Public Resources: sea level rise plans.

Assembly Member Pellerin directs local coastal authorities to align sea level rise planning with a defined content framework while preserving oversight by the state’s coastal and Bay commissions, weaving policy substance and authorial intent into a cohesive approach to coastal resilience. The measure requires local governments within the coastal zone or the San Francisco Bay jurisdiction to develop sea level rise plans that include a scientifically grounded basis, an equity-focused vulnerability assessment, identified adaptation strategies and projects, clearly named lead agencies, and a timeline for updates tied to conditions and projections.

It also introduces a deeming authority for the commissions, allowing existing sea level rise information or plans to satisfy all or part of the new content requirements when appropriate. In addition, the proposal creates a voluntary early consultation pathway with the California Coastal Commission to help local governments prepare for formal submissions; participation is optional and does not suspend the standard review framework. The early consultation process contemplates a written initiation, a status-summary report, potential draft components, a schedule for meetings, and written recommendations from staff within a mutually agreed timeframe.

Compliance and implementation are anchored by a hard deadline for full conformity with the amended content requirements, with a targeted update cycle that requires economic impact analyses of costs to critical public infrastructure. “Critical public infrastructure” is defined to include assets such as transit systems, roads, airports, ports, water storage and conveyance, wastewater facilities, landfills, power plants, and railways. An encouragement for early consultation runs through 2029, and the formal submission pathway remains governed by the existing oversight structure and guidelines established by the coastal and Bay commissions.

On the fiscal and regulatory front, the measure preserves current regulatory authority while signaling no new appropriation is required. It foregrounds a deliberate integration of best-available science, equity considerations, and infrastructure-cost analyses into local resilience planning, maintaining alignment with existing guidelines and oversight rather than creating a parallel regulatory track. The provisions aim to clarify planning expectations, reduce potential duplication where feasible, and provide a transparent path for local governments to engage with state agencies early in the certification process.