California Assembly Bill AB2720

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/20
• Refer: 3/12/20

Caption

California Environmental Quality Act: negative declarations and mitigated negative declarations: groundwater recharge projects.

Impact

The significance of AB 2720 lies in its potential to streamline the approval process for vital groundwater recharge initiatives in California. Given the state’s challenges with water scarcity and the increasing emphasis on sustainable groundwater management, this legislation could enable timely protective measures that promote water conservation and agricultural sustainability. The bill reinforces the necessity for lead agencies to assess environmental effects critically, ensuring projects are not overly hindered by regulatory barriers when aiming to enhance water resources.

Summary

Assembly Bill 2720, introduced by Assembly Member Salas, proposes to modify the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by adding a new section to the Public Resources Code. Specifically, this bill aims to facilitate the process for groundwater recharge projects that take place on agricultural lands that have been fallowed as a result of management actions dictated by groundwater sustainability plans. The bill mandates that for such projects, lead agencies must adopt a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration if there is substantial evidence indicating that the project would not have significant environmental effects.

Contention

However, the bill does raise questions regarding the adequacy of environmental protections. Critics may argue that fast-tracking negative declarations for groundwater recharge projects could overlook potential environmental impacts. There could be concerns from environmental advocacy groups that such provisions might lead to insufficient evaluations of projects, especially in areas where ecological sensitivities exist. The stipulation that no reimbursement is required for local agencies regarding costs associated with this act may also lead to contentious debates on funding responsibilities and local agency operational capabilities.