BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1385
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 3, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez, Chair
SB 1385
(Leyva) - As Amended March 29, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Governmental Organization |Vote:|20 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill stipulates the state share of eligible costs, under
the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) to local entities
will be 100% of total state eligible costs in connection with
the shooting that occurred at the Inland Regional Center in San
Bernardino on December 2, 2015.
FISCAL EFFECT:
General Fund costs of approximately $1.6 million to be payable
over several fiscal years beginning in 2016-17.
SB 1385
Page 2
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. On December 2, 2015, a terrorist attack occurred at
the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino County when
several individuals opened fire on county employees
participating in a training event, killing 14 people and
injuring 26 others. Governor Brown proclaimed a state of
emergency for San Bernardino County on December 18, 2015.
According to the author, SB 1385 will help ensure that local
entities will be eligible to receive 100% reimbursement for
costs related to the attack.
2)Background. The California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA)
requires the state to pay 75% of specified local costs for any
state-declared emergency. When there is a federal declaration,
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) pays local
governments for 75% of eligible disaster mitigation costs, and
the state pays 75% of the remaining 25% of eligible costs.
For purposes of the CDAA, the term "disaster" is defined as a
fire, flood, storm, tidal wave, earthquake, terrorism,
epidemic, or other similar public calamity that the Governor
determines presents a threat to public safety. Local costs
eligible for reimbursement include expenditures for local
agency personnel, equipment, and materials used during
disaster response activities, repair and replacement of public
facilities damaged as a result of a disaster event, debris
removal, and other emergency work.
SB 1385
Page 3
3)Historical precedent. There are some incidences where the
state has paid 100% of the non-federal eligible disaster
mitigation costs in specified disasters. However, no such
reimbursement has occurred since 2006. Moreover, the
Legislature has not increased the Act funding to 100% for
state-only disasters that are not federally declared. The
incident in question in SB 1385 was not a federally declared
disaster.
4)Related legislation. Recent attempts to increase the state's
share of state eligible costs to 100% have failed to be signed
into law. Those bills include:
a) SB 1118 (Berryhill) in 2016 would have added thee forest
fires that occurred in the County of Calaveras in 2015 to
the list of events for which the state share of state
eligible costs is up to 100% under the CDAA. That bill was
held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
b) SB 937 (McGuire) in 2016 would have added the forest
fires that occurred in the County of Lake in 2015 to the
list of events for which the state share of state eligible
costs is up to 100% under the CDAA. That bill was held in
the Senate Appropriations Committee.
c) AB 18 (Dodd) in 2015 would have added the South Napa
earthquake that occurred in Napa County on August 24, 2014
to the list of disaster events for which the state share of
state eligible costs is 100%. That bill was held in the
Senate Appropriations Committee.
d) AB 1429 (Chesbro) in 2011 would have added the tsunami
that occurred in Del Norte County on March 2011 to the list
of disaster events for which the state share of state
SB 1385
Page 4
eligible costs is 100%. (Vetoed - Governor's message
noted, "The state has not paid for a local government's
share of disaster costs since 2006 and this measure would
cost the state over $1 million. In addition, if I sign
this measure, other counties that sustain similar damages
would likely request the same relief - a precedent that
the state currently cannot afford.")
Analysis Prepared by:Luke Reidenbach / APPR. / (916)
319-2081