Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Strategy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State board hears phase‑2 plan to treat stormwater as a resource
Summary
State Water Board staff reviewed the Storms program's phase‑2 projects to increase urban stormwater capture, improve monitoring and develop policy tools; staff and stakeholders said more data, standardized cost reporting and finance mechanisms are needed to scale projects.
Lede: The State Water Resources Control Board on June 21 received an informational update on the Strategy to Optimize Resource Management of Stormwater (Storms), which lays out phase‑2 projects to standardize reporting, quantify capture potential and develop new policy and monitoring tools.
Nut graf: Storms staff said the program’s goal is to reposition stormwater from a perceived pollutant to a managed local water resource that can provide water supply, green infrastructure, recreation and habitat benefits. Phase‑2 work includes standardized cost reporting for municipal stormwater permits, localized first‑order estimates of stormwater capture in the Los Angeles and San Francisco watersheds and development of policy tools for metal bioavailability and urban pesticides.
Body: Amanda Miggy (unit lead, Storms) summarized accomplishments from phase‑1 and the program’s 2020 strategy, then introduced staff who reviewed priority projects. Nabeel Lefruz (Storms) described a standardized municipal cost reporting project to provide consistent permit expenditure categories and model permit language; the project held stakeholder workshops and will publish draft model language in spring 2023.
Sahand Rastagarpur (Storms) summarized the team’s first‑order GIS estimates of stormwater capture potential, noting results for two watersheds used in a story map: roughly 250,000 acre‑feet/year of capture potential estimated for the Los Angeles River watershed and roughly 124,000 acre‑feet/year for the San Francisco Bay watershed, with Pacific Institute and other prior estimates ranging from about 600,000 to as much as 3,000,000 acre‑feet per year statewide depending on methods and rainfall inputs. Staff emphasized these are early, local estimates and more refined modeling and monitoring design is planned.
Chris Began (Storms) described a proposed metals bioavailability policy to allow site‑specific objectives using biotic ligand modeling, and Sarah Huber summarized urban pesticide provisions to strengthen coordinated monitoring, outreach and baseline integrated pest management across municipal permittees.
Board members and public commenters pressed for clearer financing pathways and technical assistance so local agencies can build projects and take advantage of federal and state infrastructure funds; multiple speakers urged stronger focus on equity, community benefits and a central data portal. Stakeholder presenters (California Stormwater Quality Association, California Coastkeeper Alliance) welcomed the emphasis on capture and source control and encouraged stronger and faster work to link funding, planning and implementation.
Ending: Staff said phase‑2 work will continue through the next 1–2 years and flagged plans for a public story map and additional outreach; board members asked staff to return with follow‑up on financing options, equity measures and coordination with other programs on outdoor water use and urban greening.
