BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1334
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Byron D. Sher, Chairman
2003-2004 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1334
AUTHOR: Kuehl
AMENDED: March 31, 2004
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: April 19, 2004
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Randy Pestor
SUBJECT : CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
SUMMARY :
Existing law , under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), requires lead agencies with the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated
declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this
action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA. CEQA includes
various statutory exemptions, as well as categorical
exemptions in the CEQA guidelines. CEQA also clarifies that
certain types of projects are subject to the act ( e.g. , Napa
Valley rail service, certain higher education facilities).
This bill :
1) Under CEQA:
a) Specifies that CEQA applies to timberland conversions
and oak woodland conversions, but does not apply to oak
woodland conversions under the Conversion of Oak
Woodlands Law (#2 below).
b) Requires the State Board of Forestry and Fire
Protection to adopt regulations by January 1, 2006, to
implement above requirement.
c) Requires an alternative to mitigating the conversion
of timberland to include a monetary contribution to the
California Forest Legacy Program, if certain conditions
are met ( e.g. , mitigation includes at least the same
amount of acreage as proposed for conversion, landowner
SB 1334
Page 2
provides appraisal funds).
d) Requires a county, in a provision of its oak
woodlands management plan or by ordinance, to require
mitigation as specified ( e.g. , monetary contribution to
Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund, planting replacement
trees, onsite mitigation, offsite mitigation). Certain
state entities are authorized to establish a mitigation
bank that may be used to fulfill the offsite mitigation
requirements.
e) Authorizes a county to charge a fee to cover
administrative, monitoring, and mitigation enforcement
costs.
f) Authorizes the oak woodlands management plan or
ordinance to exempt certain activities ( e.g. , conversion
of less than three acres, harvesting of fuelwood for
noncommercial use by the landowner, removal of dead and
diseased trees posing risks).
g) Defines certain terms ( e.g. , conversion, oak, oak
woodlands).
h) Provides that the above requirements cannot prohibit
a county from adopting a plan or ordinance that is more
protective of oak trees or oak woodlands.
2) Enacts the Conversion of Oak Woodlands Law that:
a) Requires conversion of oak woodlands from an
agricultural use to another use to meet certain
requirements under CEQA added by the bill (#1 d above),
regardless of whether an oak woodlands management plan
or local ordinance has been adopted.
b) Requires a landowner or project proponent to give
notice of a proposed agricultural oak woodlands
conversion to the county agricultural commissioner.
c) Requires the commissioner to provide notice of the
conversion and make a finding that the mitigation
SB 1334
Page 3
alternative under CEQA has been implemented.
d) Authorizes the commissioner to require a licensed
arborist or registered forester to oversee mitigation.
e) Requires the commissioner to provide a biennial
report commencing January 1, 2006, regarding oak
woodlands conversions.
f) Provides fee authority for the commissioner's
administrative costs.
g) Provides related legislative intent.
h) Authorizes the Secretary of the Resources Agency to
revoke the applicability of the Law to a county that
does not adequately supervise or mitigate oak woodlands
conversions.
COMMENTS :
1) Purpose of Bill . According to the author, "The conversion
of oak woodlands and timberlands in California into
residential ranchettes and intensive agriculture has
created an unprecedented threat to California's signature
landscapes. More than one million acres of California's
oak woodlands have been lost since 1950 along with nearly
90 percent of riparian woodland statewide. Other threats
to oak woodlands include the fragmentation of large ranches
into small exurban lots. For example, in Nevada County,
the median size of landholdings in 1957 was 550 acres, and
by 2001 had been reduced to just 9 acres. The
fragmentation leads to an increase in roads, invasion of
exotic plant and animal species, and fencing, all of which
causes harm to indigenous wildlife. Vinyard expansion in
coastal counties and some areas of the Sierra foothills
also seriously contributes to the loss of oak woodlands."
The author notes that CEQA "is supposed to require mitigation
for the loss of oak woodlands. However, local governments
often fail to enforce this aspect of CEQA. Local
ordinances dealing with oak woodlands are often voluntary.
In reality, there is no effective mechanism in existing law
SB 1334
Page 4
to mitigate for the loss of oak woodlands."
According to the author, in response to the above concerns,
"Rather than create a new mandate for state agencies to
enforce CEQA, this bill provides a menu of options for
landowners to mitigate for projects that affect oak
woodlands. The bill will be administered at the county
level. It does not prohibit any projects." The author
notes the options available under the bill, the numerous
exemptions, and indicates that "Agricultural conversions
will be handled separately, by the county agricultural
commissioner or another local official. Lands within city
boundaries are also exempted. Counties with strong oak
woodland ordinances may be exempted from the bill upon
certification by the Secretary of Resources."
2) Brief background on CEQA . CEQA provides a process for
evaluating the environmental effects of a project, and
includes statutory exemptions, as well as categorical
exemptions in the CEQA guidelines. If a project is not
exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine
whether a project may have a significant effect on the
environment. If the initial study shows that there would
not be a significant effect on the environment, the lead
agency must prepare a negative declaration. If the initial
study shows that the project may have a significant effect
on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR.
Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed
project, identify and analyze each significant
environmental impact expected to result from the proposed
project, identify mitigation measures to reduce those
impacts to the extent feasible, and evaluate a range of
reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. Prior to
approving any project that has received environmental
review, an agency must make certain findings. If
mitigation measures are required or incorporated into a
project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.
If a mitigation measure would cause one or more significant
effects in addition to those that would be caused by the
proposed project, the effects of the mitigation measure
SB 1334
Page 5
must be discussed but in less detail than the significant
effects of the proposed project.
3) Seeking to provide guidance . Current law allows a state
agency regulatory program plan or other documentation
containing certain information to be submitted in lieu of
an environmental impact report (EIR) if the program has
been certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency
(commonly referred to as a "functional equivalent"). The
CEQA guidelines provide that a timber harvesting plan is a
discretionary action under the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest
Practice Act of 1973 (CEQA guidelines 15357), and
specifies that regulation of timber harvesting operations
is a functional equivalent program (CEQA guidelines
15251(a)). For a timber conversion, all timber must be
cut in accordance with an approved conversion pursuant to a
timber harvesting plan, with the exception of certain
requirements (Public Resources Code 4622). Therefore, a
conversion should currently be addressed through the
functional equivalent program. SB 1334, however, specifies
that a timberland conversion is subject to CEQA and
provides certain procedures for mitigating the effects of a
timberland conversion. This bill also sets procedures for
mitigating oak woodland conversions.
4) Clarification needed . SB 1334 enacts the Conversion of Oak
Woodlands Law (COWL), which sets requirements for
conversion of oak woodlands from an agricultural use to
another agricultural use, and adds requirements under CEQA
relating to the conversion of oak woodlands and timberland.
Clarification is needed in the above provisions. For example,
a) COWL requires compliance with one of the new mitigation
requirements under CEQA (Public Resources Code 4811),
(assuming "of Section 21083.4" on page 3, lines 5 and 6,
should not be stricken) but 21083.4(a) prohibits CEQA from
applying to COWL; b) 21083.4(d)(3) provides for
contributions to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund, while
the Oak Woodlands Conservation Act prohibits grants from
the fund to be used for acquiring land to mitigate project
impacts (Fish and Game Code 1366(b)); c) 21083.4(d)(4)
authorizes a mitigation alternative of planting replacement
trees on up to 10 acres, while 21083.4(d)(5) requires
SB 1334
Page 6
mitigation options to "double in acreage the land
converted"; d) 21083.4(d)(5) allows counties to reduce the
required mitigation acreage for "superior quality
mitigation lands" but this term is undefined and there is
no guidance on the reduced amount; e) 21083.4(d)(5) allows
a equal amount of mitigation land in certain areas with
undefined terms or cross references ( e.g. , urban reserve
line, urban services line); f) 21083.4(d)(9) allows
exemptions for certain purposes ( e.g. , harvesting of
fuelwood by the landowner, projects within oak woodlands
with no oak trees greater than five inches in diameter),
but sets no acreage limits for the exemptions; and g)
allows stricter local ordinances under CEQA
(21083.4(d)(10)), but not under COWL.
If the committee believes that procedures should be specified
for mitigating the conversion of oak woodlands, then terms,
mitigation alternatives, and exemptions in SB 1334 should
be clarified, and it may be appropriate for the bill to
focus on oak woodlands conversions.
5) Support and opposition concerns . Supporters generally note
the value of the state's oak woodlands ( e.g. , support
thousands of plants and animals, watershed functions,
scenery that supports tourist industry), problems
associated with the conversion of oak woodlands, and the
importance of mitigating conversion impacts and
establishing appropriate mitigation options.
Opponents assert that SB 1334 expands CEQA for oak and timber
conversions, requires the Board of Forestry and Fire
Protection to develop duplicative regulations for
timberland, requires up to two-to-one mitigation, creates a
quasi-CEQA process for converting oak woodlands on
agricultural lands, and conflicts with the Oak Woodlands
Conservation Act of 2001.
SOURCE : Senator Kuehl
SUPPORT : California Oak Foundation, Defenders of
Wildlife, Endangered Habitats League, Natural
Resources Defense Counsel, Planning and
Conservation League, Sierra Club California
SB 1334
Page 7
OPPOSITION : Agricultural Council of California, Association
of California Water Agencies, California
Agricultural Commissioners and Sealers
Association, California Association of
Realtors, California Association of Winegrape
Growers, California Building Industry
Association, California Business Properties
Association, California Cattlemen's
Association, California Chamber of Commerce,
California Farm Bureau Federation, California
Forestry Association, California Grain and Feed
Association, California Manufacturers and
Technology Association, California Association
of Counties, California Wool Growers
Association, Consulting Engineers and Land
Surveyors of California, Family Winemakers of
California, Forest Landowners of California,
Kern County Water Agency, Lumber Association of
California and Nevada, Regional Council of
Rural Counties, Resource Landowners, Coalition,
Transportation Corridor Agencies of Orange
County, Tulare County Farm Bureau, Wine
Institute