BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE
Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Bill No: |AB 1236 |Hearing |6/17/15 |
| | |Date: | |
|----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------|
|Author: |Chiu |Tax Levy: |No |
|----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------|
|Version: |4/20/15 |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Favorini-Csorba |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LOCAL ORDINANCES: ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS.
Requires cities and counties to adopt an ordinance to streamline
and expedite the permitting process for electric vehicle
charging stations.
Background and Existing Law
As an alternative to gasoline-based vehicles, California has
more electric vehicles (EVs)-and the charging stations necessary
to fuel them-than any other state in the nation. The state
currently has over 137,000 EVs on the roads and nearly 12,000
charging stations to support them, according to the Plug-in
Electric Vehicle Collaborative and the US Department of Energy.
This represents 43 percent of the electric vehicles and about 22
percent of the charging stations in the country.
Both EVs and charging stations have grown significantly in
recent years, due to a rapidly growing list of state policies
that support the adoption of EV technology and infrastructure,
beginning with incentives for purchasing EVs and requirements on
automakers to manufacture specified percentages of EVs in
relation to their production of conventional cars. Other key
policies recently adopted include:
A 2012 Executive Order issued by the Governor directed
relevant state agencies to develop benchmarks to help
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 2
of ?
support and facilitate the rapid commercialization of Zero
Emissions Vehicles (ZEVs). The order directed these
agencies to establish benchmarks to help the state's ZEV
infrastructure support 1.5 million ZEVs by 2025. Currently,
EVs are the dominant type of ZEVs on the road.
Assembly Bill 1092 (Levine, 2013) required the
California Building Standards Commission, to adopt
mandatory standards for the installation of EV charging
infrastructure for parking spaces in newly constructed
multifamily dwellings and nonresidential development in the
next triennial edition of the California Building Standards
Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations)
adopted after January 1, 2014. Those standards were
adopted as part of the Commission's 2013 intervening code
cycle and will go into effect on July 1, 2015.
AB 2188 (Muratsuchi, 2014) required every city or county
to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited permitting
process for small, residential rooftop solar energy
systems. These ordinances must be adopted by September 30,
2015.
AB 2565 (Muratsuchi, 2014) required an owner of a
commercial or residential property to approve the
installation of an EV charging station if it meets
specified requirements and complies with the owner's
process for approving a modification to the property, and
made a term in a lease of a commercial property executed,
renewed, or extended on or after January 1, 2015, void and
unenforceable if it prohibits or unreasonably restricts the
installation of an EV charging station in a parking space.
To further help communities across the state support their
residents and businesses in making the switch to ZEVs, the
Office of Planning and Research (OPR) created several resources
to help achieve the goals in the Governor's Executive Order,
including a "ZEV guidebook." The guidebook highlights many
aspects of ZEV readiness, including necessary infrastructure,
land use permitting guidelines, greening local fleets, and
incentives and outreach. It also offers a number of tools and
templates, including a checklist that guides both permit
applicants and building department staff through the process of
charging station installation.
According to the ZEV guidebook, local jurisdictions follow
several types of permitting processes:
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 3
of ?
No Permit Necessary. A few jurisdictions have
characterized the installation of EV charging equipment as
a minor improvement and do not require a permit.
Permit Required, Online System. Some jurisdictions have
invested in online permitting and inspection portals, which
reduces the time and paperwork necessary to complete the
permit application. The jurisdiction defines what is
acceptable to be permitted through the online system.
Permit Required, Over-the-Counter (OTC) with
Scope-of-Work Only. This process is similar to the online
system except that the electrical contractor deals directly
with a city official noting the type of job being
completed. There is no detailed overview of the
installation and the permit is obtained immediately.
Permit Required, OTC with Plan Check. Plan check is
defined as a technical review of the installation and will
typically require additional documentation from the
electrician. In these cases, the permit will be obtained
only if the official agrees that the documentation shows an
acceptable installation, which can add time and cost to the
upfront permit application process.
Permit Required, Plan Check. The same technical review
occurs, but not immediately. Instead, an official or
third-party contractor reviews the documents according to
the jurisdiction's process timeline. It is not uncommon
for the timeframe to be a few days to a few weeks.
Because the permitting process can vary from one local agency to
another, some businesses and organizations want to standardize
and streamline the process for permitting EV charging stations.
Proposed Law
Assembly Bill 1236 requires each city, county, and city and
county to develop an ordinance for an expedited, streamlined
permitting process for EV charging stations by September 30,
2016. The local jurisdiction developing the process must consult
with local fire agencies and, if applicable, the jurisdiction's
utility director.
AB 1236 includes a number of requirements that the permitting
process must meet. First, it requires the permitting process to
substantially conform with the recommendations for expedited
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 4
of ?
permitting in the most recent version of OPR's ZEV guidebook,
although the process may vary to account for unique local
conditions including climate, geology, seismology, or topology.
The process must also include a checklist of requirements for EV
charging stations to be eligible for expedited review (similar
to OPR's EV permitting checklist). If a local agency has a
website, it must (1) post the checklist and any required
permitting documents online, (2) allow applicants to submit the
permit application electronically, and (3) allow applicants to
sign documents electronically unless it states a reason why it
is unable to do so.
AB 1236 limits the review of the permit application to whether
the application meets all relevant health and safety standards.
Any application that meets the requirements of the checklist is
deemed complete and must be approved through the issuance of a
building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit. If the
application doesn't meet the requirements, the local agency must
provide a list of deficiencies to the applicant. AB 1236 allows
a local agency to require a discretionary use permit for a
charging station if a building official at the agency makes
certain findings, including that the proposed installation could
have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety.
However, the local agency cannot deny the use permit unless it
makes findings that there is no way to mitigate the health or
safety impacts. AB 1236 further specifies that approval by a
common interest development (such as a homeowners association)
cannot be a condition of a permit. Finally, the decision of the
local agency's building official can be appealed to the agency's
planning commission.
Comments
1. Purpose of the bill . The Legislature and the Governor have
made it a priority to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas
emissions in California. Achieving the state's target of 1.5
million ZEVs by 2025 is a critical step towards both of those
goals, and developing a system of convenient EV charging
stations is essential to promoting and accelerating the adoption
of ZEVs. Unfortunately, the number of EV charging stations has
not kept pace with the number of EVs purchased in the state.
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 5
of ?
Efforts to develop charging stations are currently underway, but
barriers still exist in some local jurisdictions. Currently, the
permitting process associated with installing EV charging
stations varies widely across local agencies. Permitting
requirements-and the time needed to receive the permit-differ
drastically across local jurisdictions. This results in
uncertainty and hinders the ability of prospective EV buyers to
understand the administrative burden and the cost of installing
EV charging stations before purchasing an EV. Based on best
practices, AB 1236 equalizes the process for permitting across
jurisdictions and simplifies the process of installing charging
stations. At the same time, AB 1236 also provides local
jurisdictions with flexibility in how they permit EV charging
stations, through policies such as allowing the adopted
ordinances to differ from the checklist due to unique local
conditions. AB 1236 will help lower the cost of installation,
expedite permitting, and further expand the infrastructure
needed to meet the statewide goals.
2. Home rule . As demand for EVs and charging stations grows
over time, cities and counties will adopt best practices for EV
permitting based on the needs and experiences of their
communities. Investing the extensive time and effort required
to adopt a streamlined process based on best practices can make
sense for cities and counties that process hundreds of permits
for charging stations each year-and jurisdictions in the Bay
Area and Los Angeles County have already done so. But for local
agencies that process very few permit requests, it does not make
sense to require them to develop a checklist and ordinance when
demand for charging stations is low. The Committee may wish to
consider whether the state should mandate streamlining for local
agencies that are fully empowered to adopt best practices on
their own.
3. Unintended Consequences . AB 1236 is not the first bill to
require expedited permitting, nor is it likely to be the last.
AB 2188 required expedited permitting of residential rooftop
solar panels, and SB 251 (Roth), which the Committee heard on
May 13, 2015, requires expedited permitting for projects that
would remedy accessibility violations. Requiring expedited
permitting for multiple types of projects may simply result in
average permitting across the board as one expedited permit
request displaces another. Furthermore, local building
departments may have good reasons for how they prioritize permit
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 6
of ?
applications, such as a need to address life safety issues.
Pushing a charging station permit application to the top of the
queue could override those decisions. The Committee may wish to
consider amendments to either:
Remove the requirement to expedite permitting for EV
charging stations, or
Specify the relative priority of permits for EV charging
stations, residential rooftop solar, and any other projects
that require expedited permitting.
4. Too Soon ? AB 1236 was modeled very closely upon AB 2188,
which required ordinances for residential rooftop solar
installations to be developed by September 30, 2015. Many
cities and counties have not yet completed or begun to implement
these ordinances. It may make sense to delay action on this
legislation until after AB 2188 has been in place for some time,
so as to identify any problems with this structure.
5. Related Legislation . SB 578 (Block), which the Committee
heard on May 6, 2015, enacts a tax credit for firms that
purchase EV charging stations. The credit is equal to 30% of
the cost for taxpayers purchasing any Level 2 or direct current
fast charging station. The charging station must be placed in
service on or after January 1, 2016, and must be depreciable,
thereby limiting the credit to business taxpayers. The credit
cannot exceed $30,000 per year. SB 578 passed the Committee on a
vote of 6-1, but was held under submission in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
6. Charter cities . The California Constitution allows cities
that adopt charters to control their own "municipal affairs."
In all other matters, charter cities must follow the general,
statewide laws. Because the Constitution doesn't define
"municipal affairs," the courts determine whether a topic is a
municipal affair or whether it's an issue of statewide concern.
AB 1236 includes a legislative finding and declaration that the
implementation of consistent statewide standards to achieve the
timely and cost-effective installation of EV charging stations
is a matter of statewide concern. As such, the bill's
requirements could apply to all cities and counties in
California, including charter cities and counties. However, the
bill does not specify that it applies to charter cities and
counties. The Committee may wish to consider an amendment that
makes this explicit.
AB 1236 (Chiu) 4/20/15 Page 7
of ?
7. Mandate. The California Constitution generally requires the
state to reimburse local agencies for their costs when the state
imposes new programs or additional duties on them. According to
the Legislative Counsel's Office, AB 1236 creates a new
state-mandated local program because it increases the duties of
local officials. AB 1236 disclaims this liability by stating
that no reimbursement is required under the Constitution because
local agencies have the authority to levy fees sufficient to
cover the cost of the increased services.
Assembly Actions
Assembly Local Government Committee: 8-1
Assembly Transportation Committee: 16-0
Assembly Appropriations Committee: 15-2
Assembly Floor: 76-4
Support and
Opposition (6/11/15)
Support : Charge Point, Inc.; California Apartment Association;
Silicon Valley Leadership Group; Sierra Club California;
California League of Conservation Voters; Natural Resources
Defense Council; Stem, Inc.; Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
Opposition : League of California Cities; California Mutual
Utilities Association; California State Association of Counties;
Urban Counties Caucus.
-- END --