(a) The court may enter a judgment in a comprehensive adjudication if the court finds that the judgment meets all of the following criteria:
(1) It is consistent with Section 2 of Article X of the California Constitution.
(2) It is consistent with the water right priorities of all non-stipulating parties and any persons who have claims that are exempted pursuant to Section 833 in the basin.
(3) It treats all objecting parties and any persons who have claims that are exempted pursuant to Section 833 equitably as compared to the stipulating parties.
(b) If a party or group of parties submits a proposed stipulated judgment that is supported by more than 50 percent of all parties who are groundwater extractors in the basin or use the basin for groundwater storage and is supported by groundwater extractors responsible for at least 75 percent of the groundwater extracted in the basin during the five calendar years before the filing of the complaint, the court may adopt the proposed stipulated judgment, as applied to the stipulating parties, if the proposed stipulated judgment meets the criteria described in subdivision (a). A party objecting to a proposed stipulated judgment shall demonstrate, by a preponderance of evidence, that the proposed stipulated judgment does not satisfy one or more criteria described in subdivision (a) or that it substantially violates the water rights of the objecting party. If the objecting party is unable to make this showing, the court may impose the proposed stipulated judgment on the objecting party. An objecting party may be subject to a preliminary injunction issued pursuant to Section 847 while his or her objections are being resolved.
(Amended (as added by Stats. 2015, Ch. 672, Sec. 1) by Stats. 2016, Ch. 86, Sec. 28. (SB 1171) Effective January 1, 2017.)
Last modified: October 25, 2018