BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2188
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 21, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 2188 (Muratsuchi) - As Amended: May 8, 2104
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:7 - 0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires each city and county to create an expedited
permitting and inspection process for small, residential solar
energy systems, alters the definition of what is a reasonable
restriction on a solar energy system, and makes additional
changes to the Solar Rights Act. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires, by September 30, 2015, every city and every county
to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined
permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy
systems, consistent with the goals and intent of the Solar
Rights Act.
2)Requires each city and county, in developing an expedited
permitting process, to adopt a checklist of all requirements
with which small rooftop solar energy systems shall comply to
be eligible for expedited review.
3)Requires an application that meets the requirements in the
checklist to be reviewed within 24 business hours.
4)Requires the checklist and required permitting documentation
to be published on a publically accessible Internet Web site.
5)Requires each city and county to allow for electronic
submittal of a permit application and to authorize the
electronic signature on all forms, applications, and other
AB 2188
Page 2
documentation.
6)Requires, for a small residential rooftop solar energy system
eligible for expedited review, only one inspection and
requires that one inspection to be scheduled within two
business days of receiving a request. If a city or county is
unable to provide inspection within two business days of a
request, it may authorize a third-party inspection, using a
qualified or certified inspector.
7)Specifies that the Solar Rights Act applies to every city in
this state, including charter cities.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Negligible fiscal impact to the state.
2)Non-reimbursable costs to cities and counties to streamline
their permitting processes and perform inspections in a
shortened time frame, likely fully offset by fees cities and
counties are authorized to charge for these activities.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . The author contends that California's solar
permitting structure is a work patch of regulations and
requirements that vary from city to city and county to county
resulting in uncertainty and difficulty for companies trying
to scale and reduce costs. Requirements in one city can differ
drastically from a neighboring city even though the same solar
system is being installed on a similar home. This bill seeks
to help lower the cost and expand the accessibility of solar
installations by improving the efficiency of solar permitting
statewide.
2)Background . The Solar Rights Act of 1978 protects a
homeowner's right to install a solar energy system by limiting
a homeowner association's ability to prohibit installations
through its CC&Rs. The Solar Rights Act allows CC&Rs to
contain reasonable restrictions on solar energy systems as
AB 2188
Page 3
long as they do not significantly increase the cost of the
solar system of decrease the system's efficiency or
performance.
AB 2473 (Wolk), Chapter 789, Statutes of 2004, updated the
Solar Rights Act by specifying what constitutes "significant"
increases in solar energy system costs or decreases in those
systems' efficiency. The bill also declared solar energy
system installation is 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. A local government cannot refuse to approve an
application unless it makes detailed written findings
regarding adverse impacts on public health or safety.
In 2005, the California Public Utilities Commission
established subsidy programs for the installation of solar
photovoltaic systems administered by the California Energy
Commission. These programs, known collectively as the
California Solar Initiative (CSI), provide $3.2 billion in
subsidies through rebates for the installation of photovoltaic
projects. SB 1 (Murray), Chapter 132, Statutes of 2006,
created the Governor's Million Solar Homes Program, which
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
in 13 years.
3)Supporters . 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. In addition, they maintain that
permitting and inspections also vary and take too long in some
localities.
4)Opposition . Opponents, primarily local governments and trade
groups, assert that the processes mandated in this bill are
too rigid and the tight timelines will be difficult for many
local governments to meet. In addition, they are concerned
the reduced inspections could jeopardize public safety because
AB 2188
Page 4
visual inspections will be limited and many local fire
departments will be precluded from participating in the permit
approval process.
5)Previous legislation .
a) AB 1801 (Campos), Chapter 538, Statutes of 2012,
prohibited a city or county from basing 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.
b) 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 a city or county makes written
findings and adopts a resolution or ordinance on why the
cost exceeds the specified caps.
c) 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 development is void and
unenforceable.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)
319-2081