The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday moved forward with proposed rules aimed at regulating large-scale battery energy storage systems, which if approved in November would allow the controversial facilities in unincorporated areas while giving county officials some oversight when they are built.
The draft ordinance would amend the county’s General Plan and County Code to allow battery energy storage systems, or BESS, under a new combining district. The proposal applies outside the coastal zone and generally targets facilities near existing electrical transmission substations.
The board also directed staff to begin environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act and referred the proposal to the county Agricultural Advisory Commission and Planning Commission for review and recommendations.
The draft ordinance is a response to board direction given during a Nov. 18 meeting, when supervisors asked staff to strengthen standards related to public safety, agricultural land protection and emergency response.
Tuesday’s discussion did not directly address a proposed BESS facility on Minto Road in Watsonville.
County staff have warned that if supervisors do not establish a framework of local rules, developers could bypass county permitting and apply through a state process instead.
That could allow the developers to ignore rules such as Measure J, a 1978 voter-approved growth-control measure that limits development of agricultural land.
“It’s a pretty challenging decision for us to make and it’s a pretty challenging topic for us to work on, especially given the fact that this is another instance where a lot of local control has been removed by the state,” Supervisor Justin Cummings said. “Where if we don’t try to work together as a community and figure something out, the state’s just going to approve it, and we don’t know what that would look like.”
Among the proposed requirements are 300-foot setbacks from residences, limits on noise, additional access for first responders, on-site containment for runoff, security measures and a dedicated water supply.
Developers would be required to use the best available technology, conduct soil and water testing before and after construction, and submit a decommissioning plan addressing battery disposal.
The proposal also includes agricultural mitigation requirements when facilities are sited on farmland. That would include a 3-to-1 replacement ratio for agricultural resources.
Cummings also requested a provision that would require the board to approve new owners when facilities are sold. He said that rule would help prevent companies with poor safety records from taking over local projects.
Cummings referenced Vistra Corp., the company that owns the Moss Landing battery storage site where a fire on Jan. 16, 2025 burned for days and sent a massive plume of toxic black smoke into the air.
“Vistra doesn’t have that good of a record, and we don’t want to have a company like that come in,” he said.
Under the draft rules, developers would also be required to pay for project-related costs, including road and drainage upgrades, emergency response equipment and first responder training. The ordinance would require financial guarantees to cover potential hazardous incidents.
County officials described energy storage as an essential part of California’s shift away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. Battery energy storage facilities store electricity for use during peak demand and outages.
About 10 people addressed the board, many expressing concern about BESS facilities being placed in the county.
Karell Reader of Corralitos asked supervisors to consider families that could be impacted.
“You need to feel when you vote that the ordinance that you are shaping—the future that you’re shaping—is something where you would want to buy a house next to an energy storage facility, or you would want your children or grandchildren to be raised there,” she said.
