BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
1788 (Yamada)
Hearing Date: 08/12/2010 Amended: 07/15/2010
Consultant: Brendan McCarthy Policy Vote: NR&W 9-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 1788 changes the income threshold for
additional flood control funding provided by the state to local
governments, such that more low income communities will qualify
for increased funding.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Fund
Revising guidelines Absorbable within existing resourcesBond
*
Cost pressure on bond funds Likely in the millionsBond *
* Propositions 1E and 84.
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: Suspense File.
Under current law, the state provides funding for local,
federally-authorized flood control projects. The state generally
provides 50 percent of the non-federal share of a project's
cost. However, if the project meets certain criteria, the state
may provide up to 70 percent of the non-federal cost share. For
example, a project is eligible for additional state funding if
the project protects or enhances wildlife habitat, protects or
enhances recreational opportunities, or if the project provides
flood protection for areas that have a median household income
that is less than 120 percent of the federal poverty level.
Recommendations for additional funding are made by the Central
Valley Flood Protection Board to the Department of Water
Resources.
AB 1788 changes the standard for providing additional state
funding based on median incomes in a community. Under the bill,
the state may provide up to 70 percent of the non-federal cost
share for "disadvantaged communities" which is defined in the
Water Code as a community with annual median household income
less than 80 percent of the statewide median household income.
In 2008, 120 percent of the federal poverty level was about
$25,000. On the other hand, 80 percent of the statewide median
household income was about $49,000. Therefore, under the bill,
more communities would be eligible for additional flood control
funding. This will put pressure on existing bond funds for
additional funding, reducing the amount of funding available for
other projects. The amount of this cost pressure is unknown and
will depend on future flood control project applications.