HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03221994 - 1.33 (2) TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS . L _ Contra
FROM:
Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Costa
County/
March 15, 1994 .------ `�'
DATE: r> u i
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: ! AB 2673 (Cortese) RE REQUIRING THAT A GENERAL
PLAN BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FINDINGS OF A WATER DISTRICT RE
ITS ABILITY TO PROVIDE WATER TO A NEW AREA
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT a positionofOPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED in regard to AB 2673
(Cortese) and a further position of SUPPORT if the bill is amended
along the linesrequested by the Board of Supervisors . As
introduced, AB. 2673 would prohibit a city or county from adopting
or amending its General Plan until certain findings of fact have
been received from a water utility and would require that the
General Plan or amendment be consistent with the findings of the
water utility before the General Plan or amendment could be
adopted.
BACKGROUND:
Assemblyman Dominic Cortese has introduced AB 2673 at the request
of the East Bay Municipal Utility District. As introduced, AB 2673
would do all of the following:
1 . Require a public water system, when a city or county proposes
to adopt or substantially amend its General Plan, to make
specified findings of fact concerning its ability to provide
water service to meet the reasonable needs, through periods of
drought, of , the following types of customers :
♦ Existing customers within the existing service area.
♦ Forecasted new customers within the existing service
area.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
yyX RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
L`--APPROVE OTHER
SIG NAT URE(S)•
ACTION OF BOARD ON- Ma-r-c } 22, 1Q94 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _ OTHER `L
APPROVED the recommendation set forth above. Supervisor Bishop requested
the County Administrator to prepare a memo to the Board summarizing his
telephone conversation with Assemblyman Cortese regarding this legislation.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: �y�� E Z NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED � �J 9955,/
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: See Page 2 SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTY
_2_
♦ Forecasted new customers outside the existing service
area, including those associated with new development
according to the proposed general plan amendments .
2 . If the public water system finds that it cannot meet the needs
of all three groups through periods of drought, it is required
to identify the improvements that would be required and the
projected timeframe for implementing these improvements,
necessary to meet the reasonable needs of all three groups .
3 . The city or county would be prohibited from adopting a General
Plan or substantially amending an existing General Plan until
the findings of fact have been transmitted to the city or
county and made a part of the record.
4 . If the public water system finds that it cannot provide water
service sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of all three
groups identified above through periods of forecasted drought,
the city or county is prohibited from adopting the General
Plan or amendment to the General Plan unless the General Plan
or amendment, including those provisions identifying the
location, intensity, and timing of any new development, are
consistent with the findings of the public water system.
AB 2673 moves in exactly the opposite direction from that supported
by the Board of Supervisors previously, when the Board indicated
that land use decisions should be within its province, while the
provision of utility service should be the responsibility of the
respective utilities .
We believe that the Board of Supervisors should consider opposing
AB 2673 in its present form. Assemblyman Cortese has indicated in
writing that he agrees with the need to establish a timetable
within which water districts should identify improvements necessary
to accommodate new growth. We are currently drafting proposed
amendments to make it clear that it is the responsibility of units
of general purpose government (city councils or boards of
supervisors) to make land use decisions and the responsibility of
utilities to meet the needs generated by the land use decisions
which are made. These amendments will also provide reasonable
deadlines within which the findings of fact must be submitted to
the city or county.
It is our recommendation that the Board of Supervisors vote to
oppose AB 2673 in its present form, but to support it if
Assemblyman Cortese amends the bill along the lines outlined above.
If he is unwilling to accept these amendments, the Board should
continue to oppose AB 2673 .
cc: County Administrator
Director, GMEDA
Community Development Director
County Counsel
Les Spahnn, Heim, Noack & Spahnn
9164414925 HEIM NOACK & SPAHNN F-420 T-620 P-002 MAR 15 194 10:20
PLEASE P90LY ro!
ML-MBER:
QANXING.COMmERGE
SACRAMENTO Ai)DRES9: &INTERNATIONAL TRALYE commirrm
ROOM 3086,STATE CAF9TOL RVOaL-r AND FISCAL REVIEW
SACRAMENTO,CA 89614
IIELEPNONE:(9 16)448-EOB3 / CCTIO S A
7+Y 1tT� ELC hNTT No REAPPDRTIONMENr
eE
C1 N
CENTRAL.CQUTY: F�F4 F a =NUI!
1061 GALAXY WAY RCVENUEANOTA7tAT10iVCOMMITTE�
,UffE 210
y� TRRNwoRTA".00MMRTFF.
CONOORO C10 989-1 California. ?Ergislaturr
TELEPHONE:(51O)69!}1973 CiiAIRMAN:
a EAST COUMY. BUDGET SUBCOM MIZ NQ A
4N LEGIStATIv�,EICEGUTIVE,
4' W,7H[RD STREET BUSINESSTRANSP6RTATIGN,
J*MOCH.CA 94509 DANIEL�. t30AT1NRiGHT MOUSING,AND GENERAL,
TELEPHONE:151 0)754.301 1
CHAIRMAN GOVERNMENT
r.-yIIMJSN;
COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS 5USCOMM(TTEE ON s*6RT5
6fA1RMAN:
SGL=T-GDMMTTTEE ON
STATE PROCUREMENT AND
E%PF]VDITUFM PRACTICES
REPRESENTYI+s:
SEVEN[H E044TORiAL 01 ICT
March 10, 1994
Joel Keller, Mayor
city of Antioch
P.O. Box 134
Antioch, CA 94509
Dear Joel:
T am writing, tri bring your attention to AB 2673 Which Vas
recently introduced by .Assemblymember Dominic Cortese.
This bill has been introduced at the request of th6 East Bay
Municipal Utilities District. As you will see from the enclosed
copy of the bill, this measure proposes that water agencies make
findings about their ability to provide water pursuant to any
' changes in the general plan of cities or counties.
Assemblymember Cortese authored a law in the 1991-92 session
which gives a formal informational input role for water districts
to comment on general plan amendments and their impact on current
and future water supplies. His new measure, AB 2673, goes far
beyond the vlexchange of information" level. in fact, as you will
note on page 3, subsection (c) , lines 8Y-22, a water district is
actually given the ability to "veto" a city or county general
plan or its amendments, unless the water district agrees with the
city or county on the availability of water.
Under current law, cities and counties are generally charged
with authority over land use decisions. They must, and do,
consult with special districts prior to taking action on a
proposed development. However, with the „veto') authority
bestowed by AB 2673, special districts would be given the ability
to totally control development proposals by controlling the water
supply debate.
9164414925 HEIM NOASK & SPAHNN F-420 T-620 P-003 MAR 15 194 10:21
Your city should be extremely concerned About this bill. A3
2673 is not, limited to the jurisdictions within the East Bay
Municipal Utilities District service area, but rather has
statewide applicability. {
The League of california Cities is currently studying this
bill. I would respectfully encourage the City Council to both
take an official position opposition to AB 2673, and to convey
that position to the. League of California Cities, to the county's
Assembly representatives Richard Rainey and Bob Campbell, to the
author Assemblymember Cortese, and to Assemblymember Mike Gotch..
Chair of the Assembly Local Government Committee where the bill
has recently been assigned.
Thank you for your interest and attent'cxq
O inifAg�acr by'.
sincerely,
DEB/'Cs
Enclosure
MEMBERS LINDA S.ADAMS
VIVIEN BRONSHVAG ��1I /1 . . CHIEF CONSULTANT
Vice Chair
EDNA MAITA
ROBERT CAMPBELL U SENIOR CONSULTANT
SAL C COLLINS �j I � �� PATRICIA MEGASON
B.T.
JIM COSTA
S � xi' SENIOR CONSULTANT
MARTHA M.ESCUTIA ��yy� + LINDA R RODRIGUEZ
ROBERT C.FRAZEE � � JrjCCC� � COMMITTEE SECRETARY
TRICE HARVEY JJ"
DAN HAUSER STATE CAPITOL
PHY HAYNES P.0-BOX 942849
ILLIP SE BERG D O M I N I C L. C O R T E S E SACRAMENTO.CA 94249-0001
DAVID KNOWLES CHAIRMAN �M --^=^P �— �91�"5-6164
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
February 9, 1994 RECEIVED
I '
FF9 1 4 199A
Mr. Philip Batchelor
County Administrator OFFICE OF
Contra Costa County {
651 Pine Street; 11th Floor COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Phil:
Thank you for your interest in my AB 2673, relating to water
supply planning,
My objective in' carrying AB 2673 is to ensure an adequate
water supply to support new development by creating a linkage
between the local general plan process and a water agency' s
water supply planning process . Given California ' s limited
water supplies, particularly during California ' s frequent
droughts, this linkage is absolutely critical for the future
well being of the state.
As you may be aware, last session I carried AB 455, which was
intended to link water supply planning to the local general
plan process . Assembly Bill 455 met with opposition from
development interests as well as some cities and counties,
who pointed out, three major concerns . One concern was that
the linkage of the two processes should occur at the general
plan amendment 'stage and not the project approval stage.
Another was with the difficulty in crafting a single,
statewide definition of what constitutes a "long-term,
reliable water `supply" . The final concern was that AB 455
failed to place an obligation on water suppliers to identify
future water supplies that could accommodate proposed new
development.
When you review AB 2673, you will see that it addresses all
those concerns expressed with AB 455 . However, I agree with
you that AB 2673 should establish a timeline for water
districts to identify improvements necessary to accommodate
new growth. Therefore, I intend to draft appropriate
timelines to amend into AB 2673 . Water agencies should have
a clear obligation to plan for future water needs .
_.aM
Printed on Recycled Paper
Mr. Philip Batchelor
February 9, 1994
Page Two
Once again, thank you for your interest in this bill . I hope
you will agree with me that it is essential to establish a
two-way linkage ,in local government planning procedures to
ensure adequate 'water supplies are developed to serve new
development throughout the state.
I look forward to working with you on this important issue.
Sin rely,
DO C L. CORTESE
Cha rman
DLC:lsa
Enc .
ti
h
c +.
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE--2993-94 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2673
Introduced .by Assembly Member::Cortese
(Principal .coauthor: Assembly Member:Campbell)
(Principal coauthor: Senator:McCorquodale)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Goteh ''Hauser, and . :
Isenberg)
(Coauthors. `Senators Kelley' and'Petris)
February 3, 1994'
An act to add Section 65352.6 to the Government Code,
relating to water.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2673, as introduced, Cortese. Local public water
systems: service needs: findings of fact.
Under existing law, when a city or.county proposes to adopt
or substantially amend a general plan, a public water system,
as defined, must provide the city's or :county's planning
agency with specified information relating to the availability
and use of existing and planned future water supplies.
} €r This bill would add to these duties by requiring the public
water.system to make specified findings of fact concerning its
ability to provide water service to meet the reasonable needs,
consistent with the provisions . of the urban water
management plan adopted by the public water system,
through periods of forecasted drought, of certain customers
within and outside the public water system's existing service
area; The bill would provide procedures to be followed by the
public water system if it finds that it cannot provide water
service sufficient to meet these reasonable needs. The bill
would also prescribe the duties of the affected city or county
with respect to the public water system's findings. Because it
would require cities and counties to perform new local
99 80
AB 2673 2.._
planning duties under certain circumstances, this"bill would
impose---astate-man ate-( oc program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated
by the state Statutory`prow sions establish procedures for
making that_reimbursement,=including the creation'. f a State
mandateswhich doiis. 'icpayt�hetcMandates= d osts of
not exceedOoo;UOt) statewide: and -,other .procedures for .z
claims whose statewide costs:.exceed $1,000,000.
This bill wou1d5,p rovid6%,,, a if the Comm ssign on State
Mandates determines that this bill contains costs mandated by
the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made
pursuant to those statina.procedures and, if the statewide
cost does not exceed $l;OCNQ,000 shall be made from the State
Mandates Claims Fund.
Vote:- majority: Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION ` =1. Section 65352.6 ' is added to the
2 Government Code;`to read:
3 65352.6. (a) Pursuant to the provisions of Section
4 65352.5, the ,public water system shall make findings of "
5fact concerning its abilityto provide water service to
6 meet the reasonable needs,consistent with the provisions
7 -of the urban water management plan adopted by the
8 public water, system; through periods of forecasted
9 drought, of`the'following°types of customers:
0 (1) Existing-customers within the existing service area
11 of the public water, system.
12 (2) Forecasted ` new, customers within the existing
13 service area of the public Vater system. .
14 (3) Forecasted new customers outside the existing
15 service area of the public water system, including those
16 associated with- new development according to the
17 proposed general plan amendments.
18 (b) If the public water system finds that it cannot
19 provide water service sufficient to meet the reasonable
20 needs of all three categories of customers identified in
99 110
- 3 — AB 2673
uld 1 subdivision (a) through periods of forecasted droughts,
2 the public water system shall identify the improvements
rse 3 that would be required to its water system, and the
ted 4 projected timeframe for implementing these
for 5 improvements, as set forth in Section 65352.5, necessary
:ate 6 to meet the water needs of the three categories of
do .7 customers identified in subdivision (a) .
for 8 (c) The city or county shall not adopt or amend its
9 general plan until the findings of fact of the public water
:ate 10 system pursuant to subdivision (a) have been transmitted
I by 11 to the city or county and have been made part of the
ade 12 record. If the public water system made findings of fact
ide 13 that it cannot provide water service sufficient to meet the
:ate 14 reasonable needs of all three categories of customers
15 identified in subdivision (a) through periods of
yes. 16 forecasted drought, the city or county shall not adopt the
17 general plan or its amendments, unless the general plan
18 or amendments, including those provisions identifying
19 the location, intensity, and timing of any new
20 development, are consistent with the findings of the
the 21 public water system.
22 1 SEC. 2. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the
tion 23 Government.Code, if the Commission on State Mandates
s. of 24 determines that this act contains costs mandated by the
31, to 25 state, reimbursement to local agencies and school
ions 26 districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7
the 27 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title
3ted 28 2 of the Government Code. If the statewide cost of the
29 claim for reimbursement does not exceed one million
area 30 dollars ($1,000,000), reimbursement shall be made from
31 the State Mandates Claims Fund. Notwithstanding
ting 32 Section 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise
33 'specified in this act, the provisions of this act shall become
ting 34 operative on the same date that the act takes effect
lose 35 ;pursuant to the California Constitution.
the
snot
able O
d in
110 99 130