BILL ANALYSIS
SB 732
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 3, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Anna Marie Caballero, Chair
SB 732 (Steinberg) - As Amended: June 28, 2007
SENATE VOTE : 24-14
SUBJECT : Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood
Control, River and Coastal Protection Act of 2006.
SUMMARY : Creates and implements several new programs for which
funding is made available under Proposition 84. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Does the following for purposes of implementing the provision
of Proposition 84 that makes $90 million available for nature
education and research facilities, including natural history
museums, aquariums, research facilities, and botanical
gardens:
a)Directs the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) to
develop and implement a competitive grant program to
allocate these funds to eligible institutions, and prohibits
grants from being awarded for ongoing activities.
b)Requires that additional consideration be given to projects
that serve underserved communities, including but not
limited to disadvantaged communities with limited access to
parks and nature education facilities, or communities with
low educational achievement, that cooperate with public
educational institutions to increase accessibility, that
illustrate an ongoing commitment of financial resources to
the project, and that utilize the U.S. Green Council's
building standards.
c)Requires DPR to allow for several granting cycles, and
requires that the program be designed to fund a range of
projects at natural history museums, aquariums, botanical
gardens, and nature centers, and permits DPR to establish a
tiered grant maximum schedule based on factors including the
number of visitors served.
2)Does the following for purposes of implementing the provision
of Proposition 84 that makes $400 million available for
SB 732
Page 2
competitive grants for local and regional parks:
a)Directs DPR to develop a competitive grant program to
distribute funds fairly among all Californians, and provides
that the program shall be known as the "Statewide Parks Act
of 2007."
b)Provides that the funds shall be available through three
competitive grant programs, one
for projects in heavily urbanized counties (population over
1,000,000), one for projects in urbanized counties
(population over 200,000 but less than 1,000,000), and one
for projects in nonurbanized counties (population equal to
or less than 200,000).
c)Provides that each of the three programs shall receive a
portion of funds equal to the proportion that the combined
population of the eligible counties bears to the population
of the state.
d)Specifies that cities, counties, regional park districts,
districts, and nonprofit organizations shall be eligible
applicants. Provides that eligible projects include
neighborhood, local and regional parks that include, but are
not limited to, open space, public parks, park facilities,
environmental youth service centers, gymnasiums, sports
fields, recreation areas created through redesign of urban
freeways, and regional recreational trails.
e)Requires that each program fund a balance of passive and
active recreation, fund both new parks and new
opportunities, and distribute funds over multiple grant
cycles.
f)Requires that priority be given to projects that satisfy
specified criteria, including that the project provides
access to underserved communities, creates parks in
neighborhoods where none currently exist, involves
community-based groups, satisfies urgent recreation needs,
with an emphasis on unmet needs in the most heavily
populated and economically disadvantaged communities within
each of the three programs, and provides multiple benefits
to communities.
SB 732
Page 3
g)Requires that additional consideration be given to projects
that are a component of an existing local or regional
general plan, park master plan or regional blueprint, and
projects that facilitate partnerships with public schools.
h)Requires DPR to develop a procedural guide, which would be
exempt from the Administrative Procedures Act, and to
provide technical assistance to underserved communities.
3)Does the following for purposes of implementing the sections
of Proposition 84 on sustainable communities and climate
change reduction, including urban greening and planning
grants, and implementing the section of Proposition 1C that
makes funds available for housing-related park grants:
a)Establishes the Sustainable Communities Council (Council) to
coordinate the activities
of various state agencies that aim to improve air and water
quality, improve natural resource protection, increase
availability of affordable housing, and improve
transportation through land use planning.
b)Provides that the Council shall consist of the Secretary of
Resources (chair), the Secretary of Environmental
Protection, the Secretary of Business Transportation and
Housing, and two members of the public appointed by the
Governor, and provides that one member
of the Senate appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and one
member appointed by the Assembly Speaker shall meet with the
council and may participate to the extent not inconsistent
with legislative office.
c)Requires the Council to develop a program to award grants
and loans for the following programs:
i) To cities and counties for preparing and adopting
general plans;
ii) To cities and counties for implementing general
plans, which may include specific plans, habitat
conservation plans, zoning ordinances and design
standards, and requires that additional consideration be
given for plans that meet specified criteria;
SB 732
Page 4
iii) To councils of governments, countywide authorities,
and metropolitan planning organizations for regional
blueprint planning or regional growth plans that will
serve as the preferred growth strategy for the region and
the basis for all land use allocation and regional
transportation plans that meet specified criteria;
iv) To counties to prepare collaborative strategic
growth plans, which align general plans with regional
plans.
d)Requires the Council to develop and implement a grant
program for urban greening projects that provide multiple
community benefits, and aim to protect the environment while
improving the quality of life.
e)Provides that eligible projects include, but are not limited
to, projects that are part of a local or regional growth
plan, install permeable surfaces to reduce stormwater
runoff, vegetation projects that provide cooling and reduce
stormwater runoff, projects that provide agricultural and
nutritional benefits to communities, urban forestry
projects, and urban trails that provide safe routes between
residences, schools, community centers and workplaces.
f)Requires the Council to develop and implement a local
assistance grant program for the development of parks
associated with housing for the purpose of distributing
funds made available under Proposition 1C for urban,
suburban and rural parks, and requires that the program
shall build on the guidelines and structure established for
the three competitive local park grant programs under
Proposition 84 for nonurbanized, urbanized and heavily
urbanized counties.
4)Requires, for purposes of implementing the provision of
Proposition 84 that makes
$65 million available for statewide water planning and design,
the Department of Water Resources, in collaboration with other
agencies, to conduct a study to reduce flood risks and
increase water supply reliability by reoperating the existing
flood management and water supply facilities.
5)Includes investor-owned utilities in the definition of "local
public agency" in the water code, but also states legislative
SB 732
Page 5
intent that any public funds under Proposition 84 made
available to investor-owned utilities regulated by the Public
Utilities Commission should be for the benefit of the
ratepayers or the public and not the investors.
6)Declares the Legislature's intent to provide grants or loans
to help local agencies complete or update local coastal
programs.
7)Requires each state agency distributing grants or loans from
Proposition 84 to develop project solicitation and evaluation
guidelines by March 15, 2008.
8)Requires the guidelines to be developed with public
participation through at least one public meeting at a
geographically appropriate location, except requires for
statewide programs that one meeting be conducted in Southern
California and one in Northern California.
9)Authorizes the guidelines to include a limitation on grant or
loan amounts, and to require applicants to illustrate an
ongoing commitment of financial resources, except for projects
that assist a disadvantaged community.
10)Requires outreach and technical assistance to disadvantaged
communities.
11)Requires the Department of Health Care to develop guidelines
in collaboration with the Department of Toxic Substances
Control for purposes of implementing the groundwater
contamination provision of Proposition 84.
12)Requires the Department of Fish and Game, in funding a
Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) to only fund a
NCCP that is consistent with the state NCCP Act.
13)Requires, before a negative declaration is adopted for any
project, that the lead agency refer the proposed action to a
Native American tribe if the tribe has traditional lands
located in the project area.
14)Authorizes the San Francisco Bay Area Conservancy to use
funds made available to the Conservancy in Proposition 84 to
restore the salt ponds in the San Francisco Bay and to create
trails and visitor facilities for public use.
SB 732
Page 6
15)Requires each state agency responsible for allocating a
portion of Proposition 84 monies to submit an annual report to
the Legislature that includes the recipient, purpose, and
amount
of each project, grant, or loan awarded during the previous
fiscal year. Requires the information to include data on the
balance of the fund available for expenditures in future
fiscal years.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes approximately $5.4 billion in general obligation
bonds for safe drinking water, water quality and water supply,
flood control, natural resource protection, and park
improvements pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water, Water
Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal
Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84), and allocates
$100 million for nature education and research facilities and
$580 million for urban greening programs, local and regional
parks, and planning grants and incentives.
2)Authorizes $2.86 billion in general obligation bonds for
various housing programs, infill development, brownfield
clean-up, and housing-related parks, pursuant to the Housing
and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006 (Proposition 1C),
creates the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund, and
allocates $200 million to the Housing Urban-Suburban-and-Rural
Parks Account.
FISCAL EFFECT : Provides statutory direction for allocation of
bond funds made available through Proposition 84 and Proposition
1C.
COMMENTS :
1)Some of the funding authorized in Proposition 84 can be
allocated through existing programs. However, there are a
number of funding categories that require new programs. In
particular, the sustainable communities/urban greening and
planning incentives sections of Proposition 84 provide funding
for new programs that do not currently exist and therefore
require implementing legislation. The local park bond section
of Proposition 84 states that those funds may be allocated
pursuant to existing programs or pursuant to legislation
enacted to implement that section. SB 732 attempts to take a
SB 732
Page 7
comprehensive approach to allocating these funds. In
addition, it extends its reach beyond the scope of Proposition
84 and incorporates $200 million in housing-related park bonds
from Proposition 1C.
2)SB 732 includes programs to allocate the $100 million
Proposition 84 provides for nature education and research
facilities and the $400 million provided for regional and
local parks. These provisions of the bill were thoroughly
analyzed by the Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife, which
heard and passed SB 732 on June 26, 2007, and fall outside the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Local Government.
3)SB 732 creates the Sustainable Communities Council (Council),
the membership of which consists of the Secretaries of the
Resources Agency (who serves as Chair), CalEPA, and Business,
Transportation, and Housing, along with two public members
appointed by the Governor. The makeup of the Sustainable
Communities Council is similar to the structure
of the Ocean Protection Council. According to the author, the
objective of a sustainable communities program transcends the
jurisdiction and expertise of any one agency, and requires a
multi-disciplinary, integrated approach. For that reason,
this bill proposes creation of a council that can draw on the
expertise of different agencies and departments within those
agencies.
4)The sustainable communities program created by SB 732 makes
loan funds available to cities and counties for preparing and
adopting or implementing general plans, and to councils
of governments (COGs) and other regional entities for preparing
and adopting or implementing regional blueprint planning.
Grants will not be awarded unless the Council determines that
an applicant lacks the fiscal capacity to carry out the
proposed planning.
5)In order to obtain loan or grant funds (which may not exceed
one-half of the total costs of the general plan project), a
city, county, or COG would be required to submit and follow a
detailed budget and schedule, and declare the existence of or
intention to prepare and adopt a general plan or regional
blueprint that substantially complies with the relevant
statutory requirements of the Planning and Zoning Law and
Proposition 84. In addition, a city or county would need to
demonstrate that its current or proposed general plan is
SB 732
Page 8
consistent with either a regional blueprint project or a
regional transportation plan, and declare its intention to
review and, when necessary, update the general plan funded by
the Council.
6)In addition to the above requirements, local governments would
receive additional consideration if they adopt resolutions
declaring their intent to prepare their general plans in
collaboration with the other cities within a county and the
county or the other cities within the same COG so that the
result is a collaborative strategy implementing policies that
support efficient land uses. Additional consideration would
also result from passage of resolutions to
include data, analysis, goals, policies, objectives, and
implementation programs for air quality and flood hazards,
whether or not the city or county is required to do so, or to
impose fees to generate revenue to pay a portion of the costs
to review and revise the general plan funded by the Council.
7)Finally, the Council is to grant "additional consideration to
a grant or loan . . . for each of the following criteria
satisfied:"
a) Implementation of the state's planning policies;
b) Approval of housing projects over development that
generates sales tax revenues;
c) Conservation, rehabilitation, and enhancement of
existing neighborhoods;
d) Protection and preservation of agricultural land;
e) Acquisition, protection, and management of open-space
land;
f) Adoption of zoning and development standards that
facilitate new affordable housing projects;
g) Urban revitalization, code enforcement, and sign
control;
h) Cultural resource protection and historic preservation;
SB 732
Page 9
i) Healthy community initiatives, including community
greening and safe routes to schools;
j) Replacement or improvement of critical local
infrastructure;
aa) Achievement of applicable air quality implementation
plans;
bb) Reduction of vehicle miles traveled per household and
traffic congestion;
cc) Provision of parks, recreation areas, and facilities
throughout the community;
dd) Planning for urban trails that provide safe routes for
both recreation and for travel between residences, schools,
commercial centers, and workplaces, including regional
recreation corridors;
ee) Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions consistent with
the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB
32); and/or
ff) Active solicitation of public involvement in the
development and implementation of the plan.
8)SB 732 also proposes to allocate the $90 million Proposition
84 provides for urban greening projects. It requires the
Council to develop and implement a grant program for urban
greening projects that provide multiple community benefits,
and aim to protect the environment while improving the quality
of life, and provides that eligible projects include, but are
not limited to, projects that are part of a local or regional
growth plan, install permeable surfaces to reduce stormwater
runoff, vegetation projects that provide cooling and reduce
stormwater runoff, projects that provide agricultural and
nutritional benefits to communities, urban forestry projects,
and urban trails that provide safe routes between residences,
schools, community centers and workplaces. The bill does not
create anywhere near as many possible criteria for
establishing priority among urban greening applicants as it
does for planning projects. It merely states that priority is
to be given to projects that use existing facilities, serve
communities with the greatest need, and facilitate joint use
SB 732
Page 10
of public resources and investments.
9)SB 732 provides that the $200 million in the Housing
Urban-Suburban-and-Rural Parks Account created by Proposition
1C shall be allocated through a local assistance grant program
administered by the Council. It requires that this program
build upon the guidelines and structure established in SB 732
for the Proposition 84 local park bonds, which creates three
competitive programs for nonurbanized counties, urbanized
counties, and heavily urbanized counties.
10)SB 732 has been characterized as a "work in progress," as
indeed have almost all of the bills dealing with the
allocation of bond funds made available after the November
2006 election. This bill contains several matters of potential
concern that the Committee may wish to ask the author and
proponents to address:
a) SB 732 requires any applicant for planning funding to
declare that its general plan or regional blueprint project
is or will be consistent with the goals of Proposition 84,
which state that the planning funds are to be used to
promote water conservation, reduce automobile use and fuel
consumption, encourage greater infill and compact
development, protect natural resources and agricultural
lands, and revitalize urban and community centers.
However, the bill also directs the Council to give
additional consideration to proposals that "satisfy"
additional "criteria," which include conservation,
rehabilitation, and enhancement of existing neighborhoods,
urban revitalization, code enforcement, and sign control,
cultural resource protection and historic preservation, and
healthy community initiatives, including community greening
and safe routes to schools, all of which appear to be
aspects of urban and community center revitalization. The
"additional" criteria of protection and preservation of
agricultural land and the acquisition, protection, and
management of open-space land also appear to be no more
than fulfillment of the Proposition 84 requirement that
planning projects protect natural resources and
agricultural land. Are these in fact additional, or are
they means by which a city or county can demonstrate that
its plan meets the requirements of Proposition 84?
b) Also, how does a city or county "satisfy" these
SB 732
Page 11
additional criteria? Do they have to have actually
achieved them, or only planned for them? Should more
weight be given to jurisdictions that have actually
achieved these things? If so, should the benefit for the
achievement come in the form of planning funding, or should
it take the form of a head start for funds for
implementation of plans, such as the urban greening money?
c) With regard to the Proposition 1C housing related park
bonds, the Committee may wish to consider seriously whether
it is appropriate to apply Proposition 84-derived criteria
to a significant source of funding from a source intended
to provide for a different aspect
of the state's needs. The superficial fact that both the
$200 million from Proposition 1C and the $400 million form
Proposition 84 are for parks should not obscure the deeper
fact that there are significant differences in the goals of
each program. The Committee may wish to question the
prudence of taking funds clearly intended to create an
incentive for the production of affordable housing and
turning them into a program built upon the guidelines and
structure established in SB 732 for the Proposition 84
local park bonds, which currently give no priority to
projects related to affordable housing.
11)Related Legislation : A number of bills related to
implementation of parts of Proposition 84 and Proposition 1C
have passed from their houses of origin this year. Bills that
would implement some of the same provisions as SB 732 include:
a) AB 31 (De Leon) - This bill would create the
Neighborhood Park and Recreation Revitalization Act of 2007
to provide for allocation of the local park bond funds in
Proposition 84 through a competitive grant program, with
standards similar to the existing Urban Parks Act.
Proposed amendments being considered to this measure would
delete the urban limitations in the bill and instead limit
eligibility to projects that would serve critically
underserved communities, defined as a project within a
census tract with less than two acres of park land per one
thousand population, and would require that priority be
given to projects meeting certain specified criteria.
b) AB 1252 (Caballero) - This bill establishes the housing
SB 732
Page 12
related park program to be administered by the Department
of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to allocate
bonds authorized by Proposition 1C for parks. Communities
that issue building permits for affordable housing would be
eligible to receive funds. This bill is modeled after
HCD's Workforce Housing Rewards program.
c) AB 1253 (Caballero) - This bill would create a
sustainable communities planning program that would make
planning grants available to communities that have updated
general plans and certified housing elements and have
demonstrated achievement in certain goals such as increased
density, infill, and agricultural land protection.
d) AB 1053 (Nunez) - This bill, among other things,
requires that $100 million of the $200 million authorized
in Proposition 1C for parks shall be transferred to HCD's
Workforce Housing Reward program.
12)SB 732 has been double-referred to the Committee on Water,
Parks, and Wildlife, which passed it by a vote of 9-2 on June
26, 2007, and the Committee on Local Government.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Aquarium of the Pacific
CA Park & Recreation Society
CA ReLeaf
City of Claremont
City of Glendale Parks, Recreation and Community Services
Department
County of Los Angeles
Peninsula Open Space Trust
SB 732
Page 13
Sacramento Tree Foundation
The Nature Conservancy
TreePeople
Morris B. Vance, Mayor, City of Vista
Barry E. Weiss, Director, City of San Carlos Parks and
Recreation Department
Opposition
CA Association of Realtors (unless amended)
CA Building Industry Association (unless amended)
CA Business Properties Association (unless amended)
Consulting Engineers & Land Surveyors of CA (unless amended)
CA Major Builders Council (unless amended)
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Friant Water Authority (unless amended)
Southern CA Water Committee
Analysis Prepared by : J. Stacey Sullivan / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958