BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 620|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 620
Author: Wright (D)
Amended: 4/23/13
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 4-0, 4/17/13
AYES: Wolk, Beall, DeSaulnier, Liu
NO VOTE RECORDED: Knight, Emmerson, Hernandez
SUBJECT : Water replenishment districts
SOURCE : Water Replenishment District of Southern California
DIGEST : This bill amends state laws governing water
replenishment districts' annual budget reserves and the
penalties a district can impose on water-producing facility
operators.
ANALYSIS : The Water Replenishment District of Southern
California (WRD) is the state's sole water replenishment
district. The primary function of a water replenishment
district is to recharge water into groundwater basins for later
withdrawal by water purveyors. The WRD earns revenue by
charging water replenishment assessments to the agencies,
utilities, and companies that pump groundwater. The District
also gets property tax revenues from its share of the 1%
property tax rate. The WRD uses these funds to buy surface
water that then percolates into the groundwater basin.
Existing law allows WRD to establish an annual reserve fund in
CONTINUED
SB 620
Page
2
an amount not to exceed ten million dollars. The maximum
allowable reserve fund can be adjusted annually to reflect
percentage increases or decreases in the blended cost of water
from district supply sources. A minimum of 80% of the reserve
must be for water purchases.
This bill removes the requirement that 80% of WRD's reserve
shall be for water purchases until the 2019-20 fiscal year.
Operators of water-producing facilities within WRD must file
quarterly statements with WRD setting forth:
1.The total production of ground water from the water-producing
facilities.
2.General descriptions or numbers locating the water-producing
facilities.
3.The method or basis of the computation of the ground water
production.
Each statement also must contain other information WRD may
require. WRD's governing board also may require operators of
water-producing facilities to file additional reports or
statements that the board determines are necessary or useful to
carry out the Water Replenishment District Act's purposes. An
operator of a water-producing facility, who knowingly fails to
register a water-producing facility, knowingly fails to file the
ground water production statement, or knowingly fails to file
and furnish any other required reports or statements is liable
to WRD for a penalty of $150.
This bill increases the penalty to $1,000. This provision shall
not apply to any operator of a water-producing facility that is
a party to litigation involving a water replenishment district
at the time these provisions take effect until after the
litigation is settled or all legal remedies have been exhausted.
Existing law allows WRD to file a petition or complaint in
Superior Court seeking a temporary restraining order and
injunctive relief against an operator of a water-producing
facility which has not been registered with the district or who
is delinquent in paying a replenishment assessment.
CONTINUED
SB 620
Page
3
This bill requires the court to award to the party prevailing on
any such motion the reasonable attorney's fees and costs of
making or opposing the motion unless the court finds that the
other party acted with substantial justification or that other
circumstances make the imposition of attorney's fees and costs
unjust. These
provisions shall not apply to any operator of a water-producing
facility that is a party to litigation involving a water
replenishment district at the time these provisions take effect
until after the litigation is settled or all legal remedies have
been exhausted.
Background
A December 1999 State Auditor's report, found that WRD
maintained high fiscal reserves and didn't exercise strict
fiscal controls. In response to the audit, the Legislature
amended the Water Replenishment District Act to, among other
things, cap the size of WRD's reserve fund and require 80% of
the fund to be used for water purchases. In recent years, WRD
has been involved in litigation with a group of cities within
its jurisdiction over whether the District, when imposing
replenishment assessments, complied with the Constitutional
requirements established by Proposition 218 (1996). After an
initial favorable superior court ruling, some cities stopped
paying replenishment assessments to WRD. Litigation over
whether WRD may have to pay refunds to the cities is pending.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/24/13)
Water Replenishment District of Southern California (source)
Bell Gardens Chamber of Commerce
California Municipal Utilities Association
Cities of Gardena, Commerce and Lawndale
Hub Cities Consortium
Inglewood Airport Area Chamber of Commerce
Lawndale Chamber of Commerce
Rancho Southeast Association of Realtors
OPPOSITION : (Verified 4/24/13) (Reflects prior version of
the bill)
CONTINUED
SB 620
Page
4
Cities of Bellflower, Cerritos, Downey, Montebello and Signal
Hill
AB:ej 4/24/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED