BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
                             Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:            SB 1340         Hearing Date:    April 12,  
          2016
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Wolk                   |           |                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Version:   |April 5, 2016    Amended                             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |No               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|Dennis O'Connor                                      |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          
                   Subject:  Water Conservation in Landscaping Act


          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
          The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act was enacted in 1990.   
          This Act required the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to  
          prepare a Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.  The Act  
          required all local agencies to adopt a landscape ordinance by  
          1993 or the model ordinance would automatically take effect.  A  
          local agency could make findings that an ordinance was  
          unnecessary if certain conditions existed.

          In 2006, AB 1881 (Laird) revised the act significantly.  The  
          revised act required DWR to revise the model ordinance by  
          January 2009, pending funding, to do all of the following to  
          reduce water use:
           Provide for water conservation and the appropriate use and  
            groupings of plants.
           Include a landscape water budget based on climate, landscape  
            size, irrigation efficiency, and plant needs.
           Promote the benefits of consistent local ordinances in  
            neighboring areas.
           Encourage the capture and retention of stormwater onsite.
           Provide for the use of automatic irrigation systems and  
            schedules based on climatic conditions, specific terrains and  
            soil types, and other environmental conditions. 
           Provide for onsite soil assessment and soil management plans  
            that include grading and drainage and use of mulches in shrub  
            areas, garden beds, and landscaped areas where appropriate.







          SB 1340 (Wolk)                                          Page 2  
          of ?
          
          
           Promote the use of recycled water.
           Educate water users on the efficient use of water and the  
            benefits of doing so.
           Address regional differences, including fire prevention needs.
           Exempt landscaping that is part of a registered historical  
            site.
           Encourage the use of economic incentives to promote the  
            efficient use of water.
           Provide for landscape maintenance practices that foster  
            long-term landscape water conservation. 
           Minimize landscape irrigation overspray and runoff.

          DWR adopted the revised Model Water Efficient Landscape  
          Ordinance (MWELO) on September 10, 2010.

          On April 1, 2015, the Governor issued an executive order  
          regarding the ongoing drought.  Among its provisions was  
          direction to DWR to update the model ordinance through expedited  
          regulation. This update was to increase water efficiency  
          standards for new and existing landscapes through more efficient  
          irrigation systems, greywater usage, onsite storm water capture,  
          and by limiting the portion of landscapes that can be covered in  
          turf. It also required reporting on the implementation and  
          enforcement of local ordinances, with required reports due by  
          December 31, 2015. DWR was further directed to provide  
          information on local compliance to the Water Board, which shall  
          consider adopting regulations or taking appropriate enforcement  
          actions to promote compliance. DWR was also directed to provide  
          technical assistance and give priority in grant funding to  
          public agencies for actions necessary to comply with local  
          ordinances.

          On July 15, 2015, the California Water Commission approved DWR's  
          revision to the model ordinance.  Local agencies had until  
          December 1, 2015 to adopt the model ordinance or to adopt a  
          local ordinance which was at least as effective in conserving  
          water as the model ordinances.  Local agencies working together  
          to develop a regional ordinance had until February 1, 2016 to  
          adopt.

          PROPOSED LAW
          This bill would require the model landscape ordinance to include  
          a provision requiring, on or after July 1, 2018, a written  
          permit for the installation or replacement of any automatic  








          SB 1340 (Wolk)                                          Page 3  
          of ?
          
          
          irrigation system, or the expansion of an existing automatic  
          irrigation system to increase the irrigated area by 25 percent  
          or more, for a landscape project subject to the Water  
          Conservation in Landscaping Act and not otherwise within the  
          scope of a local agency permit, if the irrigation system is to  
          serve either of the following:
             A nonresidential landscape, except a cemetery.
             A residential landscape of 10,000 square feet or greater.

          The bill would authorize the governing body of a local agency,  
          before issuing any such permit to adopt an ordinance prescribing  
          fees for filing an application for that permit, provided the  
          fees do not exceed the amount reasonably required by the local  
          agency to review applications and issue those permits, and are  
          not be levied for general revenue purposes.

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
          According to the author, "The coverage of [Act] as specified in  
          the Model Ordinance has a major gap that leaves a very  
          significant portion of new landscape projects not subject to any  
          standards. This is because it is common practice in most parts  
          of the state for home builders to leave the back yards of new  
          homes un-landscaped. What's more, in some parts of the state, it  
          is common for front yards to be left un-landscaped by home  
          builders as well. Thus, in many cases the building permit for  
          the new home does not include the landscape, and the  
          owner-initiated landscape projects that may follow new home  
          construction by anywhere from a few months to a few years are  
          not subject to the Model Ordinance because in most localities,  
          the installation of landscape materials and an irrigation system  
          as a stand-alone project do not themselves require a permit."

          "The proper design, installation, and control of automatic  
          landscape irrigation systems is essential to the efficient use  
          and avoidance of waste of water. Stand-alone landscape projects  
          are common in California, and should not be exempt from  
          permitting. In light of the diverse and challenging conditions  
          in which ornamental landscapes are installed, and the frequent  
          changes in irrigation technology and plant varieties, the  
          avoidance of waste requires that all large new landscapes and  
          major renovations should require a permit."

          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None Received









          SB 1340 (Wolk)                                          Page 4  
          of ?
          
          
          COMMENTS
          Permit to what end?  The permitting requirement is intended to  
          ensure that landscapes would be designed and installed  
          consistent with the model ordinance.  By having homeowners,  
          landscapers, etc. get a permit for the irrigation, the  
          expectation is that the plan check would include a review of all  
          the provisions of the local agency's ordinance.

          Update again so soon?  DWR finished the regulatory process of  
          updating the model ordinance less than a year ago.  As written,  
          this bill seems to require DWR to go through the regulatory  
          process of updating the ordinance again to add a permitting  
          requirement for irrigation systems.  The author's staff indicate  
          that this bill is intended to be self-executing and not require  
          DWR to go through the regulatory process.

          Why 10,000 sq ft?  The author's staff report the intent of the  
          10,000 sq. ft. threshold for residential landscapes is to ensure  
          the focus is on larger residential landscapes.  At 10,000 sq.  
          ft., this bill would apply to landscapes slightly less than   
          acre in size.

          Additional amendments sought by some supporters. Natural  
          Resources Defense Council (NRDC), in their letter supporting  
          this bill, suggests the bill need additional amendments.  These  
          include amendments that would:
        Remove "replacement" of an existing irrigation system from the  
            bill's permitting requirement, as this might discourage needed  
            improvements to an irrigation system due to the burdens of  
            applying current MWELO to an existing landscape;
        Set a minimum size threshold for commercial landscape projects  
            subject to permitting, to avoid time and attention devoted to  
            very small projects.  It recommended that 500 square feet -  
            the threshold adopted in 2015 for MWELO applicability - be  
            considered for this purpose.
        Reposition the requirements of the bill in current law such that  
            the provisions are self-executing without requiring further  
            rulemaking by the DWR of Water Resources. 
        Clarify that a full range of landscape professionals can assist  
            residential property owners in applying for a permit required  
            by the bill.

          The committee may wish to suggest explore these proposed  
          amendments with the author.








          SB 1340 (Wolk)                                          Page 5  
          of ?
          
          

          Related Bills:
          AB 1928(Campos) - would require the Energy Commission, by  
          January 1, 2018, to adopt landscape irrigation equipment  
          performance standards and labeling requirements.  The sale of  
          landscape irrigation equipment that does not meet those  
          established performance standards and labeling requirements  
          would be banned beginning January 1, 2020.

          AB 2525(Holden) - would create the California Water Efficient  
          Landscaping (WEL) Program in DWR to encourage Californians to  
          upgrade their landscape and irrigation equipment for more  
          efficient ones. Would also prioritize participation of families  
          that qualify for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

          SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: None
          
          SUPPORT
          Natural Resources Defense Council - seek additional amendments
          Sierra Club California
          Sonoma County Water District

          OPPOSITION: None Received

          
                                      -- END --