BILL ANALYSIS
AB 348
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 5, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 348 (Salas) - As Introduced: February 19, 2009
SUBJECT : South Bay Irrigation District: directors.
SUMMARY : Eliminates the landownership requirement in order to
serve as a director of the South Bay Irrigation District.
EXISTING LAW
1)Requires that each director of an irrigation district be a
voter, a landowner in the district, and a resident of the
division of the district that he or she represents at the time
of his or her nomination or appointment and through his or her
entire term, unless elected at a formation hearing.
2)Removes the landownership requirement from the list of
qualifications to serve as a director of an irrigation
district if the district is required to submit an urban water
management plan.
3)Removes the landownership requirement for the director of an
irrigation district with divisions, if the district is
required to submit an urban water management plan to the State
Department of Water Resources, and supplies drinking water to
the division for which the director represents or seeks to
represent.
FISCAL EFFECT : Keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
AB 159 (Salinas), Chapter 847, Statutes of 2006, eliminated
the property ownership requirement for directors in urban
irrigation districts that have submitted an Urban Water
Management Plan. However, it did not eliminate the
requirement for South Bay Irrigation District, because
although the district is urban, it is not a water purveyor
and thus does not submit an Urban Water Management Plan.
This is an anomaly and it appears the intent of AB 159 was
AB 348
Page 2
to cover the very urban South Bay Irrigation District. AB
348 clarifies that the provisions of AB 159 (Salinas) also
apply to the South Bay Irrigation District.
2)Related Legislation : AB 159 (Salinas), Chapter 847, Statutes
of 2006 was a similar bill that eliminated the property
ownership requirement for directors in urban irrigation
districts that have submitted and Urban Water Management Plan.
However, it did not eliminate the requirement for South Bay
Irrigation District, because it was not a water purveyor and
thus was not required to submit an Urban Water Management
Plan.
3)Double Referral : This bill was heard in the Assembly Local
Government Committee on April 15, 2009 and passed out of the
committee on a 7-0 vote as a consent item.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
South Bay Irrigation District (co-sponsor)
Sweetwater Authority (co-sponsor)
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Qiana Charles / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094