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.