Land owners win legal battle over Paso Robles basin water rights

August 18, 2026

Water pipes laid out at a Justin Vineyard and Winery property

By KAREN VELIE

Bringing a 12-year legal battle over the right to pump water from the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin to an end, those attempting to restrict the water rights of property owners above the basin lost their last argument. The court then asked the plaintiffs to submit a proposed order.

Despite the absence of a legal finding of overdraft, in 2013, the San Luis Cbispo County Board of Supervisors enacted an “emergency ordinance” limiting landowner’s pumping to a fixed, rather than flexible, amount. The ordinance adversely impacted growers who required water amounts corresponding to crops being irrigated.

However, groundwater use can be lawfully restricted by the government only in the event of severe depletion of the basin’s water supply — an overdraft.

More than 800 property owners then formed Protect Our Water Rights. The group of overlying landowners who, by virtue of owning their property, asserted they have the right to pump and reasonably use water on their land.

Along with Cindy Stienbeck, the landowners filed a quiet title lawsuit in 2014, asking the court to confirm their right to pump.

“The landowners became concerned that the ordinance was being used by the county to take away the critical and necessary water rights of landowners provided by California law and the state constitution,” Steinbeck said. “The governmental entities (the defendants) confirmed they were trying to take landowners’ groundwater rights based on a legal claim called ‘prescription. For the first time in California history, landowners were given an opportunity by the court to be heard in front of a jury.”

After five trials and 21 affirmative defenses,

The defendants include SLO County, the City of Paso Robles, San Miguel Community Services District, Templeton Community Services District and Atascadero Mutual Water District. After five trials and 21 affirmative defenses, four of the defendants received the right to pump slightly more than 2,000 acre feet of water a year, out of the 92,000 acre feet of safe annual yield, according to the court.

Basically, the land owners retained the priority right to pump 90,000 acre feet of water a year, and the defendants won just over 2,000 acre feet of water a year. The land owners won the remaining arguments in the case.

More than $21 million has been spent on the Steinbeck lawsuit, with the plaintiffs dolling out over $5 million and the government in excess of $16 million.

A group of primarily large land owners and public officials has fought for years to require landowners over the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin to pay a fee for water usage. Their goal is to control and monetize basin water through water banking.

In 2016, nearly 80% of property owners above the basin voted against the creation of a new water district and its affiliated fees after opponents went door to door explaining the issues.

Even so, large agricultural businesses continued their pursuit of fees on residential properties and for control of the basin, which included creating the Shandon-San Juan Water and the Estrella-El Pomar-Creston Water districts.

Officials from SLO County, the City of Paso Robles, the Shandon-San Juan Water District and the Estrella-El Pomar-Creston Water District voted several years ago to create a joint powers authority to provide the power to levy taxes on those above the basin.

After the SLO County Board of Supervisors and the Paso Robles City Council voted for the new joint powers authority, opponents of the authority began putting together a plan to stop the proposed fees through a 218 vote.

In the end, there were approximately 1,300 parcels included in the proposed taxpayer base. There were 764 protest votes, which was more than the 50% plus one needed to stop the proposed tax.

Their latest attempt, through Proposition 26, is to tax property owners above the basin to pay for their administrative fees because they are having difficulty funding their agency. However, the 800 property owners in the quiet title action are unlikely to have to pay the proposed tax.

Because we believe the public needs the facts, the truth, CalCoastNews has not put up a paywall because it limits readership. However, we are seeking qualification as a paper of record, which will allow us to publish public notices, but it requires 5,000 paid subscribers.

Your subscription will help us to continue investigating and reporting the news.

Support CalCoastNews, subscribe today, click here.