§ 850.Entry of Judgment

This section sets the criteria for entering a final judgment in a comprehensive adjudication. Subdivision (a) requires the judgment to be consistent with the state constitution's reasonable-use provision, consistent with the water right priorities of nonstipulating parties and exempted claimants, equitable as to objecting parties and exempted claimants compared to stipulating parties, and considerate of small farmers' and disadvantaged communities' water use and access.

Subdivision (b) adds a further requirement for basins that must have a groundwater sustainability plan: the judgment also can't substantially impair a groundwater sustainability agency's, the State Water Resources Control Board's, or the Department of Water Resources's ability to comply with, and achieve the goals of, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Subdivision (c) lets the court refer the matter to the State Water Resources Control Board for investigation and report, on its own initiative or a party's request, with the board and department jointly investigating and reporting when that happens.

Subdivision (d) addresses stipulated judgments backed by a critical mass of the basin's water users — more than half of all parties who are groundwater extractors or storage users, and extractors responsible for at least 75 percent of the water extracted in the five years before filing. If that threshold is met and the judgment satisfies subdivision (a)'s criteria, the court may adopt it as to the stipulating parties. An objecting party must then prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the judgment fails those criteria or substantially violates that party's own rights — and if the objector can't make that showing, the court may impose the judgment on the objector too, potentially backed by a preliminary injunction under § 847 while the objection is pending. Subdivision (e) defines "disadvantaged communities" and "small farmers" by reference to existing statutory and program criteria.