BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 985
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 17, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Anthony Rendon, Chair
SB 985 (Pavley) - As Amended: June 10, 2014
SENATE VOTE : 31-3
SUBJECT : Stormwater resources planning
SUMMARY : Allows a public agency, as specified, to voluntarily
develop a stormwater resource plan (SRP) but makes adoption of a
SRP the prerequisite to receiving future grant funds for
stormwater and dry weather runoff capture projects.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Finds and declares that stormwater and dry weather runoff are
underutilized sources of surface water and groundwater
supplies that should be captured and put to beneficial use.
2)Defines stormwater and dry weather runoff, and makes
conforming changes to Stormwater Resource Planning Act of 2009
(SRPA) and the Rainwater Capture Act of 2012.
3)Require SRPs to identify and prioritize:
a) Stormwater and dry weather runoff capture projects for
implementation in a quantitative manner, using a
metrics-based and integrated evaluation and analysis of
multiple benefits to maximize water supply, water quality,
flood management, environmental, and other community
benefits within the watershed; and
b) Opportunities to use lands or easements in public
ownership for stormwater and dry weather runoff projects.
4)Deletes the requirement that SRPs be consistent with
integrated regional water management plans (IRWMPs).
5)Makes development of an SRP a prerequisite to receiving bond
funding for stormwater and dry weather runoff capture
projects.
6)Requires the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water
Board) to develop a policy setting forth various requirements
for complying with the SRPA.
SB 985
Page 2
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes, but does not require, cities, counties, and
special districts to develop and implement SRPs.
2)Mandates certain content if SRPs are to comply with the SRPA,
including, but not limited to:
a) Watershed-scale scope;
b) Community participation in plan development and
implementation;
c) Consistency with, and assistance in meeting, various
water quality requirements;
d) Consistency with any adopted IRWMPs;
e) Identification of opportunities to manage stormwater to
achieve multiple benefits, which may include: augmentation
of local water supply through reuse, including groundwater
recharge or storage; pollution and runoff volume control;
reestablishment of natural water drainage treatment and
infiltration; and, habitat and open space enhancement,
including wetlands, riverside habitats, parkways, and
parks; and,
f) Identification of projects and programs to ensure the
effective implementation of the SRP.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee analysis, there would be a one-time costs of
approximately $390,000 from the Waste Discharge Permit Fund
(special fund) for one year for the State Water Board to develop
the required policy to guide compliance; and, unknown potential
cost pressures to the State Water Board to approve stormwater
resource plans as a condition of eligibility for future bond
monies.
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to increase the usefulness and
accountability of stormwater and dry weather runoff projects
implemented under SRPs in order to maximize multiple public
benefits to water supply, water quality, flood management, the
environment, and communities.
Supporting arguments: According to the author, "If we are going
to reduce our dependence on imported water through regional
solutions, we must become more frugal with our water. In many
parts of the state stormwater and dry weather runoff are
underutilized sources of surface water and groundwater supplies.
SB 985
Page 3
Instead of being viewed as a resource, they are often seen as a
problem that must be moved to the ocean as quickly as possible
or as a source of contamination, contributing to a loss of
usable water supplies and the pollution and impairment of
rivers, lakes, streams, and coastal waters." The author states
that this bill builds on her SB 790 from 2009 by more finely
focusing the SRA on the capture and use of stormwater and dry
weather runoff. The author emphasizes that stormwater resource
plans remain voluntary but that this bill now "makes clear that
the entity creating the plan is responsible for developing the
necessary elements, including identifying public lands for
potential projects and the development and use of appropriate
analytics."
Opposing arguments : Opponents assert that this bill would
"place additional burdens on local government as it relates to
stormwater resources planning." Opponents argue that many local
governments already look for and identify opportunities for
wastewater infiltration reuse. Opponents maintain that "it is
unnecessary for the state to mandate this process on publically
owned lands, which will require additional staff time and local
government resources, both of which are scarce due to thin
budgets." Other opponents voice concern that water rights are
not being adequately considered in the bill and that the use of
captured stormwater creates potential impacts to downstream
water users that must be taken into consideration when
implementing a stormwater capture project.
Related measures : Most of the bond proposals include funding
for stormwater projects, a number of which explicitly link to
the SRA. Some also provide that bond funds can be used to
develop stormwater resources plans. In addition, AB 2403
(Rendon) also applies to stormwater capture. AB 2403 would
modify the definition of water for purposes of complying with
Proposition 218 to specifically include recycled water and
reclaimed stormwater intended for the provision of water
service.
Suggested amendments : Committee staff suggests making the
following three amendments to the bill:
1) Acknowledging that wetland restoration and an increase in
park and recreation lands are additional potential benefits from
creative management of stormwater and dry weather runoff.
SB 985
Page 4
2) Clarifying that stormwater runoff that is captured, cleaned
and stored may be used either on-site or off-site.
3) Creating two exemptions to a SRP being a prerequisite to
receiving bond funding:
a) Allowing bond funds to be granted for the development of
the SRP itself; and,
b) Allowing bond funds to be granted to a small disadvantaged
community that is outside the urban core.
The restoration of the Los Angeles River is a current example of
a proposed project that will include wetland restoration and an
increase in park and recreation lands. The second amendment
provides greater flexibility and could encourage project
partnerships, among other benefits. The exemption for SRP
development is self-explanatory. And the exemption for small
rural disadvantaged communities recognizes that they may benefit
from a stormwater project but lack the technical and other
resources to develop an overall SRP for a watershed or
subwatershed area but still requires them to meet any State
Water Board guidelines that may be relevant.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
City of Signal Hill
Community Conservation Solutions
Heal the Bay
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Club California
Trust for Public Land
Opposition
Association of California Water Agencies
City of Laguna Hills
Analysis Prepared by : Tina Cannon Leahy / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
SB 985
Page 5