Cadiz Inc. wants to sell groundwater from the Mojave Desert. Will California let it happen?

Want more coverage of climate change, energy and the environment? Sign up for Climate Point, our weekly email newsletter.

The next two days could help determine the fate of a proposal by Cadiz Inc. to pump groundwater in the Mojave Desert and sell it to Southern California cities.

Environmental groups are making a last-minute push for lawmakers in Sacramento to pass a bill that could block the project. The state Assembly approved the measure in a 45-20 vote Wednesday evening. But the bill could face an uphill battle in the Senate, and the legislative session ends Friday night. If the measure doesn't pass by then, Cadiz will have an easier path toward pumping up to 16.3 billion gallons of groundwater per year on land surrounded by Mojave Trails National Monument, especially after last year's decision by the Trump administration to approve the company's water pipeline.

"This is a bill about the fact that the feds moved the goalposts ... We were going to have a (federal environmental) analysis done, and now we're not," said Kim Delfino, California program director for Defenders of Wildlife. "The state should step in and do this review that the feds would have done, especially since it has to do with groundwater."

THE LATEST:Bill targeting company's plan to pump desert groundwater dies in California Senate

DESERT HYDROPOWER: Lawmakers advance bill supporting Eagle Mountain project

PUMPED DRY: Desert Sun special report: The global crisis of vanishing groundwater

Opponents say Senate Bill 120 unfairly singles out Cadiz for scrutiny, and would set a dangerous precedent of state lawmakers second-guessing infrastructure projects that have already been subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA. The bill's opponents include dozens of labor unions, business groups and water agencies — and several well-connected lobbyists hired by Cadiz to fight the legislation.

In June, the company hired a lobbying firm led by Greg Campbell, former chief of staff to Senate leader Toni Atkins, who can stop the bill from getting a vote in the Senate. Cadiz hired three more lobbying firms this week, including one led by Justin Fanslau, Atkins' former legislative director. Faced with a similar bill that could have blocked its project last year, Cadiz hired Mercury Public Affairs, one of whose partners is former Assembly Speaker Fabián Nuñez, a friend and mentor to then-Senate leader Kevin de León.

Atkins received several campaign contributions from Cadiz and people linked to the company last year, including $4,400 from the company, $1,000 from a Cadiz employee, and $11,150 from more than a dozen employees of the law firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP, which owns shares of Cadiz, state records show. Cadiz also gave $5,000 to de León's short-lived campaign for lieutenant governor last year. De León is now challenging U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who is up for re-election in November.

Supporters of SB 120 include Feinstein, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Lieutenant Gov. Gavin Newsom. Gov. Jerry Brown urged lawmakers to approve a similar measure last year. Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon also announced his opposition to the Cadiz project this year, calling it "a textbook example of doing more harm than good."

The Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation and the music producer Moby also weighed in on Twitter, asking legislators to block Cadiz. That followed a barrage of Twitter support for last year's anti-Cadiz bill from actors and musicians, including the pop star Sia.

Cadiz first proposed pumping groundwater from the Mojave Desert in the 1990s. The company has been fighting with environmentalists for years. A recent study funded by the Mojave Desert Land Trust, a nonprofit conservation group that opposes the Cadiz project, found the proposed groundwater pumping would imperil the largest spring in the southeastern Mojave Desert, which nourishes bighorn sheep, migratory birds and dozens of species of native plants. Cadiz disputes those findings, and points to the fact that its project went through an environmental review commissioned by Orange County's Santa Margarita Water District, which plans to buy water from Cadiz.

The text of SB 120 was written by state Sen. Richard Roth, a Riverside Democrat, and was introduced on Friday, a week before the end of the session. The bill would prohibit projects that transfer groundwater out of the desert, unless the State Lands Commission and the Department of Fish and Wildlife conclude the proposed water transfers "will not adversely affect the natural or cultural resources" of nearby state or federal lands.

Roth told the Assembly's natural resources committee that while he doesn't oppose groundwater withdrawals, he wants to know how much pumping is sustainable.

"I'm certainly not one for layering on unnecessary bureaucracy and permitting processes, nor am I actually known as an environmentalist around here," Roth said Tuesday. "But I think there's an immediate need for greater state oversight of projects that seek to take water out of the desert and send it to our urban areas."

CLIMATE POINT: Subscribe to our climate change, energy and environment newsletter

COACHELLA VALLEY: Desert cities have been saving a lot of water. Farms and golf courses, not so much.

Groups opposing Roth's bill include the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Building Industry Association and the State Building and Construction Trades Council, an influential labor union. In a letter to lawmakers this week, those groups and dozens of others said SB 120 "poses a potential threat to any infrastructure project in the state" —in part, they said, because it would undermine the California Environmental Quality Act.

"This bill disregards CEQA as the final arbiter of environmental safety and sets a dangerous precedent that once any infrastructure project goes through the CEQA process, it has not necessarily complied with California environmental law," the groups wrote. "This precedent would make uncertain the finality of CEQA reviews."

Cadiz spokesperson Courtney Degener said the firm's critics could have introduced a bill months ago — when it could have been debated openly and under regular order — but instead chose to rush a bill through the Legislature in the last days of session. She also pointed to the many groups that have joined Cadiz in opposing SB 120, many of whom don't have a position on the company's project, as a sign of the bill's flaws.

"We think everyone should be concerned about the legislative games being used here to thwart a CEQA approved, Court validated, sustainable water project that is widely supported," Degener said in an email. "The precedent that it establishes has been what has driven nearly 70 organizations in barely 3 days to voice opposition to the bill."

The Obama administration ruled in 2015 that Cadiz needed a new permit to build its water pipeline, a process that would have prompted a federal environmental review and a public comment period. But the Trump administration reversed that decision last year, saying Cadiz could build its pipeline under an existing railroad right-of-way without additional environmental scrutiny. Environmental groups sued the federal Bureau of Land Management in November to try to block that reversal. The lawsuit is ongoing.

FEDERAL ROLE: Trump's deputy Interior secretary, David Bernhardt, has ties to Cadiz

MOJAVE DESERT: Rare desert spring imperiled by Cadiz proposal, researchers say

Even without SB 120, California regulators could complicate Cadiz's plans.

The State Lands Commission, which is chaired by Lieutenant Gov. Gavin Newsom, told the company last year that one mile of its 43-mile pipeline would pass through state-owned lands, meaning it would require a state lease and possibly a new environmental review. Cadiz said at the time that the state commission had been notified of the project's environmental review process years earlier, and had declined to get involved.

David Lamfrom, from the National Parks Conservation Association, said SB 120 is still needed because Cadiz could reroute its planned water pipeline to avoid state lands. He called the legislation "the immediate and only opportunity we have to make sure that this project would not cause substantial harm to Mojave Trails National Monument."

Environmentalists blamed two state senators for killing last year's anti-Cadiz bill: Kevin de León, the Senate leader at the time, and Ricardo Lara, who led the Appropriations Committee and is now running for state insurance commissioner. After the bill was defeated, Cadiz paid for ads and robocalls thanking the two men for their support.

In addition to the company's $5,000 campaign contribution to de León, Cadiz employees are listed in campaign finance filings as having given $15,600 to Lara's campaign for insurance commissioner this year. The company's co-founder and board chair Keith Brackpool contributed $14,600 to Lara. Ten employees of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, the law firm that owns shares of Cadiz Inc., also gave a total of $3,700 to Lara.

Sammy Roth writes about energy and the environment for The Desert Sun. He can be reached at sammy.roth@desertsun.com, (760) 778-4622 and @Sammy_Roth.

Editor's note: There is no relation between state Sen. Richard Roth and Desert Sun reporter Sammy Roth.