BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 156
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
156 (Perea) - As Amended April 27, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Natural Resources |Vote:|8 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable:
SUMMARY:
This bill requires the Air Resources Board (ARB) to include
technical assistance funds to assist disadvantaged and
low-income communities in its AB 32 Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Fund (GGRF) Investment Plan.
AB 156
Page 2
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the Investment Plan to allocate technical assistance
funds to ARB to assist disadvantaged communities in developing
project funding proposals to reduce GHG.
2)Prohibits technical assistance funds from counting towards the
25% set aside for projects that benefit disadvantaged
communities and the 10% set aside for projects located within
identified disadvantaged communities.
3)Requires ARB, upon appropriation of funds, to establish a
comprehensive technical assistance program for communities
that meet the California Communities Environmental Health
Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) criteria for disadvantaged
communities and other communities ARB determines require
technical assistance with median incomes at or below 80% of
the statewide median income.
4)Requires the technical assistance program to provide
assistance to applicants with any of the following:
a) Identifying state agencies with appropriate grant
programs.
b) Developing competitive project proposals to apply for
funds.
c) Coordinating existing programs to reduce GHG emissions
with new programs funded by the GGRF.
AB 156
Page 3
d) Conducting community outreach on programs, including,
but not limited to, programs that improve air quality,
reduce residential and commercial water use, and increase
residential and commercial energy efficiency.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Increased administrative costs to the ARB (GGRF) potentially in
the millions of dollars. Some costs may be reduced by
contracting with nonprofit agencies and regional air boards.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. This bill seeks to improve the quality of life in
disadvantaged communities (DACs) by funding GHG reduction
projects. DACs often have a difficult time bringing the right
technology, project, or program to mitigate and reduce GHG
emissions. Because many disadvantaged communities lack the
technical and managerial resources to apply for help, it is
difficult to be awarded funds for projects that can reduce the
amount of GHG emissions in their communities. Therefore, these
communities are often left with limited options to improve
their environment. Various state departments that are
appropriated moneys from the GGRF fund administer the funding
for these programs and projects. These agencies then
distribute the funds in rebates, loans, and grants to the most
qualified candidates. Some DACs with most need do not
participate because they do not have the consultants,
research, and money to apply competitively. The
CalEnviroScreen 2.0 report identifies a long list of
AB 156
Page 4
disadvantaged communities that need to apply for money and
programs to reduce the impact of GHG emissions in their
communities. The inability for disadvantaged communities to
apply competitively for grants is not a new phenomenon. In the
past, laws and policies have been drafted to empower these
communities by providing technical assistance. For example,
the State Water Resource Control Board provides free TA across
the state for the neediest DACs.
2)Background. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of
2006 (AB 32) requires ARB to adopt a statewide GHG emissions
limit equivalent to 1990 levels by 2020 and adopt regulations,
including market-based compliance mechanisms, to achieve
maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG
emission reductions.
As part of the implementation of AB 32 market-based compliance
measures, ARB adopted a cap-and-trade program that caps the
allowable statewide emissions and provides for the auctioning
of emission credits, the proceeds of which are quarterly
deposited into the GGRF available for appropriation by the
Legislature.
The 2014-15 Budget Act allocates cap-and-trade revenues for
the 2014-15 fiscal year and establishes a long-term plan for
the allocation of cap-and-trade revenues beginning in fiscal
year 2015-16.
The Budget continuously appropriates 35% of cap-and-trade
funds for investments in transit, affordable housing, and
sustainable communities. Twenty-five percent of the revenues
are continuously appropriated to continue the construction of
high-speed rail. The remaining 40% will be appropriated
annually by the Legislature for investments in programs that
include low-carbon transportation, energy efficiency and
AB 156
Page 5
renewable energy, and natural resources and waste diversion.
3)Disadvantaged Communities. SB 535 (De León), Chapter 830,
Statutes of 2012, requires no less than 10% of cap-and-trade
revenues fund projects located within disadvantaged
communities, and that 25% of available revenues fund projects
that benefit those communities.
In October 2014, CalEPA released its list of disadvantaged
communities for the purpose of SB 535. CalEPA relied on
CalEnviroScreen, to identify the areas disproportionately
burdened by and vulnerable to multiple sources of pollution.
CalEnviroScreen is a tool that assess all census tracts in
California to identify the areas disproportionally affected
and vulnerable to multiple sources of pollution.
Areas (census tracts) identified as disadvantaged for SB 535's
purposes by CalEnviroScreen include the majority of the San
Joaquin Valley; much of Los Angeles and the Inland Empire;
pockets of other communities near ports, freeways, and major
industrial facilities such as refineries and power plants; and
large swaths of the Coachella Valley, Imperial Valley and
Mojave Desert.
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 156
Page 6