BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2444|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2444
Author: Eduardo Garcia (D), et al.
Amended: 8/16/16 in Senate
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 6-2, 6/28/16
AYES: Pavley, Allen, Hertzberg, Hueso, Jackson, Monning
NOES: Stone, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wolk
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-1, 6/29/16
AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara
NOES: Moorlach
NO VOTE RECORDED: Nguyen, Pavley
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/11/16
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza
NOES: Bates, Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 56-18, 6/23/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: California Parks, Water, Climate, and Coastal
Protection and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2016
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST:
This bill enacts the California Parks, Water, Climate, and
Coastal Protection and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2016,
which, if approved by the voters, authorizes issuance of $2
billion in State General Obligation bonds to finance parks,
water, climate adaptation, coastal protection, and outdoor
access programs.
AB 2444
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Authorizes the Legislature to pass legislation, by a 2/3
vote, to place a proposed general obligation bond measure
before the voters on the statewide ballot, to authorize the
sale of bonds to finance various state purposes. General
obligation bonds have been one of the primary methods voters
have used to fund the acquisition and improvement of park
lands, open space, and wildlife areas; water conservation and
infrastructure projects, and related purposes.
2) Ratified, by a vote of the people, The California Clean
Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal
Protection Act of 2002 (Proposition 40), a legislative ballot
measure approved in 2002, which authorized $2.6 billion in
bond expenditures for parks and other resource related
purposes, which was the last parks-only bond measure.
3) Ratified, by a vote of the people, The Safe Drinking Water,
Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal
Protection Act of 2006 (Proposition 84), an initiative
measure approved by in 2006, that authorized bond
expenditures of $5.4 billion, of which approximately $875
million was for parks.
4) Authorizes general obligation bonds which the public agency
pays out of general revenues and are guaranteed by its full
faith and credit.
This bill:
1) States legislative findings and declarations regarding
California's parks, natural resources and outdoor
opportunities, and the scale of unmet need and demand for,
and lack of equal access to, those resources and activities.
It contains findings and declarations regarding the benefits
AB 2444
Page 3
of investments for these purposes to public health, and to
state and local economies.
2) States that it is the intent of the people of the state
that:
a) Public investments authorized by this bill provide
public benefits and address the most critical statewide
needs and priorities;
b) Priority is given to projects that leverage other
funding sources;
c) Projects receiving funding include signage informing
the public of the bond investments;
d) Administering entities be encouraged when developing
program guidelines for urban recreation and habitat
projects, to give favorable consideration to projects
that both provide urban recreation and protect or restore
natural resources, to the extent practicable, and
authorizes entities to pool funding for such purposes.
3) Includes a number of general provisions that apply to all of
the articles included in the Act, including:
a) Allows up to 10% of funds in each category to be
used for planning and monitoring. Planning funds for
projects in disadvantaged communities can exceed the 10%
if needed.
b) Requires at least 20% of funds in each article to be
allocated to severely disadvantaged communities.
c) Allows up to 10% of funds to go toward technical
assistance. Technical assistance may exceed 10% for
disadvantaged communities if needed.
d) Requires agencies administering the bond to develop
project solicitation and evaluation guidelines, to
conduct 3 public meetings, and to publish draft
guidelines on the Internet.
e) Requires the Department of Finance to provide for an
independent audit of expenditures.
f) Requires projects that use California Conservation
Corps services or certified community conservation corps
to be given preference for grants where feasible.
g) Authorizes projects that include water efficiencies,
AB 2444
Page 4
stormwater capture, or carbon sequestration features in
the project design to be given priority for grant
funding.
h) Authorizes the Legislature to enact legislation
necessary to implement programs funded by the bond.
4) Makes available in Article 2 an unspecified amount for
creation and expansion of safe neighborhood parks in
park-poor communities, in accordance with the Statewide Park
Development and Community Revitalization Act of 2008
competitive grant program [AB 31, De León, Chapter 623,
Statutes of 2008].
5) Makes available in Article 3 an unspecified amount for local
and regional outdoor spaces as follows:
a) An unspecified amount for local park rehabilitation
and improvement grants to local governments on a per
capita basis. Requires a 20% local match unless the
entity is a disadvantaged community. Describes the
formula to be used to allocate the per capita funds
between cities, districts, counties, and regional park
districts, based on population.
b) An unspecified amount for grants to cities and
districts of less than 200,000 population in urbanized
counties of less than 500,000 total population. A 20%
match is required except for disadvantaged communities.
c) An unspecified amount is to go to cities and
districts that are not regional park districts on a per
capita basis except each jurisdiction receives a minimum
of an unspecified amount.
d) 40% of the unspecified amount in this article is to
go to counties and regional park districts on a per
capita basis.
6) Makes available in Article 4 an unspecified amount in
funding for state parks, as follows:
a) An unspecified amount for enterprise projects for
new user experiences and revenue generation projects.
b) An unspecified amount for grants to local agencies
that operate state parks for deferred maintenance. A 25%
AB 2444
Page 5
match is required except for disadvantaged communities.
c) An unspecified amount for infrastructure repairs at
state parks through new regional programs at state parks
with unspecified amounts in the Central Valley, Central
Coast in Ventura County, East Bay, Inland Empire, and San
Diego.
d) An unspecified amount for direct distribution by the
department to its existing 12 districts to address
historic underinvestment.
7) Makes available in Article 5 an unspecified amount for the
California Natural Resources Agency for Trails and Waterfront
Greenway investments. These funds would be for competitive
grants to local agencies, conservancies, tribes, and
nonprofit organizations for trails and non-motorized access
to parks, waterways, or other natural environments, to
encourage health-related commuting. Authorizes 25% of the
total for this program to be made available for innovative
transportation programs for disadvantaged youth.
8) Makes available in Article 6 an unspecified amount for
competitive grants for rural recreation and tourism to rural
entities eligible for under criteria established in the
Roberti, Z-Berg, Harris grants program.
9) Makes available in Article 7 an unspecified amount for clean
water and coastal programs including urban creeks and
requires 60% of the funds to be expended in the area of the
Los Angeles River upstream of the northernmost boundary of
the City of Vernon, and 40% of the funds expended for project
grants in the remainder of the Los Angeles River area.
10)Designates in Article 7 unspecified amounts to the
following:
a) The Lower American River Conservancy Program or the
American River Parkway Plan;
b) The Santa Ana River program of the Coastal
Conservancy; and
c) The Urban Streams Restoration program.
The bill specifies that projects serving disadvantaged
AB 2444
Page 6
communities must be given funding priority.
11)Makes available in Article 7.5 unspecified proposed funding
for state conservancies, including the Baldwin Hills
Conservancy, the Tahoe Conservancy, the Coachella
Conservancy, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy,
the Salton Sea Authority, the San Diego River Conservancy,
the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains
Conservancy, the San Joaquin River Conservancy, the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy, the Sierra Nevada Conservancy,
and the State Coastal Conservancy of which an unspecified
amount would be allocated to the Bay Area program. There is
a declaration of legislative intent to increase funding for
conservancies by an unspecified amount.
12)Makes available in Article 8 unspecified expenditures for
climate preparedness and habitat resiliency including:
a) An unspecified amount for climate adaptation and
resiliency projects that improve a community's ability to
adapt to climate change, including projects to improve
and protect coastal and rural economies, agricultural
viability, wildlife corridors or habitat, recreational
opportunities, or drought tolerance and water retention.
b) An unspecified amount to the Wildlife Conservation
Board (WCB) for wildlife corridors and open space, for
climate change adaptation, for species habitat, and for
existing open space corridors and trail linkages of which
an unspecified amount above would go to the
implementation of natural community conservation plans
and $10 million would go to nonprofit wildlife
rehabilitation facilities.
c) An unspecified amount to the Climate Resilience
Account to assist local communities and commercial
fisheries adapt to climate change, address ocean
acidification, sea level rise, or habitat protection
along the Pacific flyway.
d) An unspecified amount for projects that improve
agricultural and open-space soil health, to improve
AB 2444
Page 7
carbon soil sequestration, erosion control, water
quality, and water retention.
e) An unspecified amount for forest projects to reduce
fuel loading, and to invest in forest management
practices that increase the resilience of forests to
wildlife and climate change. These funds would be
administered jointly by the Department of Forestry and
the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, with an unspecified amount
available to the Tahoe Conservancy.
f) An unspecified amount to the Department of Fire and
Forestry for existing urban forestry programs.
g) An unspecified amount to the California Conservation
Corps, with half of that available as grants to local
conservation corps, for projects in parks, forests, and
stream and river restoration.
h) An unspecified amount to the California Natural
Resources Agency for grants to local agencies, tribes,
and others for restoration protection and acquisition of
natural, cultural, and historic sites. Also eligible are
projects to repurpose former fossil fuel power plants as
permanent open space and projects that enhance natural
resource protections in those areas of the state not
within the jurisdiction of a state conservancy. A match
of 20 percent is required.
i) An unspecified amount to the Ocean Protection
Council.
j) States legislative intent to increase funding for
article by an unspecified amount.
13)Adds Article 8.5 regarding advance payments for water
projects for nonprofit organizations or disadvantaged
communities.
14)Includes related fiscal provisions regarding sales of bonds
and implementation of the Act pursuant to the State General
Obligation Bond Law. Establishes a finance committee for the
bond composed of the Director of Finance, the Treasurer, and
AB 2444
Page 8
the Controller.
15)Requires the Secretary of State to submit the bond act to
the voters at the November 2016 statewide general election,
and includes related instructions regarding preparing ballot
pamphlets and statements. Provides that this act shall take
effect upon approval by the voters.
16)Includes an urgency clause providing that it is necessary
that this bill take effect immediately in order to fund a
California parks, water, climate, and coastal protection and
outdoor access for all programs at the earliest possible
date.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to Senate Appropriations Committee:
Unknown significant costs, in the low billions of dollars. A
total of approximately $735,000,000 in interest per billion in
bonds issued, assuming 30-year maturity at 4 percent interest
rate. (General Fund)
Unknown, but potentially significant, costs to the State
Treasurers Office and administering agencies (bond funds).
Nearly $3 million (General Fund) to the Secretary of State for
printing and postage for a supplemental ballot in the 2016
election. This bill missed the deadline for printing for this
election.
SUPPORT: (Verified8/16/16)
Association of California Water Agencies
Audubon California
Azul
AB 2444
Page 9
Bay Area Open Space Council
Big Sur Land Trust
Bolsa Chica Land Trust
Bronzan Consulting
Calcoast
California Association of Local Conservation Corps
California Association of Museums
California Association of Park & Recreation Commissioners &
Board Members
California Association of Park Districts
California Association of Recreation and Park Districts
California Council of Land Trusts
California Center for Public Health Advocacy
California Coastal Protection Network
California League of Conservation Voters
California Native Plant Society
California Park & Recreation Society
California ReLeaf
California Special Districts Association
California State Parks Foundation
California Tahoe Alliance
California Urban Streams Partnership
California Wilderness Coalition
Carmichael Recreation and Park District
City of American Canyon Parks and Recreation Department
City of Chino
City of Dublin
City of Fountain Valley
City of Imperial
City of Morgan Hill
City of Poway
City of Torrance
City of Tustin Parks & Recreation Department
City of Lafayette
City of Milpitas
City of Montebello
City of Portola
City of Selma
City of Westminster
City of Victorville
Children's Defense Fund
County of Placer
AB 2444
Page 10
Consumnes Community Services District Park & Recreation
Department
Defenders of Wildlife
Desert Recreation District
Desert Valley Builders Association
East Bay Regional Park District
El Cerrito Recreation
El Dorado Irrigation District
Fathers & Families of San Joaquin
Friends of Harbors, Beaches, and parks
Fulton-El Camino Recreation & Park District
Golden Gate National parks Conservancy
Greater Vallejo Recreation District
Hesperia Recreation & Park District
Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System
Hills for Everyone
John Muir Land Trust
Laguna Greenbelt, Inc
Land Paths
Land Trust of Santa Cruz County
Latino Outdoors
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
Mammoth Lakes California
Marin Agricultural Land Trust
Marin County Parks
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mono Lake Community
Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District
Sierra Business Council
Orangevale Recreation & Park District
Outdoors Access for All
Pacific Forest Trust
Paradise Recreation & Park District
Pathways for Wildlife
Peninsula Open Space Trust
Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District
Policy Link
Rails to Trails Conservancy
Rancho Simi Recreation and Park District
San Francisco Parks Alliance
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority
AB 2444
Page 11
Save Mount Diablo
Save the Redwoods League
Sierra Business Council
Sierra Club California
Sierra Institute for Community and Environment
Sierra Nevada Alliance
Sierra Water Workgroup
Solano Land Trust
Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District
Sonoma County Regional Parks
Sonoma County Water Agency
Sonoma Land Trust
State Park Partners Coalition
Tahoe Mountain Sports
The City Project
The Greenlining Institute
The Nature Conservancy
The Trust for Public Land
TODEC Legal Center
TreePeople
United Ways of California
Watershed Conservation Authority
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/16/16)
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The author notes that to maintain a high
quality of life for California's growing population the state
requires a continuing investment in parks, recreation
facilities, and protection of the state's natural and historical
resources. It has been 14 years since California last approved a
"true park bond." The 2008 economic downturn had a
disproportionate impact on local, regional and state park
infrastructure. There is a high unmet demand for park
investment, as witnessed by the 8-1 ratio of grant application
requests vs. available grant dollars for park grants awarded
under the AB 31 Statewide Parks Program. Demand has been
particularly high in both urban and rural disadvantaged
communities where many still lack access to safe parks, trails,
AB 2444
Page 12
and recreation areas. The author notes that according to the
Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Plan of 2015 (SCORP), 38% of
Californians still live in areas with less than 3 acres of
parkland per 1,000 population, a recognized standard for
adequate parks, and 9 million people do not have a park within a
half mile of their home. The SCORP action plan highlights the
need for increasing park access to residents in underserved
communities by encouraging park development within a half mile
of park deficient neighborhoods, creating new trails and
greenways to provide active transportation corridors for
commuting, and expanding transportation opportunities to larger
parks. The author also notes the findings of the Parks Forward
Commission which highlighted the need to prioritize protection
of natural and cultural resources for future generations, expand
access to parks for underserved communities and younger
generations, and to address state park deferred maintenance.
Investing in parks and trails will help ensure all Californians
have access to safe places to exercise and recreate.
Additionally, continued investment in the state's natural
resources and greening of urban areas will help mitigate the
impacts of climate change and provide access to natural
resources for future generations. The author also emphasizes
that a priority throughout the bond will be to address the needs
of park-poor and severely disadvantaged communities.
There is a huge list of supporters of this measure. The general
theme is to support public investment in local and state parks
and resource protection that has not been able to be achieved
because of the recession and because earlier bond funds have
largely been depleted. There is also widespread support for the
emphasis on increasing access to parks by disadvantaged
communities and especially disadvantaged youth.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association opposes increasing the state's indebtedness and
questions whether improvements in parks will endure for the life
of the bond.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 56-18, 6/23/16
AYES: Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta,
Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,
Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Cristina
AB 2444
Page 13
Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez,
Gordon, Gray, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin,
Jones-Sawyer, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low, Maienschein,
McCarty, Medina, Mullin, O'Donnell, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas,
Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber,
Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Travis Allen, Bigelow, Brough, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Grove,
Harper, Jones, Kim, Linder, Mathis, Mayes, Melendez,
Obernolte, Patterson, Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron
NO VOTE RECORDED: Achadjian, Chang, Chávez, Gallagher,
Nazarian, Olsen
Prepared by:William Craven / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
8/17/16 9:25:14
**** END ****