BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE
Senator Tom Torlakson, Chair
BILL NO: SB 610 HEARING: 5/2/01
AUTHOR: Costa FISCAL: Yes
VERSION: 2/22/01 CONSULTANT: Detwiler
LAND USE AND WATER SUPPLIES
Background and Existing Law
Nearly 70 years ago, the Legislature required cities and
counties to adopt general plans. Over time, these general
plans have become the legal basis for local decisions about
land use development and conservation: zoning,
subdivisions, public works, and use permits. Since the
1970s, local land use decisions are subject to
environmental review under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Public water systems with more than 3,000 customers must
adopt urban water management plans (AB 797, Klehs, 1983).
Cities and counties must send their proposed general plan
amendments to public water systems for review. Public
water systems must give cities and counties specific
information about water supplies and their future plans (AB
455, Cortese, 1992).
In 1995, the Legislature required cities and counties to
consider information provided by water suppliers when
acting on applications for large-scale residential,
commercial, hotel, industrial, or mixed-use projects. If a
project requires an environmental impact report under CEQA,
the public water system must assess whether its total
projected water supplies will meet the projected water
demand from the proposed development project. The
Legislature exempted projects in San Diego County from
these requirements because local voters had created a
regional planning and growth management review board (SB
901, Costa, 1995).
A recent study by the East Bay Municipal Utility District
shows that local officials do not comply with the 1995
Costa law. Of the 119 projects studied, only 2% complied
with all of the requirements.
SB 610 -- 2/22/01 -- Page 2
Proposed Law
Senate Bill 610 expands the requirement for public water
systems to prepare water supply assessments for large-scale
projects. SB 610 requires every large-scale project to
have a water supply assessment, not just projects that need
environmental impact reports, or amendments to general
plans and specific plans.
The bill requires smaller public water systems (those with
less than 5,000 connections) to prepare water supply
assessments on projects that would increase their service
connections by 10% or more.
The bill expands the information required in water supply
assessments to include more information about water supply
contracts, capital outlay programs, permits, and regulatory
approvals in their water supply assessments. SB 610
expands the time for public water systems to approve their
water supply assessments from 30 days to 90 days.
If the city or county cannot identify a public water system
to provide the water supply assessment, SB 610 requires the
State Department of Water Resources to prepare the
assessment. The bill allows the State Controller to cover
the Department's costs.
The bill exempts projects in San Diego County from the
requirement to prepare water supply assessments only if the
Office of Planning and Research determines that local and
regional officials have met six statutory conditions.
SB 610 requires urban water management plans to include
more information about groundwater supplies.
Comments
1. Knowledge is power . Alarmed that cities and counties
were approving large-scale developments without enough
information about the availability of long-term water
supplies, the Legislature reacted in 1995 by passing a bill
that required this information to appear in environmental
impact reports. Rather than creating elaborate new review
procedures, the 1995 law relied on standard definitions,
the existing urban water management plans, and accepted
SB 610 -- 2/22/01 -- Page 3
environmental review processes. Heralded at the time as a
reasonable compromise, the law appears to have been ignored
by cities and counties as well as by water suppliers. SB
610 reforms the 1995 law, seeking better compliance.
2. Too much, too soon . California's land use planning and
development laws require builders and local officials to
travel a long path from the initial idea to actual
construction. General plans, urban water management plans,
congestion management plans, development agreements,
zoning, and environmental review all precede the
construction of subdivisions, shopping centers, and
industrial parks. While no reasonable person believes that
large-scale development can occur without long-term water
supplies, asking water purveyors to generate detailed
information so early in the development process is a case
of asking too much, too soon. SB 610 forces local
officials, water purveyors, and private builders into
unnecessary confrontation.
3. Hold them accountable . The 1995 Costa bill held much
promise but local officials' implementation seems lacking.
To avoid repeating that poor performance, the Committee may
wish to consider setting up a method for observing how
cities, counties, and water purveyors carry out the reforms
in SB 610. The Committee may wish to consider asking the
State Department of Water Resources and the Governor's
Office of Planning and Research to collaborate on a
monitoring project that tracks how local officials include
water supply information in their environmental documents.
Regular, biennial reports would alert legislators to any
need for further reforms.
4. Second base . The Senate Rules Committee ordered a
double-referral of SB 610 and the related SB 221 (Kuehl).
Both bills passed the Senate Agriculture and Water
Resources Committee on Tuesday, April 24.
5. Technical amendment . The Committee should adopt a
technical amendment. Section 9 of the bill allows local
agencies to recoup the costs of the bill's state mandated
local programs. More appropriately the bill should
disclaim state reimbursement because local officials can
charge fees to recover their costs.
SB 610 -- 2/22/01 -- Page 4
Support and Opposition (4/26/)
Support : American Planning Association-California Chapter,
California Building Industry Association, California
Building Properties Association, California Chamber of
Commerce, California Farm Bureau Federation, California
Manufacturers and Technology Association, California
Municipal Utilities Association, Citizens Planning
Association of Santa Barbara County, Department of Justice,
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.