BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
                             Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:            AB 2549         Hearing Date:    June 14,  
          2016
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Committee on Water,    |           |                 |
          |           |Parks, and Wildlife    |           |                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Version:   |June 6, 2016                                         |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |Yes              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|William Craven                                       |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          
                             Subject:  Public resources


          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
             1)   Establishes procedures for public input, petitions to  
               add or remove species from the state endangered or  
               threatened species lists, and other administrative  
               procedures regarding the public hearing process and the  
               administrative record of matters pursuant to the California  
               Endangered Species Act, several of which sunset on January  
               1, 2017.  Specifically, these include Fish and Game Code  
               sections 2074.2, 2074.6, 2074.8, and 2075.5. 
             2)   Prohibits and establishes enforcement criteria regarding  
               the invasive quagga and zebra mussels that would sunset in  
               2017. 
             3)   Authorizes the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)  
               to receive funding from third parties for maintenance,  
               restoration, operation, repairs and other purposes at state  
               parks and requires such funds to be deposited in a separate  
               account in the State Park Contingent Fund. 
             4)   Requires DPR, for all operating agreements it enters  
               into with third parties, to include a projection of costs,  
               including design, planning, construction, operation, staff,  
               maintenance, marketing, and information technology. 
             5)   Requires the California Parks and Recreation Commission  
               to approve general plans of state park units that are  
               prepared by DPR and establishes criteria for such  
               approvals. 







          AB 2549 (Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife)       Page 2  
          of ?
          
          


          PROPOSED LAW
          This is an omnibus committee bill that contains several  
          non-controversial items that affect the DPR and the Department  
          of Fish and Wildlife (DFW). Specifically, this bill: 

             1)   Removes the sunset on certain public hearing process and  
               administrative record matters of the California Endangered  
               Species Act. These provisions were enacted in SB 749 (Wolk)  
               in 2013 and the sunset was added to ensure there were no  
               unintended consequences. 
             2)   Extends the sunset date on the quagga and zebra mussel  
               invasive species program until 2020.  
             3)   Clarifies the cost analysis required for revenue  
               generation projects at the Department of Park so that the  
               criteria identified above are applied only when appropriate  
               to each funded project. 
             4)   Requires DPR, in consultation with the commission, to  
               present specific recommendations to the Legislature for  
               improving the state park planning and project approval  
               process that will do all of the following: 
               a)     Provide more efficient and cost-effective plan  
                 development, including the use of multi-unit general  
                 plans where appropriate; 
               b)     Provide clear guidance for management direction of  
                 the relevant park units; 
               c)     Provide for meaningful public participation;
               d)     Reduce redundant reviews carried out pursuant to  
                 CEQA and other statutes. 

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
          According to the author, the general plan process at DPR is  
          labor and resource intensive. DPR currently has a significant  
          backlog of state parks that do not have general plans, as well  
          as parks with plans that are outdated. DPR has estimated that  
          under the current process for general plans, it would take more  
          than 30 years to address the backlog. The commission has been  
          working with DPR in an effort to identify additional reforms as  
          well. 

          On the Fish and Game code changes, the author pointed out that  
          those procedural provisions had a sunset clause in order to  
          identify any unintended consequences from SB 749 (Wolk) in 2013.  








          AB 2549 (Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife)       Page 3  
          of ?
          
          
          No unintended consequences have been reported. 

          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
          None received

          SUPPORT
          None Received 

          OPPOSITION
          None Received

          
                                      -- END --