BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1334
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 4, 2004
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Judy Chu, Chair
SB 1334 (Kuehl) - As Amended: June 17, 2004
Policy Committee: Natural Resources
Vote: 7-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill establishes a process that counties must follow in an
effort to mitigate the loss of oak woodlands resulting from the
approval of development projects.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Moderate costs, perhaps an average of $200,000 annually
starting in FY 2005-06, to Caltrans and other state agencies
pursuing significant capital outlay projects that may require
oak woodlands conversion and mitigation costs. (State Highway
Account and other capital outlay-related special funds.)
2)Moderate statewide costs, in the range of $250,000 starting in
FY 2004-05, to counties containing oak woodlands that must
develop procedures and conditions for mitigating the loss of
oak woodlands resulting from development projects. These
costs are covered by fees a county may impose on project
developers, and thus, are not reimbursable from the state.
SUMMARY CONTINUED
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a county to include, in its oak woodlands management
plan, a provision that requires mitigation when oak woodlands
are converted to other purposes
2)Requires a county to determine whether a development project
will result in a conversion of oak woodlands that will have a
significant effect on the environment, and, if so, to consider
SB 1334
Page 2
the following oak woodlands mitigation alternatives:
a) Conserve two oak trees for each oak tree that is
removed.
b) Restore former oak woodlands so that twice as many oaks
are restored as the project removes.
c) Contribute funding for one of the above alternatives, to
the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund to help finance the
purchase of oak woodlands conservation easements.
3)Requires the county, if mitigation is provided by the planting
of oak seedlings, to require the planting of three seedlings
for each oak removed and to require ongoing care, maintenance,
monitoring and replanting, as necessary to ensure the survival
of the resulting trees.
4)Allows a county that receives a state grant under the Oak
Woodlands Conservation program to use the grant to fund its
costs to prepare an oak conservation element for a general
plan, an oak protection ordinance, or an oak woodlands
management plan.
5)Exempts the following activities from oak woodlands management
plans:
a) Harvesting of firewood for noncommercial use.
b) Approved Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs).
c) Removal of dead or diseased trees.
d) The removal of smaller oak trees.
e) Affordable housing projects.
f) Certified state regulatory programs subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
COMMENTS
Rationale . The author claims that California has lost more than
a million acres of oak woodlands since 1950. This loss is due,
in part, to continuing expansion of new subdivisions into
previously rural areas of the state and the expansion of
agriculture, in particular vineyards, into these areas.
Opponents, primarily agricultural interests, claim that the
total statewide canopy of oak woodlands and other hardwoods has
stabilized in recent years and that current CEQA and the state's
Oak Woodlands Conservation program requirements are sufficient
to protect the state's oak woodlands.
SB 1334
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by : Steve Archibald / APRO / (916) 319-2081