A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State, by adding Section 8 to Article X thereof, relating to water.
ACA 11 is a proposed constitutional amendment, titled the California Water Resiliency Act, that would dedicate a new ongoing funding stream for water infrastructure. It would require the State Treasurer to transfer 1% of state revenues eligible for appropriation from the General Fund each year into a newly created Water Conveyance and Capacity Infrastructure Fund. The measure would then continuously appropriate those funds to the California Water Commission to cover its administrative costs and to award grants for the entitlement, repair, design, and construction of water infrastructure projects.
The grants would be limited to projects intended to maintain or expand the availability of clean, safe drinking water for homes and businesses and water for agricultural uses, while remaining consistent with area of origin water rights. Eligible applicants would be public agencies, special districts, joint powers authorities, or public-private partnerships, and funded projects would need to be owned in whole or in part by the applicant. The measure also states that the new transfer would not reduce constitutionally required funding for K-12 schools or public higher education.
If approved by voters, ACA 11 would amend Article X of the California Constitution and create a constitutionally protected funding mechanism for water conveyance and capacity projects. It would shift a fixed share of General Fund revenues into a dedicated infrastructure fund, making those dollars continuously available without further annual appropriation. The measure would affect state budgeting, the California Water Commission’s responsibilities, and the financing of water supply, storage, conveyance, and related infrastructure projects across the state.
The bill’s stated purpose reflects a strongly pro-water-infrastructure and drought-resiliency message, emphasizing the need for reliable, affordable water supplies for communities, agriculture, and the environment. Because the measure was just introduced and no committee transcripts or votes are available, there is no recorded legislative debate or formal vote history to indicate broader support or opposition. The framing suggests an effort to elevate water funding as a statewide priority similar to other constitutionally protected spending categories.
The main points of potential contention are fiscal and policy-related. Opponents or skeptics could object to reserving 1% of state revenues for a single purpose, especially because the transfer is automatic and continuous, reducing budget flexibility. There may also be debate over whether the funding should prioritize conveyance and capacity projects versus other water strategies such as conservation, ecosystem restoration, groundwater management, or local supply projects. Additional questions may arise about the role of public-private partnerships, the scope of eligible projects, and how the measure interacts with area of origin water rights and existing water allocation rules.