California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 300 — Subdivisions: water supply.

Last action — From Senate committee without further action.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) The Subdivision Map Act prohibits approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, or a development agreement for a subdivision of property of more than 500 dwelling units, except as specified, including the design of the subdivision or the type of improvement, unless the legislative body of a city or county or the designated advisory agency provides written verification from the applicable public water system that a sufficient water supply is available or, in addition, a specified finding is made by the local agency that sufficient water supplies are, or will be, available prior to completion of the project. This bill would require, until January 1, 2017, the public water system, or the local agency if there is no public water system, to review, verify for accuracy, and approve, as specified, the subdivider's water savings projections attributable to voluntary demand management measures, as defined. The public water system would be authorized to collect fees necessary to provide the additional analysis of the voluntary demand management measures. This bill would provide that a water supply assessment completed, as specified, satisfies the existing requirement of verifying sufficient water supply, unless the public water system receives specified new information. The public water system would be required to determine the projected water savings attributable to the voluntary demand management measures that will be incorporated into the subdivision. The projected water savings would be required to be calculated using specified data compiled or maintained by the public water system or the water savings projections adopted by the California Urban Water Conservation Council. If a project applicant proposes to use a new voluntary water demand management measure for which neither the California Urban Water Conservation Council nor the public water system has adopted an estimate or method to calculate the projected water savings of the proposed voluntary demand management measure, the projected water savings would be required to be made based on documented methodologies or calculations submitted in the record. Five years after the project has been fully developed, the public water system would be required to include within its next urban water management plan a report on the monitoring and compliance of voluntary water demand management measures and to determine, if practicable based on readily available information, whether they have resulted in the water savings necessary to achieve the agreed upon water demand offsets. The bill would also require the public water system to document the measured annual water use of the subdivision in comparison to the projected demand associated with the subdivision, and to calculate the water savings attributable to the voluntary mitigation measures financed by the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund for the subdivision. If the public water system bases its written verification of a sufficient water supply for the subdivision, in whole or in part, on the use of voluntary demand management measures within the subdivision, the written verification would be required to be conditioned on the maintenance and operation of the voluntary demand management measures, or measures that are at least as water efficient, as agreed to by the applicant and the public water system, and the recordation as a covenant running with the land for the lots within the subdivision. The bill would provide that by acceptance of a deed to a lot, each purchaser would acknowledge the obligation to comply with the voluntary demand measures for the lot as described in the covenant. These covenants would be authorized to be enforced pursuant to the existing authority of a public water system. The bill would further require a builder, prior to the close of escrow, to give a purchaser information that would be required to be included in a maintenance manual that informs the purchaser of the existence of the home's unique water saving devices, including specified information. The bill would also encourage the public water system to commit to carrying out the water conservation measures funded by the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund within 24 months of the sale of the last unit of the proposed subdivision. The bill would require the public water system to choose water conservation measures that are the most cost-effective means to yield water savings. The bill would authorize expenditures from the fund to be made within the subdivision or elsewhere within the service area of the public water supplier, at its discretion. Not less than 40% of the proceeds from the voluntary water demand mitigation fund would be required to be directed to water conservation programs in any disadvantaged community, unless the public water system makes a specified finding. By adding to the duties of the public water system, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires a city or county that determines a project, as defined, is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act to identify any public water system that may supply water for the project and to request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. If no public water system is identified, the city or county is required to prepare the water supply assessment. This bill would require, until January 1, 2017, if the project applicant elects to include voluntary demand management measures, any city, county, or public water system preparing a water supply assessment to reduce the projected water demand for the project to an amount below planned water demand reduction actions contained in an adopted urban water management plan and the current statutory, regulatory, and local ordinance requirements, based on the project applicant's voluntary water demand management measures, as defined. The bill would authorize the applicant to enter into a mutual agreement with the public water system to mitigate water demand associated with a proposed subdivision by depositing funds in a Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund, as defined. The fees paid into the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund would be prohibited from exceeding the amount necessary to offset the actual or percentage of actual water demand impacts agreed upon in the agreement between the applicant and the public water system. The bill would authorize, at the discretion of the public water system, the amount required for the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund to be reduced by a portion of the normally required system capacity charges that finance future water supplies. The bill would also authorize any reduction in the capacity charge to be calculated using the amount of water projected to be conserved using the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund at the cost determined by the public water system for developing new water supplies or for water conservation. The bill would not require the total reduction in system capacity charges to be equal to the amount paid into the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund. The bill would require the public water system to determine the projected water savings attributable to the voluntary demand management measures that will be incorporated into the project. The public water system would be required to expend all funds from the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund on water conservation measures that will reduce the projected demand associated with the subdivision. The public water system would be prohibited from using any funds from the Voluntary Water Conservation Mitigation Fund to supplant funding for water conservation programs required by planned water reduction actions contained in an adopted urban water management plan, existing law, or paid for by existing customers through water rates and surcharges. By adding to the duties of the public water system, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Senate committee without further action.

  2. In committee: Set, first hearing. Testimony taken. Further hearing to be set.

  3. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

  4. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

  5. From committee: Amend, do pass as amended, and re-refer to Com. on N.R. & W. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 17).

  6. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  7. Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and N.R. & W.

  8. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  9. Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 73. Noes 0. Page 1742.)

  10. Read second time. To third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 20).

  12. From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 28).

  13. Re-referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.

  14. Read second time and amended.

  15. From committee: Amend, do pass as amended, and re-refer to Com. on W.,P. & W. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 15).

  16. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  17. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.

  18. Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and W.,P. & W.

  19. From printer. May be heard in committee March 20.

  20. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Caballero · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Caballero

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 85 Yea · 0 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 78006
Democratic 5000
Republican 2001
Total 85007
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (92)
Member Party Vote
Hagman — Yea
Carter — Yea
Eng — Yea
Evans — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cook — Yea
Bill — Yea
Berryhill — Yea
Tom — Yea
Berryhill — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Charles — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Coto — Yea
Davis — Yea
Duvall — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Gaines — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Audra — Yea
Saldana — Not Voting
Furutani — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Gilmore — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bass — Yea
Huffman — Not Voting
Jeffries — Yea
Knight — Yea
Krekorian — Not Voting
Lieu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Ruskin — Not Voting
Silva — Yea
Skinner — Not Voting
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Tran — Yea
Adams — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Huber — Yea
Logue — Yea
Ma — Yea
Nava — Not Voting
Nielsen — Yea
Price — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torres — Yea
Villines — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
DeVore — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 20 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 18001
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 20001
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (21)
Member Party Vote
Charles — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Audra — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Miller — Not Voting
Nielsen — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Duvall — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Price — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Davis — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13001
Democratic 2001
Total 15002
% of votes cast 88%0%0%12%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Fuller — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Tom — Yea
Berryhill — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Salas — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Yamada — Not Voting
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Not Voting
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 300 do?
(1) The Subdivision Map Act prohibits approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, or a development agreement for a subdivision of property of more than 500 dwelling units, except as specified, including the design of the subdivision or the type of improvement, unless the legislative body of a city or county or the designated advisory agency provides written verification from the applicable public water system that a sufficient water supply is available or, in addition, a specified finding is made by the local agency that sufficient water supplies are, or will be, available prior to completion of the project. This bill would require, until January 1, 2017, the public water system, or the local agency if there is no public water system, to review, verify for accuracy, and approve, as specified, the subdivider's water savings projections attributable to voluntary demand management measures, as defined. The public water system would be authorized to collect fees necessary to provide the additional analysis of the voluntary demand management measures. This bill would provide that a water supply assessment completed, as specified, satisfies the existing requirement of verifying sufficient water supply, unless the public water system receives specified new information. The public water system would be required to determine the projected water savings attributable to the voluntary demand management measures that will be incorporated into the subdivision. The projected water savings would be required to be calculated using specified data compiled or maintained by the public water system or the water savings projections adopted by the California Urban Water Conservation Council. If a project applicant proposes to use a new voluntary water demand management measure for which neither the California Urban Water Conservation Council nor the public water system has adopted an estimate or method to calculate the projected water savings of the proposed voluntary demand management measure, the projected water savings would be required to be made based on documented methodologies or calculations submitted in the record. Five years after the project has been fully developed, the public water system would be required to include within its next urban water management plan a report on the monitoring and compliance of voluntary water demand management measures and to determine, if practicable based on readily available information, whether they have resulted in the water savings necessary to achieve the agreed upon water demand offsets. The bill would also require the public water system to document the measured annual water use of the subdivision in comparison to the projected demand associated with the subdivision, and to calculate the water savings attributable to the voluntary mitigation measures financed by the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund for the subdivision. If the public water system bases its written verification of a sufficient water supply for the subdivision, in whole or in part, on the use of voluntary demand management measures within the subdivision, the written verification would be required to be conditioned on the maintenance and operation of the voluntary demand management measures, or measures that are at least as water efficient, as agreed to by the applicant and the public water system, and the recordation as a covenant running with the land for the lots within the subdivision. The bill would provide that by acceptance of a deed to a lot, each purchaser would acknowledge the obligation to comply with the voluntary demand measures for the lot as described in the covenant. These covenants would be authorized to be enforced pursuant to the existing authority of a public water system. The bill would further require a builder, prior to the close of escrow, to give a purchaser information that would be required to be included in a maintenance manual that informs the purchaser of the existence of the home's unique water saving devices, including specified information. The bill would also encourage the public water system to commit to carrying out the water conservation measures funded by the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund within 24 months of the sale of the last unit of the proposed subdivision. The bill would require the public water system to choose water conservation measures that are the most cost-effective means to yield water savings. The bill would authorize expenditures from the fund to be made within the subdivision or elsewhere within the service area of the public water supplier, at its discretion. Not less than 40% of the proceeds from the voluntary water demand mitigation fund would be required to be directed to water conservation programs in any disadvantaged community, unless the public water system makes a specified finding. By adding to the duties of the public water system, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires a city or county that determines a project, as defined, is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act to identify any public water system that may supply water for the project and to request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. If no public water system is identified, the city or county is required to prepare the water supply assessment. This bill would require, until January 1, 2017, if the project applicant elects to include voluntary demand management measures, any city, county, or public water system preparing a water supply assessment to reduce the projected water demand for the project to an amount below planned water demand reduction actions contained in an adopted urban water management plan and the current statutory, regulatory, and local ordinance requirements, based on the project applicant's voluntary water demand management measures, as defined. The bill would authorize the applicant to enter into a mutual agreement with the public water system to mitigate water demand associated with a proposed subdivision by depositing funds in a Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund, as defined. The fees paid into the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund would be prohibited from exceeding the amount necessary to offset the actual or percentage of actual water demand impacts agreed upon in the agreement between the applicant and the public water system. The bill would authorize, at the discretion of the public water system, the amount required for the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund to be reduced by a portion of the normally required system capacity charges that finance future water supplies. The bill would also authorize any reduction in the capacity charge to be calculated using the amount of water projected to be conserved using the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund at the cost determined by the public water system for developing new water supplies or for water conservation. The bill would not require the total reduction in system capacity charges to be equal to the amount paid into the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund. The bill would require the public water system to determine the projected water savings attributable to the voluntary demand management measures that will be incorporated into the project. The public water system would be required to expend all funds from the Voluntary Water Demand Mitigation Fund on water conservation measures that will reduce the projected demand associated with the subdivision. The public water system would be prohibited from using any funds from the Voluntary Water Conservation Mitigation Fund to supplant funding for water conservation programs required by planned water reduction actions contained in an adopted urban water management plan, existing law, or paid for by existing customers through water rates and surcharges. By adding to the duties of the public water system, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 300?
AB 300 is sponsored by Caballero.
What is the current status of AB 300?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 300?
Track AB 300 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 300

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of AB 300

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →