BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1788|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1788
Author: Yamada (D)
Amended: 7/15/10
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 9-0, 6/29/10
AYES: Pavley, Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe,
Lowenthal, Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 11-0, 8/12/10
AYES: Kehoe, Ashburn, Alquist, Corbett, Emmerson, Leno,
Price, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 6/1/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Water development projects: state financial
assistance
SOURCE : California Central Valley Flood Control
Association
DIGEST : This bill 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.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Requires specific percentages of nonfederal (i.e. state
and local) cost sharing for federal flood control
CONTINUED
AB 1788
Page
2
projects.
2.Allows the state to increase the state share of the
nonfederal capital costs of a flood control project from
50 percent to up to 70 percent if the project would
increase the level of flood protection in an area with a
median household income that is less than 120 percent of
the federal poverty level, as defined by the Department
of Finance.
3.Changes the name of the Reclamation Board to the Central
Valley Flood Protection Board.
This bill:
1.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.
2.Corrects the name of the former Reclamation Board to the
Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
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 percent of the
non-federal share. If the area to be benefited by that
project is economically disadvantaged, the state can
increase its share of the non-federal flood control project
CONTINUED
AB 1788
Page
3
costs to up to 70 percent.
The determination of whether an area is economically
disadvantaged, and therefore qualifies for an increased
state payment of the non-federal share, is currently based
on a whether a project increases flood protection in an
area with a median household income less than 120 percent
of the federal poverty level. Such a comparison to federal
median income levels doesn't take into consideration that,
while California average income levels are higher,
California costs of living are also higher.
This bill determines eligibility for the state to pay up to
70 percent of the non-federal share by comparing the number
of families living in poverty in the area to be benefited
against the median percentage of families living in poverty
in California. If the area to be benefited is at least 150
percent of the California average, it would be eligible.
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.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Revising guidelines
Absorbable within existing resources
Bond*
Cost pressure on bond funds Likely in the
millions
Bond*
* Propositions 1E and 84.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/16/10)
CONTINUED
AB 1788
Page
4
California Central Valley Flood Control Association
Association of California Water Agencies
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
County of Yolo Board of Supervisors
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters, including numerous
local governments, contend this bill would result in
increased funding for important flood control projects,
especially in areas of the state with relatively high rates
of poverty.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong,
Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,
Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez,
Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico,
Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Audra Strickland
CTW:nl 8/16/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED