right to haul water.

  1. Avatar
    Jordan Lee May 11, 2017 at 2:20 am

    The revisions of this bill since this article was written are just as bad as the initial ban. The revisions do nothing to serve new development and only help any development before Jan 1 2017… but in order to develop before 2017 you need a building permit and the only way to get a permit is to have a viable source of water – which would be a well or a utility. So why would anyone who had either of those water sources prior to Jan 1 2017 care or need hauled water? If this was supposed to encourage new development I don’t see how it will – the ability to deny new development is STILL in the 2nd part of the bill along with a subjective contingency of fire response times from local fire departments. The whole thing is a major disappointment.

  2. Avatar
    Jordan Lee July 6, 2017 at 6:44 am

    AB-366 was just recently completely gutted and they dismantled the entire proposal. Instead, they used the AB-366 bill to create an entirely different bill that would reimburse money for “exhibit and rental equipment.” Makes absolutely no sense that we have voiced our concerns only to have it completely gutted at the Committee discussion level because the Committee Chair didn’t like that we want hauled water – the Chair is the Senator who created the hauled water ban in the first place. We need to collectively join together and demand this to be addressed.

  3. Avatar
    Vicki Kea January 31, 2018 at 2:25 pm

    I’ve attached an article from 2016. It appears that the banning building if hauled water is to be used was meant to stop large-scale developers from creating their own small water districts, citing health issues with the water. They threw us little guys under the bus by putting us under the umbrella of “developers.” Who the hell is that dimwit senator anyway? Find a cabin with no well and no public water and plop him out there. He’d be crying to see one of those water trucks.

  4. Avatar
    Wendy Sue Mesny October 2, 2018 at 1:35 pm

    I hope this is the case, Vicki. Out here in LA County, this issue is just now coming to a head for us. We live in rural Pearblossom, but this effects many of us, hundreds throughout our area and more West through Acton and Agua Dulce also. Many horse properties. My feeling is that since the Water Adjudication of our entire valley, this is only going to get uglier. My family and I have several properties after having lived out here for 40 plus years. Some of these properties are now worthless. Either we cannot drill because we now have no rights to water, or cannot build without being connected to infastructure. LAFCO, who I call the “boundry police” both state that all these 200+ homes up here do not “belong” in any water districts boundries, nor can they bring pipes up here for infastructure, deeming us in a type of a “no man’s land.” Upon 2 years of investigative work, I was told that LA County stopped allowing us to buils relying on hauled water up until, 1/1/03. OR allowed people to drill for wells, and now that many have gone dry, NO WATER HAULERS have been allowed to haul to the homes that have no water, dry or previously hauled, because of the new Water Adjudication of the area. It’s “their water” and they do not have to share. Just how far up and how far down do we own, anyways. Along the highways in Acton and Agus Dulce, it’s many folks feelings that this ‘no water- worthless properties’ may also have to do with the State or ?whomever being able to purchase, or even take land for the High Speed Rail plans. Not out of the question either I suppose. I get the whole water rationing thing, I do… but at such an expense that i guess poeople have to suffer from their retirements and investments??? Our Adjudication out here says that all water that is used must be replaced and acre feet must be purchased and then pumped back into our basin, to keep our water reserves at what they call a “Safe Yield,” water levels. so, ok, then let us pay and be metered as though we are on a system if we drill, let us haulers haul water to those in need. Don’t make us give up our investments. Land, homes and taxes are so expensive in California. Not to mention what this is going to do to our Agriculture, farmers, alfalfa growers, prices of hay, costs of food and beef, milk, etc., Ouch.
    BTW, I’m Wendy with Wendy’s Water Truck Co. LLC
    A company servicing many who cannot get and do not have water rights of their own. If I were not for us, many would not have access to water at all, but do through me. These water prevayors do not care nor have to as I have been told, supply me with water to give to these people who “CHOSE TO LIVE OUT THERE.” Exact quote from the general manager of the state water company that services our entire valley/ Ca. aqueduct, he told me this to my face. His, and the boards lack of consideration and outright refusal to service these people was a shock and outrage. I took this all the way to Gov. Brown’s office who said they also could not help me based on the fact that the water companies are all privatly owned and do not have to. Then I stated that these ppl pay state taxes, they did not care, I then realized that LA County approved these homes to be built, can’t LA County Public Works Dept.give me water for them? NO… It has been a huge strugle. This has also caused a black market and much theft from people stealing from water hydrants, from neighbors, and empty homes. Please, If anyone has iny thoughts or ideas, I can be reached at my office/ cell: (661) 944-4420, Email:, or on the Web at Wendy’s Water Truck Co. online, or via Facebook Messenger. I attend many town meetings, water meetings, and Watermaster meetings. Be cautious, read up on this topic, pay attention to your newpaper articles, eyes open wide and think outside the box, our government is not always watching out for us, so we must stay informed and share our findings. Speak up, ask questions.
    Wendy sue Mesny- Both hated and apprecited, lol


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.