BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE AGRICULTURE & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE
Senator Jim Costa, Chairman
BILL NO: SB 610 HEARING: 4/24/01
AUTHOR: Costa FISCAL: Yes
VERSION: 2/22/01 CONSULTANT: Brent
Walthall
Water Supply Planning
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
In 1995, the Legislature passed SB 901 (Costa) which, for the
first time, required planning agencies to consider information
provided by water suppliers in their decision to approve or deny
commercial, industrial, or residential development. Under SB
901 a water provider that has more than 3,000 domestic service
connections may provide an assessment of water supply
availability to the local planning agency for any of the
following:
(1)a residential development that has more than 500 homes;
(2)a business employing more than 1,000 people or having more
than 500,000 square feet of floor space;
(3)a commercial office building employing more than 1,000 people
or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space;
(4)a hotel having more than 500 rooms;
(5)an industrial complex with more than 1,000 employees and
occupying more than 40 acres of land; or
(6)a mixed use project that would require the same or greater
amount of water as a 500 dwelling-unit project.
These requirements ensure that developments of all types are
subject to similar reviews as part of the water supplier's
assessment.
Under SB 901 the assessment must state whether the water supply
needs of the development can be met by the supplies available to
the water provider as described in its Urban Water Management
Plan. The assessment should determine if the water provider's
available water supplies are capable of meeting the
development's needs during single-dry and multiple-dry water
years as described in the Urban Water Management Plan's 20 year
projection. The heart of SB 901 is the requirement that the
lead agency for the project under CEQA must include the water
supply assessment in the environmental impact report required
for the development.
The local planning agency may deny the development if the
assessment shows that insufficient water supplies are available.
Page 2 SB 610
However, the local agency is not required to deny the
development and may approve the development if it so chooses.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would make findings and declarations regarding
California's inability to predict the amount of water available
for development and the overall decrease in water supply
reliability that results from continued commercial, industrial,
and residential growth. The findings also state that previous
legislation (SB 901 (Costa)) intended to provide planning
agencies with information about available water supplies has not
been implemented as intended by the Legislature.
The bill would amend the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) to require any city or county that determines a project
is subject to CEQA, to require that project to comply with Part
2.10 of the Water Code (Water Supply Planning to Support
Existing and Planned Future Uses).
The bill adds to the assessment of service reliability required
to be included in Urban Water Management Plans. The added
section would require urban water suppliers whose water supply
includes groundwater to identify other users of the groundwater
basin, and estimate the maximum amount of water than can be
withdrawn from the groundwater basin annually. The added
requirements also would require the urban water supplier to
identify whether the groundwater basin is overdrafted, and
describe any groundwater management efforts in the basin to
mitigate the overdraft.
Existing law requires water districts to prepare a water supply
assessment for any project that requires: (1) the adoption of a
specific plan, or (2) an amendment to a general or specific plan
that results in an increase in population or building density.
This bill would delete those two criteria thereby making a water
supply assessment necessary for any project that is subject to
CEQA.
The bill would make amendments to existing law by requiring
cities and counties to identify the water system that is or may
become the water supplier for the project. If no water supplier
can be identified, the Department of Water Resources shall
conduct the water supply assessment.
The bill would require the water supply assessment to include an
Page 3 SB 610
identification of the water supplier's existing water supply
entitlement, water rights, or water service contracts. The bill
requires all of the following as proof of those entitlements,
rights and service contracts: (1) Proof of entitlement to the
water supply; (2) copies of an adopted capital outlay program;
(3) any necessary federal, state, and local permits to build any
necessary infrastructure; and (4) any necessary regulatory
approvals for conveyance of the water.
If the water supplier has not previously received water from the
identified water supply entitlements, rights, or service
contracts, then the bill would require the water supplier to
identify any other water suppliers that also receive water from
those same entitlements, rights, or service contracts.
If the water supplier receives any of its water from groundwater
sources, the bill would require the water supplier to identify
other users of the groundwater basin, and provide an estimate of
the maximum amount of water than can be withdrawn from the
groundwater basin annually. The water supplier must also
identify whether the groundwater basin is overdrafted, and
describe any groundwater management efforts in the basin to
mitigate the overdraft.
The city or county shall request DWR to perform the water supply
assessment if the water supplier fails to submit the requested
water supply assessment to the city or county. The bill would
require the state controller to deduct DWR's cost of producing
the water supply assessment from any state funds appropriated to
the water supplier.
The bill would require the city or county to include the water
supply assessment in any environmental document prepared
pursuant to CEQA.
The bill would add to the definition of a project by including
any mixed-use project, general plan, element or amendment that
includes any one of the types of projects defined in existing
law. The bill would expand the definition of a project by
including any project that would require as much water as a 500
dwelling unit project. The bill would also add to the
definition of a project any project that results in a 10% or
greater increase in a water supplier's total demand.
Existing law provides an exemption from these requirements for
San Diego County because San Diego voters enacted a measure that
is functionally equivalent to the water supply assessment
Page 4 SB 610
requirements. This bill would ensure that functional
equivalency by requiring the Office of Planning and Research to
determine that certain requirements have been met.
COMMENTS
1.A recent study of environmental documents for commercial,
industrial, and residential developments shows a high level of
non-compliance with SB 901. The East Bay Municipal Utility
District examined 119 large scale development projects and
found that only 2% complied with all of the requirements of SB
901. Of those that did not comply, 24% did not identify any
water supply. This bill ensures that all commercial,
industrial and residential projects have an identified source
of water and that city and county planning agencies have
sufficient information to determine the adequacy of those
supplies before deciding to approve or deny a development
project.
2.California's increasing population and limited water supply
virtually guarantee a future of insufficient water supply to
support California's forecasted growth. While this bill
provides a much needed link between the planning decisions of
cities and counties and the amount of water available for
development, it does not address the state's fundamental need
for additional water supplies.
3.Courts have begun to recognize the importance of water
supplies to support development. Last year the Los Angeles
County Superior Court decided a case challenging the adequacy
of the environmental documents for the Newhall Ranch
residential development. In that case the court found the
environmental documents to be inadequate in part because the
water supplies identified by the project proponents were
insufficient to meet the project's needs.
4.Senator Kuehl has introduced SB 221 which also address the
issue of land use and water supply. SB 221 would require a
city or county to deny approval of a tentative or parcel map
if the city or county finds that the project does not have a
sufficient, reliable water supply as defined in the bill.
SUPPORT
American Planning Association (if amended)
Page 5 SB 610
California Building Industry Association (if amended)
California Business Properties Association (if amended)
California Chamber of Commerce (if amended)
California Farm Bureau Federation (if amended)
California Manufacturers and Technology Association (if amended)
California Municipal Utilities Association
Citizens Planning Association of Santa Barbara County
Department of Justice (Attorney General)
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Friends of the River
National Audubon Society
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Club
The Nature Conservancy
OPPOSITION
Association of California Water Agencies