Colorado River Board of California

Administrative History

The Colorado River Board of California was created in 1937 (Chapter 838) to protect the rights and interests of the State of California, its agencies and citizens, in and to the waters of the Colorado River system. The maximum use of Colorado River water is essential to the development of nearly one million acres of agricultural land in the Palo Verde, Imperial and Coachella valleys, and to the domestic, industrial, and municipal water supply for the metropolitan areas of coastal southern California.

California’s interest in the water system of the Colorado River has a long history. In 1921, the Governor was authorized to appoint a representative to an interstate commission for the purpose of negotiating a compact relating to the Colorado River. This resulted in the Colorado River Compact, which was signed on November 24, 1922, and settled some of the general issues, such as division of water between the upper basin and lower basin, but left unresolved the division of water among the states. In 1925, an attempt was made to divide the water rights among the lower basin states (California, Arizona, and Nevada), but this failed.

As the Boulder Canyon Project Act neared completion, the urgency to reach an agreement increased. A Colorado River Commission was created in 1927 (Chapter 596) to represent the state’s interest, but it soon lapsed with the construction of Hoover Dam, presumably on the basis that it was no longer needed. However, increasing friction led to litigation and three lawsuits were filed by Arizona against California and other states during the years 1931-1936. These lawsuits were successfully defended. As the burden to protect the state’s rights to the river became more pressing and time-consuming, it became necessary to create a separate agency. Thus, the Colorado River Board was given an advisory role to a Colorado River Commissioner, who would have the general function of investigating issues and providing information about the water system, and reporting and recommending to the Governor as appropriate.

In 1940, the duties of the Commissioner were made subject to the direction of the Board. The Board initially consisted of six members appointed by the Governor, one representative from each of the agencies including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Department of Water and Power – City of Los Angeles, San Diego County Water Authority, Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, and the Palo Verde Irrigation District. The Board represents the state before congressional committees, federal agencies, and in negotiations with other Colorado River basin states. The staff of the Board, consisting mainly of engineers, collects, compiles, and analyzes engineering and legal data on the existing and proposed division and apportionment of the Colorado River waters. In more recent times, the Governor was given authority to add four members to the Board, two from the general public, and the Directors of the Departments of Water Resources and Fish and Game.

For the most part, the work of the Board has focused on sources of conflict over the use of the water system. The problem with Arizona has a lengthy and troublesome history, which relates to the interpretation of the Colorado River Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act, and the Mexican Treaty of 1945. In 1952, Arizona filed suit in the United Sates Supreme Court against California and the six agencies of the Board. In 1963, the Court ruled in Arizona’s favor, which significantly curtailed California’s quota of water. The Court determined that in years when the flow of the river was 7.5 million acre-feet or more, the water would be apportioned as follows: 4.4 million acre-feet to California; 2.8 million acre-feet to Arizona; and the reminder to Nevada. This has formed the foundation for distribution of the lower Colorado River waters. As other projects have arisen, various meetings and discussions have been held among the three states and the federal government. The Court, however, did not decide how to distribute the water in years when the overall flow is less than 7.5 million acre-feet, but left this issue to a determination by the U. S. Secretary of the Interior. In most years, the Secretary has transferred unused portions of other state allotments to make up for California’s shortage.