BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2087
Page 1
(Without Reference to File)
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
2087 (Levine)
As Amended August 31, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |52-20 |(June 2, 2016) |SENATE: | |(August 31, |
| | | | |25-12 |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: W., P., & W.
SUMMARY: Authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
to approve regional conservation investment strategies (RCIS) to
identify and provide voluntary guidance for regional
conservation, and to encourage investments in conservation
through advance mitigation.
The Senate amendments:
1)State that the purpose of this bill is to create a pilot
program to identify and prioritize science-based regional
AB 2087
Page 2
conservation while also encouraging conservation investments
through advance mitigation. Clarify that the purpose of an
RCIS is to provide non-binding voluntary guidance on
conservation priorities.
2)Rename the Regional Conservation Frameworks this bill would
authorize as RCIS.
3)Add a three year sunset date, prohibiting the DFW from
approving an RCIS or regional conservation assessment on or
after January 1, 2020, and limiting the number of RCIS
approved by the DFW within that time frame to no more than
eight.
4)Add, delete and clarify definitions.
5)Clarify that it is not the intent of the Legislature with this
bill to regulate land use, or to limit or restrict the land
use authority of any public agency. Further state that it is
not the intent of the Legislature that an approved RCIS be
binding on independent agency action within the geographic
scope of the RCIS. State that RCIS are nonbinding and
voluntary and do not affect the authority or discretion of
local land use agencies.
6)Clarify program provisions, specifically what is to be
included in and considered in developing an RCIS. Among other
things, require that the RCIS process, in addition to
considering the potential for conservation of focal species,
also consider:
a) The conservation benefits of preserving working lands
for agricultural uses.
b) Reasonably forseeable infrastructure facility
AB 2087
Page 3
development.
c) Reasonably forseeable projects in the area, including
housing.
d) Reasonably forseeable development for the production of
renewable energy.
7)Add additional public notice, public meeting, and public
comment opportunity requirements. Require a public agency to
publish notice of its intent to create an RCIS, to file that
notice with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research and
the county clerk of each county in the RCIS area, and to
notify anyone who has filed a written request with the DFW for
notices regarding draft RCISs, and any implementing entities
for any Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs) in the
RCIS area. Also require that those entities be notified at
least 30 days before a public meeting is held on the RCIS.
Require a public agency proposing an RCIS to include responses
to public comments in their submittal to the DFW.
8)Require consultation with local agencies that have land use
authority within the geographic area in developing an RCIS.
9)Add additional criteria that must be met for a conservation
action or habitat enhancement identified in an RCIS to be used
to create mitigation credits. Expand upon and clarifies the
conditions that must be met for the DFW to approve a
mitigation credit agreement. Among other things, require the
DFW to ensure the long-term durability of habitat
enhancements, and requires a mitigation credit agreement to
meet standards consistent with those required for approval of
a mitigation bank under existing law, as specified.
10)Require an RCIS to be consistent with any applicable
administrative draft or approved NCCP within an RCIS area, and
AB 2087
Page 4
to explain how the RCIS is consistent with any other
previously approved conservation strategies or recovery plans
that overlap with the RCIS area.
11)Add information on climate change vulnerability to the
information that is included in an RCIS.
12)Clarify that an RCIS does not modify the requirements for
other Fish and Game Code sections or regulations, and does not
constitute a plan, policy or regulation for purposes of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Further clarify
that an RCIS does not modify the standards for CEQA, or
otherwise limit a lead agency's discretion to determine
whether a project may or may not result in significant
environmental effects.
13)Prohibit mitigation credits authorized under this bill from
being used to fund or offset the costs of design,
construction, or mitigation of new Delta conveyance. Clarify
that this bill does not modify or limit the Delta Reform Act.
14)Clarify that RCISs are voluntary and non-binding on public
agencies other than the parties to a mitigation credit
agreement, are intended to provide scientific information for
consideration by public agencies, and do not require other
public agencies to adopt, implement or otherwise adhere to an
RCIS.
15)Add a requirement for the DFW to provide public notice and an
opportunity to comment on proposed mitigation credit
agreements.
16)Authorize the DFW to adopt guidelines to aid in
implementation and require the DFW to collect fees or other
compensation from an entity that proposes to enter into a
mitigation credit agreement to cover costs.
AB 2087
Page 5
17)Make other technical and clarifying changes.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the DFW in the Natural Resources Agency. The DFW
has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and
management of fish and wildlife, native plants, and habitat
necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those
species.
2)Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), prohibits
the taking of an endangered or threatened species, except as
specified. The DFW may permit the take of listed species if
the take is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity and the
impacts are minimized and fully mitigated.
3)Establishes that it is the policy of the State to conserve,
protect, restore and enhance natural communities. Further
declares that it is the policy of the state to encourage,
wherever feasible and practicable, voluntary steps to protect
the functioning of wildlife corridors through various means.
4)Recognizes the need for broad-based planning to provide for
effective protection and conservation of the state's wildlife
heritage while continuing to allow for appropriate development
and growth. Authorizes the development of NCCPs to provide
AB 2087
Page 6
comprehensive management and conservation of wildlife,
pursuant to specified requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)Approximately $675,000 in year one, and $987,000 annually
(special fund) to develop guidelines and administer the
program, some or all of which may be recovered through fees.
2)Unknown, potentially significant savings to state agencies
using the RCIS process for conservation efforts,
infrastructure planning, or mitigation.
COMMENTS: This bill authorizes a new voluntary conservation
tool known as a RCIS to identify wildlife habitat conservation
needs in a region, help guide infrastructure planning and
development, improve the effectiveness of public expenditures
for conservation, and identify potential advance mitigation
solutions for public infrastructure projects. An RCIS could be
proposed by a public agency, in consultation with local
agencies, and submitted to the DFW for review and approval. A
conservation action that measurably advances the conservation
objectives of an approved RCIS, and meets other specified
requirements, could be used to create advance mitigation credits
through a mitigation credit agreement approved by the DFW.
The Senate amendments narrow this bill to a three year pilot
program. The DFW would be authorized to approve RCISs only
until January 1, 2020, and the number of RCISs approved during
those three years would be limited to no more than eight. The
Senate amendments also clarify the voluntary, non-binding and
non-regulatory nature of this bill.
The Senate floor analysis notes that in order to demonstrate the
approach that is represented by this bill, there are three pilot
AB 2087
Page 7
projects currently underway in Yolo County, Antelope Valley, and
the Bay Area. Each demonstrates a different application of the
conservation strategy proposed in this legislation. However, in
the absence of a statutory change, the concept of advance
mitigation credit based on an RCIS would not be available.
Supporters of this bill emphasize this bill will provide an
efficient approach for regional conservation planning that
identifies needs and priorities for wildlife and habitat
conservation, improves the effectiveness of public investments
in wildlife conservation, and assists in guiding infrastructure
projects and identifying suitable areas for advance mitigation
investments for those projects. They emphasize this bill
accomplishes the twin goals of improved conservation outcomes
and improved infrastructure development. Some supporters also
believe this new tool will help guide development away from the
most sensitive habitat while providing a more comprehensive and
efficient approach to mitigation.
Most of the opposition was removed with the final amendments
adopted in the Senate. Some entities who manage mitigation
banks had concerns with a prior version, specifically with the
advance mitigation credit provisions, and would like to see
advance mitigation options limited to for-profit mitigation
banks approved under existing statutory processes. This bill as
amended requires mitigation credit agreements authorized under
this bill to meet the same standards as mitigation banks. One
opponent to an earlier version of this bill also raised concerns
regarding NCCPs, public review of mitigation credit agreements,
and the science requirements for RCIS. The amendments taken in
the Senate require that the RCIS be consistent with any NCCP
that overlaps with the RCIS area, add a requirement for public
notice, review and comment on mitigation credit agreements, and
require that the RCIS be science-based.
Analysis Prepared by:
Diane Colborn / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096
FN:
0005039
AB 2087
Page 8