BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 300
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
300 (Alejo) - As Amended April 7, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Natural Resources |Vote:|8 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable:
SUMMARY:
This bill requires the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) to establish and coordinate the Algal Bloom Task Force
to review the risks and negative impacts of toxic algal blooms
and make recommendations on funding, prevention and long-term
AB 300
Page 2
mitigation by January 1, 2017.
The task force includes representatives from the Department of
Public Health (DPH), the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW),
the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), the State Coastal
Conservancy (SCC) and any other relevant agency representatives.
This bill also authorizes SCC, DFW and the Wildlife Conservation
Board (WCB) and SWRCB to enter into contracts and provide grants
from Chapter 6, of Proposition 1, approved by the voters on the
November 2014 ballot.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Unknown cost pressures potentially in the millions of dollars
to implement the task force recommendations.
2)Increased ongoing administrative costs in the range of
$200,000 for SWRCB to convene the task force, conduct research
and public outreach, and finalize recommendations (GF or
special fund). One-time costs in the $150,000 range to meet
the reporting requirements.
3)Increased administrative costs for DFW to participate in the
task force.
4)Minor, absorbable costs for DPH, SCC, and CDFA.
5)Unknown, likely minor, costs for any other agencies included
on the task force.
AB 300
Page 3
COMMENTS:
1)Rationale. The majority of freshwater harmful algal blooms
(HABs) reported in the United States and worldwide are due to
one group of algae, cyanobacteria. Cyanobacteria are
widespread bacteria that are capable of forming toxic blooms
and super-blooms in the States' waters.
Cyanobacteria produce potent hepatoxins and neurotoxins,
collectively referred to as cyanotoxins. Cyanotoxins are
poisonous to humans, pets, livestock, birds, and other
wildlife via ingestion, inhalation, or skin exposure. A single
dose can cause prolonged toxicity by cycling repeatedly
between the liver and intestines
According to the author, the state's waters are especially
prone to toxic cyanobacterial blooms due to our warm climate,
numerous water diversions, and stressed waterways. Blooms of
toxic cyanobacteria are threatening our water supply and
health throughout the state.
This bill provides a coordinated multiagency effort to develop
actions and projects to prevent or mitigate toxic blooms and
the associated cynotoxin pollution.
2)CyanoHAB Network (CCHAB). CCHAB, formally known as the
statewide Blue Green Algae Public Working Group, has a diverse
membership including the SWRCB, regional water quality boards,
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, DFW, DPH,
and the Department of Water Resources. It also includes
AB 300
Page 4
federal agencies, tribal governments, county agencies, cities,
academics, researchers, and utilities. CCHAB has conducted
investigations, supported research, and funded planning and
pilot projects to address HABs.
This bill allows the SWRCB to augment this or any other
existing task force or network to accomplish the requirements
of the bill.
3)Other Considerations. The recently passed water bond includes
funds to protect rivers lakes, stream, coastal waters and
watersheds (Chapter 6). Of the $1.495 billion available, all
but about $500 million is designated for specific agencies and
purposes. The remaining $500 million is available, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, for competitive grants for
multibenefit ecosystems and watershed protection and
restoration projects as specified.
Until the task force completes its work and makes its
recommendations, it is unclear if this funding source is
appropriate. In the past, work on HABs has been funded through
the SWRCB's Cleanup and Abatement Fund, the Sea Otter Fund and
the Ocean Protection Trust Fund.
The author may wish to consider amending this provision to
expand potential funding sources and clarify that funds are
available only upon appropriation by the Legislature.
It should also be noted that the task force exists beyond the
final reporting date. In order to reduce ongoing costs, the
author may wish to consider including a sunset date.
AB 300
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916)
319-2081