56 



Mr. Nelson. Yes. We think that we would like to be on equal 

 footing with the other 80 percent of the water users in the State 

 of California who don't have to go through such contract renewals, 

 that through their water permits under the State of California that 

 that is essentially where their water rights are held. 



And I guess I am a little bit baffled at why it is we think we 

 need to hold at bay not just 20 percent of CVP's water — I mean, 

 excuse me, 20 percent of the state's water which is the CVP sup- 

 ply — why we have to hold that aside as opposed to the other 80 

 percent of the users in the State of California. 



There are still mechanisms. Congressman, on being able to move 

 this water around within our contracts to meet the future needs of 

 California. We don't need to put a cloud of uncertainty over con- 

 tract renewals. There are a lot of other uncertainties in California 

 water. 



Mr. Miller. Those other mechanisms being what? 



Mr. Nelson. The other mechanisms being water transfers, regu- 



latory- 

 Mr. Miller. Outside the district? 



Mr. Nelson. Pardon? 



Mr. Miller. Outside the district? 



Mr. Nelson, Outside the district. That is correct. 



Mr. Miller. Would you give the districts a veto on that? 



Mr. Nelson. We would give the districts the power to review 

 that, absolutely. There are certain third party impacts that we all 

 agree 



Mr. Miller. We understand the power to review that. What 

 about the power to approve that or the power to veto that? 



Mr. Nelson. Yes. I think so. I think that that is the appropriate 

 vehicle for review of transfers is the local community under specific 

 guidelines. 



Mr. Miller. I understand that. Would you give them the power 

 to veto that? 



Mr. Nelson. Under- 



Mr. Miller. Who would make the decision whether the water 

 transfer would go forward or not? 



Mr. Nelson. Under agreed-upon guidelines, I think it is reason- 

 able that the local districts make that decision and do have veto 

 power. Yes. 



Mr. Miller. And have veto power? 



Mr. Nelson. That is correct. 



Mr. Miller. Mr. Quinn, would that be consistent with your 

 view? 



Mr. Quinn. Well, we don't like the V word. As I said in response 

 to a question earlier, we think the district has an appropriate role 

 in approving transfers as long 



Mr. Miller. We would stipulate that. Should they have the veto 

 power of whether or not water can go outside of the project and 

 outside of the district? 



Mr. Quinn. We think if you put together a transfer that satisfies 

 the criteria as specified, it ought to be difficult for the districts to 

 say no. So, no, we are not comfortable with an outright veto. 



Mr. DOOLEY. Would the gentleman yield to me a minute? 



Mr. Miller. Yes. 



