Hyatt Regency Hotel
Beacon Room A
Long Beach , California
Thursday, October 16, 2008
8:00 a.m.- 9:50 a.m.

Presiding:
Liz Anderson-Fitzgerald, Chair,
Wendi-Mae Davis, Vice Chair
Allen Chiang, Vice Chair
Jeanette Way, Committee Liaison
Larry Matteson, Rural Forum Chair

C.A.R. Staff:
Elizabeth Gavric, Legislative Advocate

I. Opening Comments: Chairwoman Anderson-Fitzgerald

II. Action Item - Green Mortgages IBP

III. Discussion/Information Items

A. Report from Green Task Force - Bob Hart, Chair
B. Report from REALTOR® Committee on Air Quality - Carol Banner,

C. Legislative Update
 
1. Boards, Departments and Special Districts
a. AB 1338 (Huffman) Public Resources: Local Coastal Programs** -  Current law authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRGB) and Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) to regulate stormwater runoff through the issuance of permits. AB 1338 would have expanded the land use authority of the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to include regulatory oversight of stormwater runoff permits for non-point source pollution, and would grant the CCC the last word on water quality issues rather than the RWQCBs. C.A.R. opposed AB 1338 because it would have expanded the regulatory authority of the commission into an area that the California Coastal Act has expressly identified as the regulatory jurisdiction of the SWRCB and RWQCBs. Due to opposition, the author decided not to pursue AB 1338 . The author instead "gutted" and amended the bill to address an unrelated issue. Position: Drop Status: Died in the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee as Amended
 
2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
a. SB 68 (Kuehl) Environmental Quality: Determination: Dispute - As, introduced, this bill would have prohibited any parcel of land that was included in a city's or county's general plan or resource management plan, from being developed for any purpose until the mineral excavation or commercial production of that area was completed. C.A.R. opposed SB 68 because it not only impinged upon the rights of the property owner to go out of the mining business and sell to developers, but would have also given local governments another tool to promote "no growth" principles. As amended in June 2008, SB 68 would have permitted development opponents to name only one, but not all defendants in litigation arising out of a CEQA dispute that would affect many other parties. The bill would have prohibited anyone that is overlooked or incorrectly identified by a lead agency in a notice of determination from being allowed to seek a dismissal for a lawsuit challenging a development. C.A.R. opposed SB 68 because it would have effectively reversed current law by not considering all parties whose interest may be affected by the outcome of the litigation and gave no growth proponents an unfair advantage when challenging developments. As a result of coalition opposition, the author amended SB 68 in early August 2008 to satisfy C.A.R.'s concerns. As amended, SB 68 now seeks to improve the efficiency of CEQA judicial review by addressing a burdensome procedural complication without negatively impacting notice requirements or participation in CEQA litigation. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
3. Disclosures
a. AB 2733 (Brownley) Real Property Disclosures This measure would have required sellers or their agents to purchase a new disclosure report that identified all environmental hazard sites located within a one-quarter mile radius of a home's zip code or city upon transfer of the property. C.A.R. opposed AB 2733 because it would have required the purchase of an additional, and unnecessary, disclosure report and resulted in a dilution in the value of existing disclosures. The bill would have also added unknown costs to the transaction. C.A.R. achieved amendments that removed its opposition. As amended, AB 2733 no longer requires a new separate report but requires a developer or professional natural hazard report provider to, in its existing report, disclose environmental hazard sites located within a one-quarter mile radius of the property to prospective buyers. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
b. AB 2881 (Wolk) Nuisance: Agricultural Activity: Costs: Right to Farm - As introduced, AB 2881 would have required real estate licensees to include a disclosure on the right to farm in a real property sales contract for all properties located within a 1 - mile radius of an agricultural area. C.A.R. opposed the bill until it was amended to remove the mandatory disclosure provision. The bill now places the Right to Farm disclosure in both the subdivision reports for new homes and Natural Hazard Disclosure reports for resale homes, and contains a more workable definition of "agricultural area." Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
c. SB 1386 (Lowenthal) Carbon Monoxide - SB 1386 would require ALL existing homes to install a carbon monoxide (CO) detector by July 1, 2010, and new homes built after June 1, 2009 to have a CO detector. The measure would have originally required the recording of a separate disclosure of compliance, a point-of-sale mandate and would have effectively forced home sellers and their agents to certify CO alarm installation. C.A.R. obtained amendments that removed the specified point-of-sale mandate. As amended, the bill provides for a statewide, date-certain mandate for CO detectors in all housing (not just those that transfer), and will allow the CO detector to be noted in a TDS. The amendments also broadened the statutory protections for these disclosures providing better seller protection and increased liability protections for agents. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor

4. Fire
a. AB 2447 Jones (D): Subdivision Maps: Denial of Approval - The Subdivision Map Act gives local governments the authority to approve or deny tentative maps or parcel maps. AB 2447 required local government to deny the approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map, if CalFire determined that the development is located in a high fire danger area. Those developments seeking local government approval would have been required to obtain the department’s written approval of design and location in conjunction with verification that the city or county was providing fire protection services for the new development. C.A.R. opposed AB 2447 because it expanded the jurisdiction of CalFire to include subdivision design land use decision-making authority that would have superseded local government decisions. C.A.R. has obtained amendments that removed the expansion of CalFire's jurisdiction. As amended, AB 2447 continues local government control over development, but increases the fire protection criteria for approval in state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor 

b. SB 1595 Kehoe (D): Fire Protection: Fuels Management: Forest Protection - Existing law requires a person who owns, leases, operates, or maintains a building or structure within a state responsibility area to maintain a firebreak for at least 30 feet, and additional vegetation management up to 100 feet, from the structure. SB 1595 would apply these provisions to any land within a very high fire severity zone and further requires the irrigation of all living plants in both the 30 foot and 100 foot zones of defensible space. However, in areas of water shortages, local agencies would be permitted to require further thinning and pruning in lieu of irrigation. The bill would allow the director of CalFire to remove live and dead vegetation on state and private lands. SB 1595 had also permitted CalFire to restrict access to privately owned properties that were identified by CalFire to be infested with insects or plant diseases that are known to be injurious to forest growth. C.A.R obtained amendments that removed this unnecessary restriction on a property owner’s ability to access their property. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor 
 
5. Green Buildings & Energy Efficiency
a. AB 1763 (Blakeslee) Energy: Billing Information - This bill will require utilities to provide residential customers with detailed information on their energy usage, the corresponding costs and energy conservation information in their utility billing statement. C.A.R. supports AB 1763 because it will help consumers to understand their energy usage and to voluntarily cut down on energy usage and reduce utility bills. These actions would also allow consumers to actively contribute to the statewide efforts to meet the goals of the Global Warming Solution Act of 2006. Position: Support Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
b. AB 2309 (DeSaulnier) Energy Systems - This bill will require the Public Utilities Commission to authorize electric corporations to provide owner-requested energy efficiency audits and recommendations for residential buildings built prior to January 1, 2006. California's energy efficiency building standards are among the toughest in the nation; however, most California homes were built prior to the implementation of these standards. C.A.R. supports AB 2309 because it will enable more homeowners to voluntarily obtain energy audits, which will help them understand energy efficiency, reduce utility bills, and help to reduce overall energy demand.  Position: Support Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
c. AB 2678 (Nunez) Energy: Energy Audit** - As introduced, AB 2678 required the California Energy Commission to develop a program that would have required ALL homes and commercial properties in California to have an energy audit and mandatory energy efficiency upgrades when properties were sold. While C.A.R. appreciated the goal of AB 2678, C.A.R. strongly opposed the point-of-sale requirements in the bill because not only would a point-of-sale mandate have failed to achieve the state's greenhouse gas reduction objectives, it would have further weakened the housing market by adding thousands of dollars to the cost of purchasing a home. C.A.R. obtained amendments that removed the point-of-sale requirement for energy audits and added language to ensure that the audits or improvements were not required as a condition of sale. With these amendments, C.A.R. removed its opposition and supported AB 2678 because it would have created a comprehensive statewide campaign of flexible cost-effective energy efficiency improvements for existing buildings. Position: Support Status: Died in the Senate Appropriations Committee
 
6. Planning and Zoning
a. AB 1991 (Mullin) Subdivisions: Tentative Maps** - This bill would have reinstated approved tentative maps in the City of Half Moon Bay effective January 1, 2009 in order to settle an on going legal dispute between a Half Moon Bay property owner and the City of Half Moon Bay while allowing the city to continue to provide essential services to all of its residents, without interruption. C.A.R. supported AB 1991 because local developers are often faced with numerous challenges while trying to meet the housing needs of California's growing population, and sometimes these challenges can result in an unjust taking of private property through the denial of discretionary approvals or building moratoriums during the development process. Position: Support Status: Died in the Senate Rules Committee
 
b. AB 2219 (Parra) Subdivisions: Water Supply** - Current law requires housing projects in excess of 500 units to receive verification from the public water system that sufficient water supplies are, or will be, available prior to the completion of the project. AB 2219 would have permitted local governments to consider a reduction in the anticipated water demand for new housing projects if the development voluntarily implemented water demand reduction measures. C.A.R. supported AB 2219 because it would have helped to meet the water demands needed to provide more housing to the state’s increasing population by maximizing the utilization of the states water supply through conservation. However, in the bill's final policy committee hearing, hostile amendments by Northern California water utility were added to the bill to place enforcement of water savings fixtures into CC&Rs. Due to these amendments, C.A.R. removed its support, and the author decided not to pursue the bill. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Died in the Senate Appropriations Committee
 
c. SB 375 (Steinberg) Transportation Planning: Travel Models: Reviews - As introduced, C.A.R. supported SB 375 which would have broadened the applicability of the existing CEQA exemption for urban infill developments and could have generated desperately needed housing. As amended, SB 375 provides $20 million from Proposition 1C, passed by the voters in 2006, for "smart growth" planning and incentives. While C.A.R. achieved amendments that removed the non-substantive term "smart growth" to describe the goals of the proposition, C.A.R. continued to oppose SB 375 because it would have impeded future suburban residential, commercial and retail development by creating restrictive urban growth limitations through transportation funding restrictions. The bill would have resulted in local governments losing control over land use planning decisions while ignoring the state's housing need, and placed the need for green house gas reductions of above the need for housing. Due to coalition opposition, which included C.A.R., SB 375 was amended to continue local government control over development by removing the restrictive urban growth limitations and transportation funding restrictions from the provisions of the bill. What ultimately emerged was a compromise agreement that includes ensuring that adequate land for housing be zoned; establishing greater certainty in the land-use entitlement process; providing relief from excessive and duplicative environmental reviews; and producing a road map for compliance with the land-use elements of AB 32. With these amendments, C.A.R. has removed its opposition. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
d. SB 732 (Steinberg) Environment - Proposition 84, passed in 2006, makes $5.4 billion in bond funds available for safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. SB 732 would create the Sustainable Communities Council that would be responsible for the bond funds allocated for urban greening and planning grants and incentives for the development of regional and local land use plans including a grant program for the development of parks associated with housing. C.A.R. did not favor SB 732 because the establishment of a new and ongoing state-level council is unnecessary to achieve what should be a relatively simple task of distributing the Proposition 84 funds. The bill would have made the process of distributing funds more complex and complicated by the establishment of this council. The amendments taken in September 2007 assured that the new council would not impinge on local governments' land use authority, and satisfied C.A.R.'s concerns. Unfortunately, in late August of 2008 the author amended SB 732 to require that regional plan blueprints and local government general plans be consistent with state specified planning policies that would not only create uncertainty but will pose a significant litigation risk that will delay needed development and hurt housing affordability. Due to these amendments, C.A.R. has renewed its opposition to SB 732. (see also, SB 375) Position: Oppose Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
7. Water Supply
a. AB 2046 (Jones) Water Supply Assessments: Groundwater - This bill would have required the Department of Public Health or a local heath officer to certify that every groundwater basin meets drinking water standards before the water is even extracted. C.A.R. opposed AB 2046 because it's not only impractical, but unreasonable, that groundwater be required to meet drinking water standards while still in the ground. Additionally, AB 2046 was unnecessary because current law already requires water districts to analyze whether groundwater basins will be viable sources for future water needs. As amended, AB 2046 will require the groundwater management plan to identify all contaminated groundwater that will need treatment or remediation in order to be included in the state’s planned water supply. With these amendments, C.A.R. has removed its opposition. Position: Watch as Amended Status: Enrolled to the Governor
 
D. Regulatory Update
1. California Air Resources Board (ARB) Climate Change Draft Scoping Plan - This document outlines the plan to lower the state’s greenhouse gas emissions to meet the 2020 limit of 1990 level emissions output. This Draft Scoping Plan, developed by ARB with input from the Climate Action Team of which C.A.R. is a participant, proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall carbon emissions in California. The measures in the Scoping Plan adopted by the Board will be developed over the next three years and be in place by 2012. Unfortunately, the ARB document recommends the evaluation of mechanisms for aggressively promoting environmental performance testing and ratings for all existing homes and commercial buildings, and requiring building owners that have not taken advantage of these programs to do so at time of sale. C.A.R. has submitted formal comments speaking against POS to the ARB and is continuing to address this issue in stakeholder meetings.
2. California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Vegetation and Wildlife Corridor Mapping Programs - These two mapping programs are already under way and are intended to map the entire state. C.A.R. met with DFG to discuss the process by which the mapping is being done, understand the process by which land owners grant access to DFG, and understand the process by which property owners may gain access to the data for comment and to be able to challenge assumptions, findings or other data. C.A.R. also discussed how the data would be used and at what scale it would be so as to understand the impacts of the mapping efforts on individual property owners.
3. California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Alluvial Fan Task Force - Alluvial Fan Task Force. The Task Force is creating Model Ordinances for local planning if housing and development in communities may be subject to alluvial fan flooding, which is characterized by flash flooding, and debris flows which result in damage to structures and loss of life. C.A.R. is participating in the development of these ordinances and has reviewed the Draft Executive Summary of a 5-Step Process for Application of Local Planning Tools. While C.A.R. did not have any comments on this document, we will continue to participate in this Task Force.
4. California Department of Water Resources (DWR), Water Plan Update 2009 - C.A.R. is actively participating in the Advisory Committee, Land Use Subcommittee and Urban Water Use Efficiency Subcommittee of this process, which is designed to outline all aspects of water planning for California. The Advisory Committee consists of about 35 statewide organizations representing a spectrum of interests that will provide input on statewide policy issues and initiatives concerning: Water Supply, Water Quality, and Flooding. The Advisory Committee is defining the Plan goals, objectives and implementation strategies. As usual, other interest groups recommended implementation of water savings retrofit measures at POS. C.A.R. was on hand to dispel any notions that POS is an appropriate, reasonable or efficient method for implementing any measures. C.A.R. is also attending the Land Use Planning and Management and Urban Water Use Efficiency working group meetings to participate in the development of these chapters to the Plan and the recommended strategies and to speak against POS.
5. California Energy Commission (CEC) Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) - The IEPR, as established by SB 1389 (Bowen and Sher, 2002) requires the CEC to conduct assessments and forecasts of all aspects of energy industry supply, production, transportation, delivery and distribution, demand, and prices. The CEC shall use these assessments and forecasts to develop energy policies that conserve resources, protect the environment, ensure energy reliability, enhance the state's economy, and protect public health and safety. CAR staff monitored this meeting to counter any suggestions to use POS as part of the program by which end user energy efficiency measures would be tracked and rated.
6. California Energy Commission (CEC) Home Energy Rating System (HERS) Program - The CEC is required by Public Resources Code Section 25942 to establish regulations for a HERS Program to certify home energy rating services in California. The goal of the program is to provide reliable information to differentiate the energy efficiency levels among California homes and to guide investment in cost-effective home energy efficiency measures. C.A.R. staff attends and monitors meetings in which public comments are solicited on Phase II of the HERS development program. In addition, formal comments were prepared and electronically submitted to the CEC speaking against the use of POS as the mechanism by which home energy ratings would be performed in California homes.
7. California Energy Commission (CEC) & Davis Energy Group - Large Scale Residential Retrofit Program (LSRRP) - C.A.R was approached by the Davis Energy Group to support a proposed pilot project pending approval by the CEC. Staff reviewed the Large Scale Residential Retrofit Program (LSRRP). We recently penned a letter of support of the program which would pull together a program implementing the AB 811 (Levine, 2008) approach of financing energy efficiency upgrades across an entire subdivision (voluntary participants) via property taxes. If all goes well, the success of the LSRRP will be another arrow in our quiver in the battle against POS. We believe it is an excellent and important step in the right direction to upgrade the existing housing stock and make it more energy efficient. The approach recommended in the LSRRP is not only consistent with C.A.R.’s sensitivity to burdening home sales transactions and increasing the cost of housing at time of sale, the program is also consistent with our belief that to truly address the existing housing stock, a comprehensive community-wide approach is imperative.
8. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan (EESP) - The EESP sets forth a roadmap for energy efficiency in California through 2020 and beyond, that articulates a long-term vision and goals for each economic sector and identifies specific near-term, mid-term and long-term actions to achieve the stated goals. C.A.R. prepared comments to this document, which extols POS as the mechanism by which home energy efficiency audits and improvements are best achieved. C.A.R. is now part of the proceeding and is able to file comments through the official public comment filing process.
9. State Water Board (SWB/SWRCB) 20X2020 - The Bay Delta Strategic Workplan established an objective to increase sustainable water supplies available statewide to meet existing and future beneficial uses by: 1) increasing recycled water use by 980,000 acre-feet per year by 2020 in excess of 2002 levels, 2) achieving a 20 percent reduction in per capita water use statewide by 2020 and 3) encouraging more efficient agricultural. C.A.R. is participating in the Urban Conservation Regulatory Program which will take actions to address water use efficiency for urban and agricultural water users, including an assessment of whether to develop an urban water conservation regulatory program and, if so, what the regulatory program should be.
10. State Water Board (SWB/SWRCB) Onsite Wastewater Disposal System Regulations (AB 885) - The California Association of REALTORS has been participating as a stakeholder in the AB 885 (Jackson, 2000) regulatory process since it began in 2002. During this time, C.A.R created a septic working group and has worked to define and communicate the interests of property owners who currently own, or may someday own, an onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS). After many meetings and discussions between the REALTORS® and other stakeholders, C.A.R.’s concerns have been officially drafted and communicated to the SWB in writing and through the extensive grass-roots efforts of our local REALTORS®. While it appears that the numerous stakeholder interests have brought the regulatory development to a temporary impasse, it is anticipated that the Draft EIR will be released for public review sometime in the near future. Until then, we have no idea what the final verdict will be with regard to the content of the regulations but we will continue to monitor the process. 
 
VI. Other

V. Adjournment