Battery Storage Ordinance Gets Impact Review in Santa Cruz County, CA

SCOTTS VALLEY — The effort to establish local rules for battery energy storage developments in Santa Cruz County took a significant step forward on Tuesday.

At its first meeting of 2026, the county Board of Supervisors agreed to begin the environmental and county commission review process for a draft ordinance governing battery project siting, construction and operation. The local legislation will now proceed through a monthslong environmental impact report process before being scrutinized by the county’s Agricultural Advisory Commission and Planning Commission. These steps will include multiple opportunities for public comment and feedback, county staff emphasized.

Once those steps are complete, the supervisors asked for the ordinance to return to the board’s agenda for a first reading no later than November.

The unanimous decision, made inside the Scotts Valley City Council Chambers while the board’s own meeting room undergoes renovations, was arrived at almost two months after the board declined to start this same environmental review process during a Nov. 18 meeting on the basis that staff needed to first incorporate refinements to the ordinance draft related to bolstered environmental protections and public safety.

“This is pretty tight and ensures both financial and environmental protections for our community,” said Supervisor Manu Koenig at the meeting. “If we had the opportunity to eliminate all risk by not approving a project at all or making one impossible, I would seriously consider that option. We don’t. We have to simply minimize (risks), and I think this ordinance does that.”

While Tuesday’s decision pertained to General Plan code updates that will eventually apply to all future energy storage projects in unincorporated territory, it occurred within the shadow of one such project that has already been proposed in South County. Massachusetts-based energy developer New Leaf Energy is planning to place 160 battery unit storage containers on 16 acres of a 47-acre parcel at 90 Minto Road in Watsonville.

While New Leaf representatives have repeatedly committed to abiding by county rules and regulations once they’re codified, California has established its own route for streamlining energy storage projects that supersedes local jurisdictions. If the county waits too long to formally create its own rules, New Leaf has explained, financial pressures will mount and force it to turn to the state route.

“Ultimately I believe that what the board is asking for in these core components of an ordinance is stronger and better than what we would get through a state process,” said Supervisor Monica Martinez, who was named board chair for this calendar year earlier in the meeting.

The ordinance, along with the Minto Road development, both continued to receive some pushback from members of the public, many of whom have been consistently voicing their dissatisfaction at meetings for a year. The speakers asked the supervisors to delay any action, based primarily on objections related to fire and environmental safety and the loss of agricultural land.

“There is no going back,” said South County resident Greg Audino. “Are we going to continue to lose prime agricultural land?”

Others from the public suggested their concerns about safety were shared by some officials from across the state by referring to a cease-and-desist notice issued earlier this month by a firefighters union in Los Angeles after an energy storage project was proposed near a fire station in Southern California.

Meanwhile, additional speakers from the public voiced support for energy storage projects at Tuesday’s meeting and were joined in previous meetings by energy experts and some local environmental groups that emphasized the importance of turning to green energy solutions in the face of a worsening climate crisis.

Max Christian, Minto Road project leader with New Leaf Energy, attended Tuesday’s meeting in person to stress that energy storage technology and standards are far superior to what was used at the Vistra power plant fire in Moss Landing, which burned one year ago this week.

“The new outdoor, containerized design is fundamentally different from the first-generation battery storage projects constructed prior to the current national California fire codes,” said Christian. “The proposed ordinance ensures the protection of the public, first responders and air water and soil quality while providing direct benefits to county residents and supporting local, regional and state climate goals.”

As the board requested at its November meeting, county staff detailed revisions to the ordinance that were added during the eight-week interlude. These include 300-foot setbacks from surrounding residences, adequate ingress and egress routes for fire responders, a comparative analysis of available storage technologies to minimize the risk of thermal runaway, installation of a runoff catchment system to prevent contamination of the surrounding land in the event of a fire, as well as soil and water testing prior to project installation that will continue once the facility is operational.

Other notable additions include heightened security measures, a shifting of financial responsibility on to developers — especially in case of an emergency — labor requirements and plans for decommissioning a facility that include battery disposal.

At the request of Supervisor Justin Cummings, the motion also directed county staff include language requiring the board to approve transfer of ownership of an energy storage facility before it can proceed; to explore the feasibility of a 3-1 replacement of commercial agricultural land impacted by developments; and that references to agricultural conservation easements specify that the easements are on viable and accessible agriculture land.

Asked by Koenig if the ordinance was consistent with Measure J, a county initiative passed in 1978 to tamp down on urban sprawl, county Counsel Jason Heath reassured the board that there was little risk in that regard.

“From a legal perspective, I don’t have any concerns at all that what your board is doing here would violate Measure J,” said Heath.

Cummings and Supervisor Kim De Serpa both expressed discomfort with moving forward Tuesday, but recognized alternatives were limited given that New Leaf explicitly stated that if the process was delayed any further, they’d apply with the state.

Supervisor Felipe Hernandez reassured the public that the action this week is the beginning — not the end — of a public process that will play out for months to come.

“Today’s action is not an approval of a specific project,” said Hernandez, requesting that county staff continue to spread the word when opportunities for public input arise in the future.

The board will receive another update about ordinance development efforts in August.

© 2026 the Santa Cruz Sentinel (Scotts Valley, Calif.). Visit www.santacruzsentinel.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.