Local rep pushing bill to boost use of recycled water
Feb. 13—Sen. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, on Tuesday introduced new legislation on Tuesday that would boost the use of recycled water in California.
Senate Bill 31 would also enhance the state's fresh water supply by allowing businesses, homes, and agencies to expand their use of recycled water for irrigation and other uses, rather than relying on drinking water.
"Instead of water wars pitting one region of the state against the other — North versus South — California must develop commonsense solutions that enable us to use the water we have more efficiently," McNerney said. "SB 31 is a pragmatic approach that will enhance our supplies of fresh water by expanding the use of recycled water for irrigation and commercial uses. It will also help protect the state during devastating droughts caused by climate change."
Recycled water is wastewater that has been treated to make it safe for instances in which using drinking water is unnecessary. It is commonly used in irrigation and groundwater recharge, among other uses.
California law requires state and local agencies to use recycled water for irrigating parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping along highways, and other uses when possible. In addition, state law allows agencies to require the use of recycled water for toilet and urinal flushing in public buildings.
Lodi Public Works Director Charles Swimley said the city currently uses very little recycled water, but it will be exploring opportunities associated with the bill for expanding its recycled water infrastructure.
"While we have existing recycled water infrastructure in some of our subdivisions, we don't serve recycled water in the city proper," he said. "We do however utilize approximately 2,700 acre-feet of recycled wastewater annually to irrigate the land application areas that are located at the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility."
Governor Gavin Newsom's Water Supply Strategy aims to meet a goal of recycling 1.8 million acre-feet per year by 2040.
California currently uses more than 700,000 acre feet of recycled water a year, saving the state roughly the equivalent of enough drinking water for 1.4 million households.
SB 31 would enable parks to expand the use of recycled water and ensure that using recycled water in lakes and golf courses, among other "decorative" areas, isn't deterred by overly burdensome regulations.
It also requires homeowners' associations to use recycled water, where available, to irrigate outdoor common areas, and makes sure that homeowners' associations won't have to install new plumbing systems to use recycled water.
In addition, the bill allows food handling and processing facilities to use recycled water for toilet or urinal flushing or outdoor irrigation as long as the recycled water doesn't enter a room where food handling or processing occurs.
"Increased use of recycled water is imperative to ensuring local communities have access to safe and reliable drinking water," WateReuse California managing director Brenley McKenna said. "WateReuse California thanks Senator McNerney for introducing SB 31, which will update the Code of Regulations and expand the allowable uses of recycled water throughout the state. Aligning regulations with advancements in technology and increased investment in recycled water are critical to implementing the Governor's Water Supply Strategy."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
28-05-2025
- Axios
Bill targeting abortion pills misses key deadline
An effort to limit abortion pills in Texas appears to have died in the Legislature. Why it matters: Abortion is already illegal in Texas, but Republicans this session turned their attention to medication abortion, which accounts for most abortions performed in the U.S. Driving the news: Senate Bill 2880 — a sweeping measure that allows lawsuits against those mailing, delivering, manufacturing or distributing abortion bills — sailed through the Senate last month, but did not receive a vote in the House before a key deadline. Senate bills must have received a vote in the House by Tuesday to move to Gov. Greg Abbott's desk. The legislative session ends Monday. Yes, but: It's not over 'til it's over. Measures can be resurrected at the last minute through amendments. What they're saying:"This is a significant failure from the House," Texas Right to Life president John Seago told the Texas Tribune. "When you look at the opportunity this bill had, it seems like there was a deliberate effort to slow the bill down, if not to kill it." Zoom in: More than three dozen Republicans signed a letter last week urging the House State Affairs Committee to vote on the bill so that it could move to the full chamber. The committee approved the measure, but too late in the legislative process to make it to the House floor before the clock ran out. The big picture: The Legislature has moved along several other abortion-related bills. SB 31, aimed at clarifying Texas' abortion ban, which includes an exception that allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy to save the pregnant person's life, is awaiting a signature by Abbott. SB 33, which bans a city from using taxpayer money to pay for abortion-related expenses, also awaits the governor's signature. Both Austin and San Antonio have allocated money to support people traveling for abortions out of state. The other side: "SB 31 doesn't undo the harm of the state's abortion ban, and it never could. No amount of 'clarification' can fix a fundamentally unjust law," Blair Wallace, policy and advocacy strategist for reproductive rights at the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement on the passage of SB 31.
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Yahoo
Texas bill clarifying when doctors can perform life-saving abortions wins early House vote
(The Texas Tribune) — The House voted 129-6 on Wednesday to preliminarily approve a bill to clarify Texas' near-total abortion ban, after it passed the Senate unanimously last month. Despite wide bipartisan support for the bill, some conservative lawmakers raised concerns about whether this would create a loophole allowing doctors to 'rubber stamp' otherwise prohibited abortions. Bill sponsor Rep. Charlie Geren, a Republican from Fort Worth, stressed that this was not a 'choice bill,' but rather an attempt to ensure the existing limits of the law are 'clear, consistent, fair and understandable.' 'We do not want women to die from medical emergencies during their pregnancy,' Geren said. 'We don't want women's lives to be destroyed because their bodies have been seriously impaired.' Texas banned all abortions three years ago, with a narrow exception that allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy only to save a pregnant patient's life. Immediately, doctors and legal experts warned that this exception was too narrow and vaguely written, and the penalties too severe, to ensure that women could get life-saving care. That has proven true in many cases. Dozens of women have come forward with stories of medically necessary abortions delayed or denied, and at least three women have died as a result of these laws. Faced with these stories, Republican lawmakers have conceded that the language of the law might need some clearing up. Senate Bill 31, also called the Life of the Mother Act, does not expand the exceptions or restore abortion access. It instead aims to clarify when a doctor can terminate a pregnancy under the existing exceptions by aligning language among the state's abortion laws, codifying court rulings and requiring education for doctors and lawyers on the nuances of the law. The bill was tightly negotiated among lobbyists for doctors and hospitals, anti-abortion groups and Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola, who authored the bill, and Geren. 'These groups don't always see eye to eye,' Geren said. 'But in this case, they worked together to ensure pregnant women with pregnancy complications get appropriate and timely care.' In the Senate, Republicans threw their support behind the bill, while Democrats pushed back on its narrowness, noting that Texas law still does not allow abortions in cases of rape, incest or lethal fetal anomalies. 'The folks who are working on this fix are, from my perspective, the folks who have created the problem,' said Houston Sen. Molly Cook. 'Over the past four years, we've watched women suffer and die, and this bill is the confirmation that we all agree that something is broken in Texas.' In the House, however, the bill faced headwinds from the right, as conservative Republicans rallied to the idea that this bill would allow doctors to resume elective abortions. Rep. Brent Money, a Greenville Republican, said he believed the laws were clear as written but there had been 'malicious interpretations' by pro-abortion doctors. 'People that want to promote abortion have tried to make it murky what our current law is,' Money said. 'And so my question is to you, is this law written to ensure that malicious actors won't be able to find loopholes to allow abortions that would not be allowed under our current law?' Geren touted his own perfect record of voting for every anti-abortion measure that's come before the House in his long career, and assured Money and his fellow conservatives that this was not an end-run around the laws. 'We are in no way promoting abortion on this,' Geren said, adding later that if a doctor were to abuse this clarification, they could face 99 years in prison and 'they would deserve it.' Many anti-abortion Republican women rallied to Geren's side, including Rep. Shelby Slawson, a Stephenville Republican who carried the bill in 2021 that led to Texas banning nearly all abortions. She framed this bill as just codifying the Legislature's original intent to protect the live's of pregnant women. They took the mic to offer up examples of times doctors should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy – in cases of cancer diagnoses, kidney failure, premature membrane rupture, ectopic pregnancies. But still, some Republicans were not appeased. Rep. Briscoe Cain, a Deer Park lawyer who has been involved in some of the state's most contentious abortion litigation, asked Geren if 'more or less babies will die' as a result of this bill. Geren conceded that by affirming that doctors can perform abortions to save a woman's life, it was possible more babies would die, although he noted that many women were traveling out-of-state to get the same medical care they were denied in Texas. Rep. Brian Harrison, a Midlothian Republican, said he was 'alarmed' to hear Geren's comments, and said it was the 'height of irresponsibility to tinker with these pro-life protections that have already saved countless lives.' Some doctors groups, including the Texas chapter of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have criticized the bill for not going far enough to protect doctors and the patients they treat. Others say these changes will be sufficient to free doctors to perform medically necessary abortions without fear of lengthy prison sentences and massive fines. 'At the end of the day, our hope is that political differences can be set aside, because at the heart of this is a pregnant mother whose health and safety are on the line,' Texas Hospital Association president John Hawkins said in a statement. 'Hospitals and doctors need to be able to act on the medical facts and merits in front of them, without fear of prosecution. We sincerely believe this will have an immediate and positive impact, helping us provide life-saving care to our patients.' Despite the back-and-forth between Republican factions over the bill, it passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, with just six Republicans, including Harrison, voting no. Ten Republicans, including Cain and Money, declined to vote on the measure. The House also preliminarily approved Senate Bill 33 on Wednesday, which prohibits a city or county from using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion-related expenses. The bill is aimed at Austin and San Antonio, where city officials have allocated budget dollars to support abortion funds that help pay for people to travel to abortion clinics out-of-state. Despite efforts from Democrats to kill the bill on procedural grounds, it passed 89-57. Disclosure: Texas Hospital Association has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Yahoo
Texas House overwhelmingly passes bill to clarify medical exception to state abortion ban
After months of behind-the-scenes negotiations and years of criticism over unclear medical exceptions, the Texas House on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to pass a bill clarifying the state's near-total abortion bans. Senate Bill 31 standardizes the medical exception in the state's three separate abortion bans, including one from 1857, and requires doctors to receive training on what is permissible under the law. It also clarifies that doctors may treat a life-threatening condition before a patient faces imminent death or harm, codifying the Texas Supreme Court's 2024 ruling in a lawsuit brought by 20 Texas women and two OB-GYNs. The proposal does not expand or change which Texans qualify for a legal abortion. Current law bans the procedure from fertilization, with no exceptions for rape, incest or fetal anomalies. Addressing his colleagues, Republican state Rep. Charlie Geren said SB 31 will ensure doctors know when they can intervene in near-death situations. "We know women have died after care was delayed or denied,' said Geren, who authored SB 31's House companion. "We know women have left Texas for lifesaving care. We know women have been horribly injured because doctors have refused to provide abortions that could save their bodies. Doctors and hospitals need the clarity that SB 31 can provide." Since September 2021, when the Legislature passed Senate Bill 8, at least three women have died after doctors denied abortion care during medical crises and the rate of sepsis nearly doubled among pregnant Texans, according to ProPublica. Around three abortions per month have taken place under the life-of-the-mother exception, or 135 in total, according to data from the state Health and Human Services Commission. Doctors also testified in regulatory hearings that they were afraid they would face lawsuits or criminal prosecution for intervening to save a woman's life. The preliminary 129-6 House vote moves SB 31 one crucial step forward to reaching the governor's desk after it passed unanimously in the state Senate. Ten House members abstained. The bill will go to a final vote Thursday and would take effect immediately once signed by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. Several of the chamber's hardline Republicans questioned Geren about whether the bill would allow doctors to terminate pregnancies unnecessarily, with Rep. Briscoe Cain, R-Deer Park, asking whether more babies would die as a result of the bill. Rep. Tom Oliverson, an anesthesiologist and conservative Republican from Cypress, responded to those concerns by saying that when a previable pregnancy threatens a mother's life, the baby will die regardless. "The question is whether the mother survives the pregnancy," Oliverson said on the House floor. "We're not talking about circumstances where the baby could be delivered and could survive." SB 31's initial language drew significant pushback from abortion rights activists, who said it could bolster the state's argument that an abortion ban originating in 1857 is enforceable. In response, the bill's author, Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola, changed the proposal to clarify it neither rejects nor affirms the enforceability of the pre-Roe law. The bill now also states that pregnant Texans cannot be prosecuted for receiving an abortion. SB 31 will tweak Hughes' Senate Bill 8, the 2021 law that authorizes private citizens to sue people who terminate a pregnancy after around six weeks. It also changes some language in House Bill 1280, a 2021 law that set out criminal penalties of up to 99 years in prison, loss of a medical license and significant fines for physicians found to have illegally terminated a pregnancy. According to Geren, SB 31 will address a mismatch between the intent and the effect of those abortion bans. "This bill clarifies the legislative intent that everyone thought we had when we passed the law several years ago," he said. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Bill to 'clarify' Texas abortion ban set to reach Gov. Greg Abbott
