BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1095|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1095
Author: Eduardo Garcia (D)
Amended: 7/7/15 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 9-0, 7/14/15
AYES: Pavley, Stone, Allen, Hertzberg, Hueso, Jackson,
Monning, Vidak, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/3/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Salton Sea: restoration projects
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill requires the California Natural Resources
Agency (agency) to submit to the Legislature a list of
shovel-ready restoration projects for the Salton Sea, as
specified, on or by March 31, 2016.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Authorizes $475 million to fulfill state obligations related
to a variety of agreements including restoration of the Salton
Sea (Sea) from the $7.545 billion in general obligation
funding for water-related projects and programs in Proposition
1, passed by the voters in November 2014.
AB 1095
Page 2
2)Establishes the Salton Sea Restoration Act (act) with the
legislative intent of providing that the state undertakes
restoration of the Sea's ecosystem and the permanent
protection of the wildlife dependent on that ecosystem based
on a "preferred alternative" that is developed as a result of
a restoration study and alternative selection process.
3)Requires the act's preferred alternative to provide the
maximum feasible attainment of specified environmental
objectives, such as habitat restoration and water quality
protection, among others.
4)Requires the Secretary of the agency in consultation with
others, undertake a restoration study to determine a preferred
alternative for restoration of the Sea, prepare a Programmatic
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) analyzing the alternatives,
and submit a preferred alternative to the Legislature. (The
background section includes the current status of this
statutory requirement.)
This bill requires the agency to submit to the Legislature a
list of shovel-ready restoration projects for the Sea, including
information regarding project costs and project completion
timelines on or by March 31, 2016. "Shovel-ready" is defined as
those projects that are substantially through planning,
environmental review or permitting.
Background
The Salton Sea, California's largest man-made lake, is located
in a desert sink in Southern California. The Sea's water level
is currently maintained primarily by agricultural runoff, which,
by existing agreement - the Quantification Settlement Agreement
(QSA) - will start being reduced in 2017. From pre-history
through the 19th century, the Sea has periodically filled and
receded numerous times. (For information on the history that
led up to the QSA, see the Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee analysis.)
The Sea has significant value as a natural resource. It is one
of the most important remaining wetland areas in California for
migratory waterfowl and shorebirds. The Sea supports over 400
species of birds, and is an internationally important stopover
site for the hundreds of thousands of bird migrating along the
AB 1095
Page 3
Pacific Flyway. Fishery resources in the Sea have, however,
declined lately due to the increasing salinity, worsening water
quality and a decline in the Sea's water level.
Without significant restoration efforts, the QSA water transfers
when fully implemented are highly likely to result in the
collapse of the Sea's ecosystem over the next 10 - 20 years.
The Sea itself will shrink in area considerably and the Imperial
and Coachella Valleys will experience poor air quality due to
the entrainment of fine particles from the exposed sea bed into
the atmosphere.
In 2007, the agency completed and released the Salton Sea
Ecosystem Restoration Program Plan and Final PEIR. The agency
estimated that the preferred alternative identified in the PEIR
would cost over $8 billion to implement over a period of 75
years. The PEIR noted that even the "no project" alternative
would cost the state over $1 billion due to state and federal
requirements to address air quality, water quality and habitat
issues. The $8.9 billion plan has not been implemented. The
state has an obligation to pay for, but the Legislature is not
required to allocate funds for, mitigation and restoration
efforts beyond a certain funding level under the QSA.
In 2012, the agency, working with the United States Army Corps
of Engineers, prepared and released a draft Salton Sea
Conservation Habitat (SCH) Project Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). The SCH Project
EIS/EIR proposes a range of aquatic habitats to support fish and
wildlife species dependent on the Sea. The agency's preferred
alternative identified in the EIS/EIR would include construction
of 3,770 acres of habitat ponds. Funding was provided for the
first phase of the SCH Project using Proposition 84 bond monies
(approximately $27 million was allocated) and included
construction of 800 to 1,200 acres of habitat ponds.
Governor's Budget. The May Revise to the Governor's Budget
acknowledged that "[p]rior comprehensive plans to restore the
sea are no longer feasible due to cost and decreased water
availability resulting from the drought in California and in the
southwestern states." The Administration announced the creation
of a Salton Sea Task Force to develop new medium and long-term
restoration plans through a stakeholder process. A leader will
be appointed to a new position to lead the Task Force and manage
AB 1095
Page 4
construction of projects to benefit wildlife habitat and air
quality. No additional funds were allocated.
Imperial Irrigation District petition. In 2014, the Imperial
Irrigation District filed a controversial petition before the
State Water Resources Control Board asking that the Board
require the state and the parties to the water transfer
agreement to come up with a "realistic, feasible restoration
plan." The petition seeks to condition water sales to San Diego
on the state fulfilling its promises to pay for offsetting
environmental mitigation and restoration. A workshop was held
in March 2015 by the Board, and no formal action by the Board
appears to have been taken to date.
Comments
Importance of shovel-ready projects. As noted above, water
flowing into the Sea will start being reduced in 2017.
Therefore there is merit in identifying restoration projects
that can be implemented rapidly in order to mitigate the
projected adverse environmental and human health impacts.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 71 (V. Manuel Pérez, Chapter 402, Statutes of 2013) required
the Secretary of the agency, in consultation with the Salton Sea
Authority, to lead the Sea restoration efforts.
AB 148 (V. Manuel Pérez, Chapter 124, Statutes of 2014) made
technical and clarifying changes to AB 71.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified7/7/15)
San Diego County Water Authority
OPPOSITION: (Verified7/7/15)
AB 1095
Page 5
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The San Diego County Water Authority
writes in support, "[t]he key element of the QSA that remains
unaddressed is the state's obligation with respect to Salton Sea
restoration."
"AB 1095 would initiate the important process of attempting to
identify near-term projects to determine an appropriate spending
plan utilizing Proposition 1 funds for the Salton Sea
restoration effort."
"We believe it is imperative that any spending plan for Salton
Sea restoration must be framed by a clear and workable vision
and priorities. [?] Implementation-ready projects should support
effective air quality mitigation and wildlife habitat creation
with a high functional value."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/3/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,
Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle,
Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Cristina Garcia,
Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,
Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,
Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,
Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea,
Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,
Steinorth, Mark Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk,
Williams, Wood, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Gallagher, Thurmond
Prepared by:Katharine Moore / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
8/19/15 20:39:11
**** END ****
AB 1095
Page 6