2- Agenda Summary - Land Use and Environmental Committee
Agenda Summary - Land Use and Environmental CommitteeMarriott Conference Center
Colton Room I/II/III – Level Three
Monterey, California
Thursday, January 18, 2007
8:00 a.m.-9:50 a.m.Presiding:
Carol Banner, Chair
Richard Tegley, Vice Chair
Lenny Sciacca, Vice Chair
Frank Nelson, Committee Liaison
Bradley Garbutt, Rural Forum ChairC.A.R. Staff:
Elizabeth Gavric, Legislative AdvocateI. Opening Comments: Chairman BannerII. Discussion/Information ItemsA. New Point of Sale Booklet - Home Energy Efficiency Handbook - A verbal report will be given at the meeting.B. Report from Onsite Wastewater Disposal “Septic” Working Group: Current Status of SWRCB AB 885 Draft Statewide Regulations for Septic Systems – A verbal report will be given at the meeting.C. Report from REALTOR Committee on Air Quality – A verbal report will be given at the meeting.D. Coastal Building and Remodeling Restrictions in Santa Cruz County – A verbal report will be given at the meeting.E. Flood Control1. AB 5 (Wolk) – Flood Protection: local: central valley: plans
This bill would create the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan to address flood protection in the Central Valley, authorize local agencies to create local plans of flood protection, and would require priority for state funds to be given to local agencies that have adopted a local plan of flood protection. The bill would also create the Local Flood Protection Plan Assistance Fund to award grants to agencies to develop local flood protection plans. The bill would also prohibit local governments in the Central Valley from approving new developments within high-risk flood prone areas, unless conditions are met to ensure appropriate levels of flood protection. CAR position: NRF.2. AB 26 (Nakanishi) - Flood control: natural community conservation plan
This bill would require the California Department of Fish and Game to enter into a planning agreement with the State Reclamation Board, in consultation with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies, to prepare a natural community conservation plan that encompasses the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage Districts to provide comprehensive management and conservation of multiple wildlife species. The bill would exempt flood control or flood management activity identified in a plan implementation agreement from the above-described notification and lake or streambed alteration agreement requirements. CAR position: NRF.3. AB 70 (Jones) – Flood liability
This bill would subject a city or county to joint liability with the state, whether or not the city or county directly participates in the operation or maintenance of a flood control project. The liability would be for property damage sustained in a flood in which a new development was approved in a previously undeveloped area that is protected by a project levee where flood levels are anticipated to exceed 3 feet for a 200-year flood event. CAR position: NRF. 4. SB 5 (Machado) – Flood management
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations regarding the necessity of developing a comprehensive integrated flood policy and flood management program that addresses all aspects of flood management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the state, local flood management agencies, cities and counties, developers, and property owners as part of an integrated flood policy. This bill would also integrate the flood-related funding authorized by flood bond acts with the integrated flood policy and flood management program. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to establish and clarify the roles and responsibilities of specified entities for managing flood risk and to invest bond funds made available by the bond acts consistent with those roles and responsibilities. CAR position: NRF.5. SB 6 (Oropeza) – Flood control
This bill would require the consideration of existing climate predictions regarding ocean levels in the approval of a tentative map or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, and for the mapping and identification of flood risk for local land-use planning to avoid or reduce future flood risks and damages. CAR position: NRF.6. SB 17 (Florez) –Flood protection
Thisbill would rename and revise the membership of the Reclamation Board. The bill wouldauthorize the board to collaborate with state and federal agencies, if appropriate, regarding certain multi-objective flood management strategies and would require the California Department of Water Resources to prepare reports on the status of the State Plan of Flood Control and to submit the report to the Governor, Legislature and the board. The bill would require the department to inspect the project levees, as defined, and to include certain components in reports. The bill would require the board, on or before December 31, 2010, to prepare and adopt a strategic flood protection plan that would be updated every 5 years, and would include standards for levee construction, operation, and maintenance. The bill would require the board to review local and regional land use plans to ensure their compliance with flood protection and public safety standards adopted by the board. The bill would require the board to review, andauthorize the board to make recommendations regarding, flood control plans adopted by local public agencies, and prohibit the board from allocating any funds to a local public agency for a flood control project unless the board determines that project ensures adequate flood protection consistent with existing law. The bill would establish procedures for the decertification of locally maintained flood control facilities as a part of the State Plan of Flood Control. CAR position: NRF.7. SB 34 (Torlakson) – User fees and assessments: Sacramento – San Joaquin Delta flood control
Under existing law, various levee or conveyance system maintenance programs are undertaken by federal, state, or local public agencies. Proposition 1E, approved by the voters at the November 7, 2006, general election, enacted the $4.1 million Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006. This bill would declare legislative intent to authorize the Reclamation Board, in consultation with the Department of Water Resources, to establish a "beneficiary pays system" and to collect user fees and assessments for levee maintenance and other flood control purposes in the delta. This bill would further declare legislative intent that a significant portion of the state bond funds approved in Proposition 1E be prioritized in conjunction with the "beneficiary pays system." CAR position: NRF.F. Water Quality and Supply1. AB 19 (DeVore) – Water quality: Santa Ana region
This bill would establish the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Improvement Fund and would authorize the developer of a development project, if the developer has become subject to regulation by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Improvement Board (SARWQIB), to agree to pay a fee to the appropriate city or county, based on the acreage and density of the proposed development project, for deposit in the fund. The bill would authorize the SARWQIB to expend these funds for research relating to urban runoff. The research is to be conducted by certain educational institutions, as specified, for formulation of mitigation measures for proposed development projects, and for mitigation projects that are approved by that board for the purposes of improving water quality within the region, including projects to mitigate the impacts of urban runoff. CAR position: NRF.2. AB 41 (La Malfa) – Water resources: bond proceeds
The $4.09 billion Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, was approved by the voters at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election to finance disaster preparedness and flood prevention projects. The $5.4 billion Safe Drinking Water, Water Qualityand Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, was approved by the voters at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election to finance a safe drinking, water quality and supply, flood control, and resource protection program. This bill would declare that it is the intent of the Legislature that the funds derived from these bond acts, consistent with the intent of the voters, be expended in the most cost-efficient and effective manner and, to the greatest extent possible, to address this state's critical lack of adequate surface water storage. CAR position: NRF.3. SB 8 (Kuehl) – California Bay-Delta Authority Act
This bill would add Environmental Justice to the program elements of the California Bay-Delta which currently consist of Levee system integrity, Water quality, Water supply reliability, Ecosystem restoration, Water use efficiency, Water transfer, Watershed, Storage, Conveyance, Science, and Environmental water account. CAR position: NRF.4. SB 27 (Simitian) Clean Drinking Water, Water Supply Security, and Environmental Improvement Bond Act of 2007
This bill would enact the Clean Drinking Water, Water Supply Security, and Environmental Improvement Bond Act of 2007 which, if approved by the voters would authorize, for purposes of financing a water conveyance and environmental improvement program, the issuance, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, of bonds in the amount of $5,000,000,000. CAR position: NRF.5. SCA 2 (Simitian) – Clean Drinking Water, Water Supply Security, andEnvironmental Improvement Bond Act of 2007
Existing provisions of the California Constitution prohibit the creation by the Legislature of debts in excess of $300,000 except for a single object or work specified in a law creating the debt, which is approved by the people by a majority of the votes cast in a statewide general or direct primary election. This measure would establish requirements for the amendment or repeal of SB 27 (Simitian), a bond measure designated as the "Clean Drinking Water, Water Supply Security, and Environmental Improvement Bond Act of 2007". This measure would provide that it would become operative only if the described bond measure is approved by the voters at an unspecified statewide election, and would provide, in that event, that it would become operative commencing on an unspecified date. CAR position: NRF.G. Planning and Zoning1. AB 29 (Hancock) – Infill development: incentive grants
Existing law, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $2.85 billion. Proceeds from the sale of these bonds are required to be used to finance various existing housing programs, capitaloutlay related toinfill development, Brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. This bill would require certain of those funds to be made available to the Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing for distribution to designated councils of governments to fund competitive infill incentive grants for local public agencies that meet certain, listed criteria. CAR position: NRF.2. AB 31 (De Leon) – Murray-Frommer Urban Parks andRenewal Act
This bill would change definitions in the Urban Park Act of 2006, for the term "heavily urbanized county" to include counties with a population of 350,000 or more people and a density of at least 900 persons per square mile.CAR position: NRF.3. AB 82 (Evans) – Local planning: agricultural land
The Planning and Zoning Law requires that the general plan of a city or county include specified elements, including a land useelement that designates the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of the land for, among other things, housing, business, industry, and open space, including agriculture, and an open-space element. The Planning and Zoning Law defines the local open-space plan as the open-space element and that open-space use includes, among other things, open space used for the managed production of resources, including, but not limited to, agricultural lands and areas of economic importance for the production of food and fiber. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would encourage the preservation of agricultural land and would encourage local governments to enhance, through the local planningprocess, the recognition of the importance of agricultural production to the state and local economy. CAR position: NRF.H. Eminent Domain1. ACA 2 (Walters) Eminent Domain
The California Constitution authorizes private property to be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation has been paid to, or into court for, the owner of the property. This measure would instead permit private property to be taken or damaged only for a stated public use and only when just compensation has been paid to, or into court for, the owner of the property. The measure would also prohibit, with respect to both new and pending eminent domain projects that involve the exercise of thepower of eminent domain, a community redevelopment agency, community development commission, or joint powers agency that has the power of eminent domain from exercising that power to acquire any real property if ownership of the property will be transferred to a private party or private entity, except as specified. CAR position: NRF.III. OtherIV. Adjournment
