Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Water Srf Iup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Water Resources Control Board adopts Clean Water SRF intended use plan, asks staff to explore boosting small‑community grants
Summary
The State Water Resources Control Board unanimously adopted the 2026–27 Clean Water State Revolving Fund intended use plan, approving a fundable list and grant limits while directing staff to return with steps to increase small‑community grant authority amid shrinking federal funds.
The State Water Resources Control Board on July 7 adopted its 2026–27 Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) intended use plan, approving the program's fundable project list and grant guidelines and asking staff to return with steps to increase the small‑community grant authority.
Chair Joaquin Esquivel praised staff and stakeholders for the work behind the plan, saying it will help target limited funding where it's needed. Nicole Morgan moved the item; the board voted by roll call and the resolution carried unanimously.
The IUP adds 10 loan projects to the fundable list (about $780 million) and proposes grant limits for water recycling projects (a $15 million cap per project or phase). For the small‑community wastewater grant program, staff proposed a series of caps and prioritization rules intended to stretch scarce subsidy dollars across more projects: planning grants with different caps, construction grant caps per residential connection (higher caps for septic‑to‑sewer and regionalization projects), and a reduced per‑project cap (proposed to drop from $50 million to $30 million) to reflect limited funding.
Mike Downey of the Division of Financial Assistance summarized five years of recent commitments from the program and said the SRF continues to leverage loans and grant elements to support projects statewide. Lisa Hong and Bridget Chase described updates to the loan scoring, water‑recycling grant rules, and the small‑community projections; speakers emphasized co‑funding and program administration challenges, including timely reimbursements and the need to manage amendments as project costs change.
Multiple stakeholder groups spoke in support of the IUP but urged refinements. Stormwater representatives asked for higher per‑project caps and a simplified application path; small‑systems advocates and regional associations asked for careful prioritization so the most urgent public‑health projects can proceed. At the board's request, staff agreed to provide follow‑up information on steps and timetable for increasing small‑community grant authority.
The board's action directs staff to implement the IUP and return with additional analysis and options for altering the small‑community grant authority. The adopted resolution will guide the CWSRF program's work on loans, grants and principal forgiveness for the coming year.
