Assigned to NREW FOR
COMMITTEE
Assigned to NREW FOR
COMMITTEE
ARIZONA STATE SENATE
Fifty-Third Legislature, Second Regular Session
adequate water supply; county review.
Purpose
Establishes a review process for water adequacy requirements that have been adopted by a county board of supervisors (BOS) in a county that is outside an Active Management Area (AMA).
Background
Current law requires a developer to obtain a determination from the state regarding the sufficiency of water supplies before a subdivision can be marketed. The Director of DWR is required to evaluate the water supplies that will be used for a new subdivision based on the development’s projected needs, the source of the water and the method of delivery. If the subdivision is inside an AMA, lots may not be sold unless the Director of DWR determines that an assured water supply exists.
If the development is outside an AMA and sufficient water exists to support the development, a certificate of adequate water supply is issued. If the water supply is determined to be inadequate, the property may still be sold, and information on the water supply must be included in documents provided at the initial sale of the property. An adequate water supply is one that will be available for current and committed uses for at least 100 years. The 100-year supply must be physically, legally and continuously available.
An adequate water supply can be demonstrated in one of two ways: 1) the developer has a water supply that is determined to be adequate or sufficient to supply the water needs of the development for 100 years; or 2) the development will be served by a city, town or private water company that has been designated by the Director of DWR as having an adequate water supply.
Currently, the BOS of a county located outside an AMA may adopt an adequacy provision, by unanimous vote, requiring all new subdivisions to have an adequate water supply for the proposed development to be approved by the platting authority. If adopted, the provision applies countywide and may not be rescinded (A.R.S. § 11-823).
There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the state General Fund associated with this legislation.
Provisions
1. Requires the BOS of a county that is not in an AMA and that has adopted an adequacy provision to review the adequacy provision:
a) within five years of the general effective date; and
b) at least every ten years thereafter, but not more than every five years.
2. Allows the BOS to vote on whether to continue the adequacy provision and specifies that if no vote is taken, the adequacy provision remains in effect.
3. Provides that the adequacy provision will remain in effect unless the BOS votes unanimously not to readopt the provision.
4. Provides that if the adequacy provision is not readopted:
a) the BOS will provide written notice to the State Real Estate Commissioner and the directors of ADWR and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality; and
b) the adequacy provision has no further force only if specified water conservation measures are in place at the time of the vote.
5. Makes technical and conforming changes.
6. Becomes effective on the general effective date.
House Action
EENR 2/13/18 DPA 6-3-0-0
3rd Read 2/20/18 32-27-1
Prepared by Senate Research
March 15, 2018
KK/lat