Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which California water districts are eligible for Proposition 50 funding?
Executive Summary
Proposition 50 created a broad $3.4 billion bond program for California water projects, but the available materials do not produce a single, definitive list of “eligible” water districts; eligibility depends on statutory program rules, competitive grant rounds, and agency-administered Project Priority Lists. Historical applicants and awardees include named entities such as Contra Costa Water District and the City of Ripon, but confirming whether a given district is currently eligible requires consulting the administering agencies and specific program guidance in the Proposition 50 chapters (Water Code Division 26.5) and Department of Water Resources / Department of Public Health program pages [1] [2].
1. What the ballot measure actually promised — and why that doesn’t equal a simple eligibility roster
Proposition 50 authorized $3.4 billion in general obligation bonds for a wide array of water priorities: CALFED Bay-Delta projects, regional water management, safe drinking water, and competitive grants for water-quality and management improvements. The measure created multiple program buckets administered by state agencies rather than a single entitlement program that automatically covers every water district; eligibility therefore depends on which program within Proposition 50 is in question and the statutory definitions in Division 26.5 of the Water Code [1]. This structure means support from or listing of a district in Proposition 50 materials does not confer blanket eligibility; rather, districts qualify by meeting program-specific criteria and either applying to or being invited into competitive grant rounds administered by state agencies [3].
2. How state agencies implemented awards — invitations, Project Priority Lists, and targeted rounds
Implementation documents and application guidance show that awards were driven by Project Priority Lists and invitation processes rather than an open, unconditional district roster. The Department of Public Health (Drinking Water Program) and Department of Water Resources handled different chapters and rounds; some proponents were explicitly invited to apply based on their ranking on the Project Priority Lists for Round 1 and Round 2, and templates and resolution requirements were issued to those invitees [3] [2]. The program webpages note that pre-applications were closed at times and that the Department of Water Resources continued to post funding opportunities for certain project types, underscoring that eligibility shifted with each competitive round and program chapter [2].
3. Named awardees show precedent — but not a universal rule for all districts
Publicly documented completed projects and historical award notices list specific recipients such as the Contra Costa Water District and the City of Ripon, demonstrating that local water agencies have been eligible and successful under particular Proposition 50 programs [2]. These examples establish precedent that municipal and special district applicants can access funds when they meet program criteria. However, the documentation repeatedly notes the absence of a comprehensive online roster of all invitees or awards and emphasizes that some lists and invitation letters were mailed and not posted, meaning past awards provide examples rather than an exhaustive eligibility list [3].
4. The practical path for a district to confirm eligibility today
The available guidance consistently points districts to procedural steps: review Water Code Division 26.5, consult the administering agency’s Proposition 50 program pages, and check Project Priority Lists or contact program staff directly for current open solicitations or historic invitee lists [2] [3]. Materials warn that agency pages have been updated over time and that some components—like the Department of Public Health’s pre-application window—have closed while other DWR opportunities persisted. Therefore, the only reliable way for a district to determine current eligibility is to match the district’s proposed project to the specific Proposition 50 program chapter and current agency solicitations, not to rely on a static “eligible districts” list [2].
5. Where the public record is silent and what that implies for transparency
Multiple official pages and archival notices referenced here acknowledge gaps: invitee lists and some application materials were mailed rather than published, program webpages have been revised, and many summaries explain program rules without an exhaustive award ledger [3] [2]. This opacity means that claims naming particular districts as “eligible” without citing a specific program chapter or solicitation risk overstating the case; conversely, named awardees cited in program accounts show actual eligibility in practice. For any stakeholder or journalist seeking certainty, the responsible step is to request the Project Priority Lists, solicitation records, and award letters from DWR or the Department of Public Health under program records, which are the only sources able to verify eligibility for specific funding rounds [3] [2].