BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1788
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 14, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1788 (Yamada) - As Introduced: February 10, 2010
Policy Committee: Water, Parks and
Wildlife Vote: 12-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill changes the criteria by which a flood control project
may receive an increased amount of state funding. Specifically,
this bill:
1)Authorizes, upon recommendation of the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) or the Central Valley Flood Protection Board,
a flood control project to receive a greater amount of state
funding if the project increases flood protection within an
area that has a household poverty rate more than 150% of the
household poverty rate of the state. (Current law makes such
an authorization for a project that increases flood protection
within an area that has a median household income less than
120% of the federal poverty level.)
2)Updates statute to reflect the change in name of the
"Reclamation Board" to the "Central Valley Flood Protection
Board."
FISCAL EFFECT
Cost pressures of an unknown amount, but potentially in the
millions of dollars. This is because more flood control
projects will qualify for state subvention funding, which is
finite. To the extent the state wishes to fund all these flood
control projects, there will be cost pressure to find new fund
sources to do so. (Bond funds or special funds.)
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . Existing law authorizes the state to increase,
AB 1788
Page 2
from 50% to no more than 70%, its share of nonfederal capitol
costs of a flood control project. The state is authorized to
increase such funding if the area that benefits from the
project has a median household income less than 120% of the
federal poverty level. According to the author, this method
of determining the poverty of an area prevents the state from
increasing funding for flood control projects in areas that
are impoverished, despite existing legal definitions. This is
because, the author contends, the methodology for determining
an area's poverty is based on comparisons to federal
standards, which fail to account for California's generally
higher cost of living.
This bill instead will determine an area's relative poverty by
comparing the rate of poverty in the area to the rate of
poverty in the rest of the state. As a result, the author
concludes, more flood control projects in impoverished areas
will qualify for increased state funding, in keeping with the
intent of the law.
2)Background . Under the State Water Resources Law of 1945, the
state may participate in funding local flood control projects
that are authorized by the Legislature and that meet specified
criteria. State authorization for funding of a flood control
project is contingent upon preceding federal statutory
authorization of the project.
Consistent with state law (AB 1147, Honda, Chapter 1071,
Statutes of 2000), the state must contribute a portion of the
capital costs of the non-federal share (meaning the costs paid
by state or local governments) of federal flood control
projects that have been authorized by the state. In most
cases, the state portion is 50% of the nonfederal share. The
state portion may be as much as 70% of the nonfederal share,
however, if a project increases flood protection in an area
with a median household income less than 120% of the federal
poverty level.
As of 2009, there were about $82 million in claims for
subventions for approved flood control projects. There is
about $350 million remaining in unappropriated Proposition 1E
funds for flood control subventions.
3)Supporters , including numerous local governments contend, this
bill would result in increased funding for important flood
AB 1788
Page 3
control projects, especially in areas of the state with
relatively high rates of poverty.
4)There is no registered opposition to this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081