BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2188|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2188
Author: Muratsuchi (D)
Amended: 7/1/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 6-1, 6/25/14
AYES: Wolk, Knight, Beall, DeSaulnier, Hernandez, Liu
NOES: Walters
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 58-8, 5/27/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Solar energy: permits
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires, on or before September 30, 2015,
every city and county to adopt an ordinance, in consultation
with fire and utility officials, as specified, to streamline and
expedite the permitting process for small, residential, rooftop,
solar energy systems.
ANALYSIS : The Solar Rights Act of 1978 (Act) established a
homeowner's right to install a solar energy system by limiting
the ability of a homeowners association or other non-public
entity to prohibit such an installation. The Act also limited
the authority of a local agency to place unreasonable
restrictions on the use of solar energy systems.
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
2
The Act was modified in 2008, to further restrict limits on the
installation of solar electricity generation systems and
require, in writing, a reason from a homeowners association if
denying permission to install a solar energy system on a home
(AB 2180, Wolk, Chapter 539, Statutes of 2008). The Legislature
also declared solar energy system installation to be a matter of
statewide concern, and made a local government's grant of
permission to install a solar energy system ministerial rather
than discretionary, with some exceptions (AB 2473, Wolk, Chapter
789, Statutes of 2004).
The Governor's Million Solar Homes Program established the goal
of installing 3,000 megawatts of solar generation capacity,
establishing a self-sufficient solar industry, and placing
photovoltaic systems on 50% of new homes. The Act includes a
requirement that sellers of production homes, under specified
conditions, offer to home buyers the option of installing a
solar energy system
(SB 1, Murray, Chapter 132, Statutes of 2006).
This bill requires, on or before September 30, 2015, every city
and county to adopt an ordinance, in consultation with fire and
utility officials, as specified, to streamline and expedite the
permitting process for small, residential, rooftop, solar energy
systems.
This bill defines "small rooftop solar energy systems" as
systems that meet all of the following:
A solar energy system that is no larger than 10 kilowatts
alternating current nameplate rating or 30 kilowatts thermal.
A solar energy system that conforms to all applicable state
fire, structural, electrical, and other building codes as
adopted or amended by the city, county, or city and county and
applicable safety and performance standards established by the
National Electrical Code, the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, and accredited testing laboratories
such as Underwriters Laboratories and, where applicable, rules
of the Public Utilities Commission regarding safety and
reliability.
A solar energy system that is installed on a single or duplex
family dwelling.
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
3
A solar panel or module array that does not exceed the maximum
legal building height.
As part of that ordinance, each city and county must develop a
checklist of all requirements that allow rooftop solar energy
systems to be eligible for expedited review.
This bill establishes that all complete applications that meet
the requirement for expedited review, and meet the requirements
of the checklist, must be approved and all permits and
authorizations must be issued.
For incomplete applications, a city or county and a city and
county must issue a written correction notice detailing all
deficiencies and information requirements for expedited review.
This bill requires each city and county and a city and county to
publish its application checklist and document requirements on a
publicly accessible Internet Web site if the local agency
maintains an Internet Web site, and allow for the electronic
signature on all forms, applications and other documents. If a
city, county, or city and county determines that it is unable to
authorize the acceptance of an electronic signature on all
forms, applications, and other documents in lieu of a wet
signature by an applicant, the city, county, or city and county
shall state, in the required ordinance, the reasons for its
inability to accept electronic signatures and acceptance of an
electronic signature shall not be required.
This bill requires all cities and counties to accept permit
applications and all associated documents via email, the
internet, or facsimile.
For small residential rooftop solar energy systems that qualify
for expedited review under the local ordinance, only one
inspection shall be required, which shall be done in a timely
manner and may include a consolidated inspection, except that a
separate fire safety inspection may be performed in a city,
county, or city and county that does not have an agreement with
a local fire authority to conduct a fire safety inspection on
behalf of the fire authority. If a small residential rooftop
solar energy system fails inspection, a subsequent inspection is
authorized, however the subsequent inspection need not conform
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
4
to the requirements of this bill.
This bill prohibits a city or county from conditioning approval
of a small rooftop solar energy system on the approval of that
system by a nonprofit entity created for the purpose of managing
a common interest development.
This bill changes the standard for a local agency to require a
use permit for the installation of a solar energy system, from a
good faith belief, to a finding based on substantial evidence,
that a solar energy system could have a specific, adverse impact
on public health and safety.
This bill requires solar energy systems for heating water to be
certified by an accredited listing agency, defined as a
standards or testing organization, rather than the Solar Rating
Certification Corporation or other nationally recognized
certification agency specified in existing law.
Existing law limits the ability of a covenant, deed restriction
or similar instrument to constrain the installation of a solar
energy system on a home, to reasonable restrictions that do not
significantly impact costs or limit system efficiency.
This bill amends the definition of significant impact from no
more than 20% of system costs to no more than 10%, or $1,000,
whichever is less. Redefines significant change in efficiency,
reducing the current allowance for loss of efficiency from 20%,
down to 10%.
This bill reduces, from 60 days to 45 days, the amount of time
that an approving agency that is an association, such as a
homeowners association, has to deny, in writing, an application
for a solar energy system. An application that is not denied in
that timeframe is deemed approved.
This bill contains legislative findings and declarations on the
need for this bill, including the value of a modernized and
standardized permitting process for installations of small-scale
solar distributed generation technology to increase the
deployment of solar distributed generation, expand access to
lower income households, provide solar customers greater
installation ease, improve the state's ability to reach its
clean energy goals, and generate much needed jobs in the state,
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
5
all while maintaining safety standards.
Comments
California's solar industry has grown dramatically. That growth
has been supported by the efforts of many local agencies to
streamline the permitting process for small, rooftop solar
electricity systems. But the industry continues to face steep
obstacles that must be addressed if solar electricity generation
is going to help the state address its growing energy needs.
Research indicates that while the hard costs of solar, namely
materials and components, have come down in price in recent
years, soft costs, including the cost of local agency permitting
and inspection process, are preventing solar energy systems from
being more affordable to many Californians. The Governor's
Office of Planning and Research has called for streamlining the
permit process, including the development a checklist with
expedited review as a best practice to continue to promote these
systems. This bill directs each city and county to adopt an
ordinance tailored to the unique needs of their communities, to
adopt best practices in the permit application, review and
inspection process, to reduce costs, and promote solar
electricity generation.
Related Legislation
SB 871 (Senate Budget Committee, Chapter 41, Statutes of 2014)
extends the sunset for a solar tax exemption for new active
solar energy systems on new construction. The bill extends the
exemption through 2023-24, and extends the sunset through
January 1, 2025.
AB 1801 (Campos, Chapter 538, Statutes of 2012) prohibited a
city or county from basing the calculation of a permit fee for
the installation of a solar energy system on the valuation of
the system, or any other factor not directly associated with the
cost to issue the permit, and required the city or county to
separately identify each fee assessed on the applicant for the
installation of the system on the invoice provided to the
applicant.
SB 1222 (Leno, Chapter 614, Statutes of 2012) placed a cap on
the amount of permit fees charged by a city or county for both
residential and commercial rooftop solar energy systems, unless
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
6
a city or county makes written findings and adopts a resolution
or ordinance providing substantial evidence of the reasonable
cost to issue the permit and why the cost exceeds the specified
caps.
AB 1892 (Smyth, Chapter 40, Statutes of 2008) provided that a
prohibition or restriction on the installation or use of a solar
energy system in any of the governing documents of a common
interest developments (CIDs) is void and unenforceable.
AB 2180 (Lieu, Chapter 539, Statutes of 2008) required an HOA
(homeowners association) in a CID to respond to a request from a
member to install a solar energy system in his/her separate
interest within 60 days.
AB 2473 (Wolk, Chapter 798, Statutes of 2004) required cities
and counties to permit the installation of solar energy systems
if the system meets specified requirements, and redefined the
term "significantly" in regard to restrictions on solar
electricity generation systems that raise costs or decrease
efficiency.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/5/14)
1st Light Energy
Arise Solar
ASI Hastings, Inc.
Aztec Solar, Inc.
BMC Solar
Booth Construction
Brigtline Defense Project
California Center for Sustainable Energy
California League of Conservation Voters
California Solar Energy Industry Association
Chico Electric
Clean Power Finance
Clean Solar
Cobalt Power Systems
Cosmic Solar
Delta Solar Electric, Inc.
Enphase Energy
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
7
Environment California
Environmental Defense Fund
FAFCO, Inc.
Freedom Solar
Gayle McLaughlin - Mayor of Richmond
HelioPower
Home Energy Systems, Inc.
Horizon Solar Power
Hot Purple Energy
Insoltech Solar
Luminati
Marin Clean Energy
Mayor Jean Quan - City of Oakland
Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
One Block off the Grid
Presente.Org
Real Good Solar
Real Goods Solar
Renova Energy Corp.
Rising Sun Energy
San Francisco Environment Commission
Sierra Club California
Sierra Pacific Home & Comfort, Inc.
Skyline Innovations
Solar Census
Solar Energy Industries Association
Solar Roof Dynamics
Solar Universe, Inc.
SolarCity
SolarCraft
Sonoma Clean Power
Spectrum Energy Development, Inc.
Stellar Solar
Sullivan Solar Power
Sun Light & Power
Sun Pacific Solar Electric, Inc.
Suncrest Solar
Sungevity, Inc.
SunRun
TerraVerde Renewable Partners
Tom Bates- Mayor of Berkeley
Unique Solar
Verengo Solar
Westcoast Solar Energy
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
8
Zep Solar
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/5/14)
American Institute of Architects
California Building Industry Association
California Building Officials
California Fire Chiefs
California Municipal Utilities Association
Cities of Antioch, Benicia, Beaumont, Brentwood, Brisbane,
Camarillo, Ceres, Cerritos, Chowchilla, Chula Vista, Concord,
Corning, Corona, Del Mar, Downey, Dublin, El Cerrito, Elk
Grove, El Segundo, Eureka, Fremont, Goleta, Healdsburg, Indian
Wells, Lawndale, Moorpark, Norwalk, Palmdale, Paso Robles,
Plymouth, Rancho Cordova, Redding, Riverbank, Riverside,
Rocklin, Roseville, Sacramento, San Carlos, Santa Rosa, Scotts
Valley, Shasta Lake, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Truckee,
Tulare
County of Orange
Fire Chiefs Association of Santa Barbara County
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Advocates, primarily the solar
industry, argue that while the solar industry is largely
standardized, the rules and procedures for permitting and
installation can vary greatly from one city to another resulting
in unnecessary costs for providers. By making the local
permitting process more efficient, this bill will help lower the
cost of solar power by making it more affordable to moderate and
low income families, while growing our economy, creating local
jobs, saving government time and money, and getting solar "out
of the way" of other permitted industries.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue that speeding up the
local permitting process for this one technology sets up a poor
precedent and could present public safety concerns. The
permitting process involves decisions which, in part, avoid
safety hazards and allow proper compliance with applicable
building codes by ensuring that solar panels are properly
designed and installed to different types of structures. This
bill establishes a "one size fits all" approach to solar roof
permits irrespective of workload, level of staff, or unique
aspects of the building or structure where the panel is to be
placed. Ensuring public safety and proper review and oversight
should not be rushed because one commercial product has gained
CONTINUED
AB 2188
Page
9
in popularity.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 58-8, 5/27/14
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla,
Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Garcia,
Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall,
Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Mullin,
Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, John A. Pérez, V. Manuel
Pérez, Quirk, Rendon, Rodriguez, Skinner, Ting, Wagner,
Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Allen, Fox, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Medina,
Salas, Stone
NO VOTE RECORDED: Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Daly, Gordon,
Linder, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, Quirk-Silva,
Ridley-Thomas, Yamada, Vacancy
AB:d 8/6/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED