BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 1205 (Gomez) - The California River Revitalization and
Greenway Development Act of 2015.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: July 16, 2015 |Policy Vote: E.Q. 6 - 0, N.R. & |
| | W. 8 - 1 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 17, 2015 |Consultant: Marie Liu |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 1205 would create a grant program administered by
the Natural Resources Agency (agency) for projects on or
adjacent to riparian corridors that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions.
Fiscal
Impact:
Cost pressures at least in the tens of millions of dollars to
the General Fund and the GHG Reduction Fund (GGRF, special) to
fund the grant program.
Unknown costs, likely in the hundreds of thousands to low
millions of dollars to the General Fund and the GGRF (special)
for the agency's administrative costs in administering the
grant program including the development of regulations.
Potential costs of approximately $350,000 annually to the GGRF
(special), to the ARB to evaluate the GHG reduction from each
AB 1205 (Gomez) Page 1 of
?
application, should the grant program receive funding from the
GGRF. These costs may offset some of the agency's
administrative costs.
Background: Existing law authorizes the Department of Water Resources to
establish a program of flood damage reduction and urban creek
restoration known as the Urban Streams Restoration Program
(Water Code §7048). Since 1985, the program has provided more
than 270 grants ranging from $1,000 to $1 million to communities
throughout California for projects ranging from bank
stabilization to the occasional acquisition of strategic
floodplain properties or easements. The last funding cycle for
the program was in 2014, where over $8 million was awarded to 13
project proposals.
Existing law establishes the California River Parkways Program
(Public Resources Code (PRC) §§5750 et seq.) under the
administration of the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency
(agency). It requires the agency to provide grants for river
parkway projects that acquire land for river parkways or for the
restoration, protection, and development of river parkways. The
agency is currently soliciting for a one-time funding round of
approximately $7.6 million for the acquisition, restoration,
protection and development of river parkways. The funds for
this cycle are the last of the Proposition 84 funding for the
program. Eligible entities include public agencies and
non-profits.
Additionally, the agency administers other grant programs,
including the Urban Greening for Sustainable Communities (on
behalf of the Strategic Growth Council) and the Environmental
Enhancement and Mitigation Program that river restoration and
related projects may be eligible for and have received funding
from.
Further, various state bond acts and legislative appropriations
have repeatedly provided moneys, through a variety of programs
and mechanisms, for river and stream restoration. State-level
organizations providing grants for these purposes include the
Department of Fish and Wildlife; the Wildlife Conservation
Board; various Conservancies, including the State Coastal
Conservancy, the San Joaquin River Conservancy, the Santa Monica
AB 1205 (Gomez) Page 2 of
?
Mountains Conservancy, the Strategic Growth Council, and
Department of Forestry and Fire, among others.
Proposition 1, which was passed by the voters in November 2014,
which authorized $7.545 billion in general obligation bonds to
fund ecosystem and watershed protection and restoration, water
supply infrastructure projects, including surface and
groundwater storage, and drinking water protection. More
specifically, $.495 billion is designated for competitive grants
for multibenefit ecosystem and watershed restoration projects.
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (referred to
as AB 32, HSC §38500 et seq.) requires the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) to determine the 1990 statewide greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions level, to approve a statewide GHG emissions
limit equivalent to that level that will be achieved by 2020,
and to adopt GHG emissions reductions measures by regulation.
ARB is authorized to include the use of market-based mechanisms
to comply with the regulations. All monies, except for fines
and penalties, collected pursuant to a market-based mechanism
are deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF)
(Government Code §16428.8).Existing law requires that the GGRF
only be used to facilitate the achievement of reductions of GHG
emissions consistent with AB 32.
Proposed Law:
This bill would enact the California River Revitalization and
Greenway Development Act, which would create a grant program
administered by the agency for projects that reduce GHG
emissions and are located on or adjacent to riparian corridors.
Priority would be given to projects based on the extent to which
the project provides the following co-benefits:
Recreational access to and improve interaction with a river or
riparian corridor, especially in urban corridors and
park-stared communities.
Improved transportation mobility
Economic viability of the surrounding communities.
Development of visitor-serving and interpretive facilities.
Access and development of urban greening.
AB 1205 (Gomez) Page 3 of
?
Species protections and the protection of habitat strongholds.
Improved resiliency to climate change.
Improved water supply, flood protection, and water quality.
Job training and workforce development.
Improved stormwater retention.
Priority will also be given to projects that:
Are consistent with a parkway, greenway, or urban greening
plan.
Leverage monies from Proposition 1.
Provide recreational access and opportunities to major
metropolitan areas of the state.
Projects funded by this program would be required to be
consistent with the California Water Action Plan and the
Safeguarding California Plan. If the project is for flood
protection, it must also be consistent with the Cobey-Alquist
Flood Plain Management Act and the Central Valley Flood
Protection Act.
The agency would be required to consult with the ARB to consider
the extent to which a project reduces GHG emissions.
The grant program would be funded by the CalRIVER fund, which is
created by the bill, and may receive proceeds from bonds and
special funds, including the GGRF.
Staff
Comments: By establishing a program to fund projects on or
adjacent to riparian corridors, this bill would cause cost
pressures to fund these projects. Based on the amount of state
grants previously given to river restoration, river parkways,
and related projects, staff assumes these costs pressures are at
least in the tens of millions of dollars.
To administer the grant program, the agency will incur
administrative costs. However, these costs are unknown as they
are dependent on the size of the program. Generally speaking,
AB 1205 (Gomez) Page 4 of
?
administrative costs can be estimated at five percent of the
grant program size. That is, for a $10 million dollar grant
program, the agency will need approximately $500,000 in
administrative costs. These administrative costs would include
the workload necessary to develop regulations for the program.
This bill would require the agency to consult with the ARB to
consider the extent to which a project reduces GHG emissions.
This consultation will be particularly necessary should the
grant program receive funding from the GGRF, as the GGRF must be
used to further the purposes of AB 32. ARB notes that should
this program be funded by the GGRF, it anticipates costs to
create new GHG emission reduction methodologies for the proposed
project types, to create new project reporting requirements,
and to update the existing disadvantaged communities guidance to
reflect the new projects. The ARB notes that these tasks may be
more complicated than other projects because "[d]ue to the
complexity of greenhouse gas sources and sinks in natural
systems, the riparian projects identified in the bill may not
provide significant net GHG emission reductions." Thus, to
ensure that GGRF funds are used appropriately, ARB anticipates
needing a higher level of additional resources to develop GHG
quantification methods. For a $10-$20 million dollar grant
program, ARB would anticipate needing two positions at an annual
cost of $350,000 to review projects for GHG reduction potential.
Should funds be appropriated to ARB for these activities, it may
result in a corresponding decrease in administrative costs for
the agency.
Staff notes that this bill creates a special fund to fund the
grant program. However, it is unclear why a special fund would
be necessary.
Staff notes that there are multiple bills being considered by
both houses of the Legislature that propose projects that would
be eligible to receive GGRF funds. It is unclear how these bills
will interact with each other. Staff notes that a discussion on
the spending of GGRF is anticipated in August as part of a
budget discussion.
AB 1205 (Gomez) Page 5 of
?
-- END --