BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1818
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 22, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Wesley Chesbro, Chair
AB 1818 (Blumenfield) - As Amended: March 16, 2010
SUBJECT : Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy: Upper Los Angeles
(LA) River Watershed Program
SUMMARY : Creates the Upper Los Angeles River and Watershed
Program (Program), to be administered by the Santa Monica
Mountains Conservancy (Conservancy), to address the resource
protection, public recreation, water conservation, and water
quality goals of the LA River watershed in a coordinated,
comprehensive, and effective way.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the Conservancy, pursuant to Chapter 1087,
Statutes of 1979, to award grants or loans to cities,
counties, districts, or nonprofit organizations to restore,
enhance, acquire, or conserve resources or develop
recreational opportunities in and around the Santa Monica
Mountains environment.
2)Creates the 26-member the Conservancy Advisory Committee to,
among other things, propose and review projects for
Conservancy action and provide opportunities for public
participation.
3)Establishes the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and
Mountains Conservancy (RM Conservancy), pursuant to Chapter
789, Statutes of 1999, to acquire and manage public lands
within the Lower LA River and San Gabriel River watersheds,
and to provide open-space, low-impact recreational and
educational uses, water conservation, watershed improvement,
wildlife and habitat restoration and protection, and watershed
improvement within the territory.
4)Provides that watershed protection activities in the San
Gabriel and LA River watersheds must be consistent with the
San Gabriel and LA River Watershed and Open Space Plan
(Watershed Plan) as adopted by the RM Conservancy and the
Conservancy. Each conservancy must implement the Plan
pursuant to its respective authorizing statutes.
AB 1818
Page 2
THIS BILL :
1)Adds the chair of the Upper LA River and Watershed Stakeholder
Advisory Committee to the Conservancy board, increasing its
membership to 10 members.
2)Creates the Program, to be administered by the Conservancy, to
address the resource protection, public recreation, water
conservation, and water quality goals of the Upper LA River
Watershed in a coordinated, comprehensive, and effective way.
3)Requires the inclusion within the Program: all projects
identified by the City of LA its LA River Revitalization
Master Plan (LARRMP); all projects identified by the County of
LA in the LA River Master Plan (Master Plan); any other
project that may be recommended by a stakeholder committee and
approved by the Conservancy; any other project that may be
recommended by the Conservancy. All projects must be
consistent with the Watershed Plan.
4)Establishes the Program Stakeholder Advisory Committee
(Advisory Committee), which will consist of 10 voting members
and five ex officio members; the 10 voting members are as
follows:
a) Three members of the public, who shall be appointed one
each by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the
Senate Committee on Rules, and all of whom shall be
residents within the Upper LA River Watershed;
b) Director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works;
c) Member of the Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles
County;
d) Los Angeles City Engineer or a designated employee
thereof;
e) A member of the Los Angeles City Council, to be
appointed by the Mayor;
f) A member of the city council of a city within the
watershed, other than the City of LA, as determined by the
AB 1818
Page 3
city selection committee;
g) Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency or his or her
employee designee;
h) A member appointed by the Conservancy to represent
underserved communities.
5)Requires the Advisory Committee to encourage public
participation in the development of projects, propose projects
for funding by the Program, review and coordinate projects to
avoid duplication and to achieve maximum multiple benefits
from projects funded by the Program, annually review the
Program and solicit nominations of new projects from all
affected constituencies and from all portions of the
watershed; advise the Conservancy with respect to project
funding priorities.
6)Directs the Advisory Committee to annually report to the
Legislature by December 1.
7)Requires the Conservancy to fund the implementation of this
bill using only existing state fiscal resources.
8)Authorizes the Conservancy to undertake projects and award
grants to an eligible entity if they furthers the purposes and
objectives of the Program; are consistent with the Watershed
Plan; or are consistent with Proposition 84 funding
requirements. The Conservancy may also approve, disapprove,
or modify a grant or proposed project, or condition the
approval thereof, to better comply with the purposes of the
Program.
9)Provides that any authority granted by this bill is in
addition to any other power the Conservancy or any other state
or local agency may exercise pursuant to any other law.
10)Creates the Program Protection Account within the Conservancy
Fund and continuously appropriates funds that may be
transferred into the account.
11)Provides that this bill does not affect the jurisdiction or
authority of other state or local agencies or districts with
regulatory or non-regulatory responsibilities over the LA
River.
AB 1818
Page 4
12)States the intent of the Legislature that the Program must be
implemented within existing budgetary resources, and that the
Conservancy must use, to the greatest extent possible, the
resources of other governmental entities and nonprofit
organizations in carrying out the Program's responsibilities.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose : According to the author's office, "Currently, there
isn't a state program that addresses the LA River's needs from
a watershed perspective. By establishing this program, the
Conservancy can help to organize the intense stakeholder
interest in projects within, and adjacent, to the river. The
program would allow for regional stakeholder input and would
help to implement the Los Angeles County River Master Plan and
the City of Los Angeles River Revitalization Plan." The
author's office and sponsor, the Mountains and Recreation
Authority, indicate that this bill is modeled after the San
Francisco Bay Area Conservancy Program of the State Coastal
Conservancy.
2)Background : According to the LARRMP, the LA River flows
approximately 51 miles from its origin in the San Fernando
Valley to Long Beach Harbor and the Pacific Ocean. The River
runs east/southeastward through LA and along the cities of
Burbank and Glendale in its northern reaches, and then heads
southward, flowing through the cities of Vernon, Commerce,
Maywood, Bell, Bell Gardens, South Gate, Lynwood, Compton,
Paramount, Carson, and Long Beach. The LA River and its
adjacent San Gabriel River drain 1,513 square miles from the
San Gabriel Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. The river and its
original habitat, once the site of early Native American and
Spanish settlements, have been completely transformed into an
urban metropolis of about seven million people. Until the
1930s, the LA River and its tributaries were primarily
"natural bottom" streams. Devastating floods in 1914, 1934,
and 1939 led to the construction of a concrete-lined channel
along most of its 51 miles.
As soberly stated in the LARRMP, "?with the rail yards,
warehouses, and other industrial uses that line the River's
edge, the River has become both literally and figuratively
AB 1818
Page 5
isolated from most people and communities. Most residents
cannot see the River, let alone enjoy it as a valuable public
resource. For the six decades since the River was paved, it
has been treated as an unwelcome guest in many neighborhoods."
3)Brief history and status of the LARRMP and LA River Master
Plan : The LARRMP is, according to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa,
a "25 to 50 year blueprint for transforming the City of LA's
32-mile stretch of the river into an 'emerald necklace' of
parks, walkways, and bike paths, as well as proving better
connections to the neighboring communities, protecting
wildlife, promoting the health of the river, and levering
economic reinvestment." It is also the culmination of an 18
month public process, beginning in October 2005, which
included the input of many stakeholders and thousands of
citizens. As of February 2010, the City of LA has spent
nearly $70 million (from local, state, and federal sources)
and completed 13 projects; it is currently implementing 43
capital projects, 25 of which are bridges that traverse the LA
River and various flood control channels, that total almost $1
billion.
The LA River Master Plan (Master Plan), completed and adopted
by the LA County Board of Supervisors in 1996, proposes a
multi-objective program for the LA River while recognizing its
primary purpose for flood protection. The objectives of the
Master Plan, overseen by an advisory committee of 50
government and non-government entities, include environmental
enhancement, recreational opportunities, and economic
development. Since adoption (and as of 2005), over $100
million in projects have been developed including bikeways,
parks, landscaping, community events, and restoration efforts.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in partnership with the
City of LA, has also initiated development of ecosystem and
watershed restoration, recreation, and water quality
enhancement opportunities along 32 miles of the LA River.
4)Is a separate program necessary at this time? Section 79508
of the Water Code requires watershed protection activities in
the San Gabriel and LA River watersheds to be consistent with
Watershed Plan, adopted by the Conservancy and the RM
Conservancy in 2001. The Conservancy implements the Watershed
Plan in the upper LA River watershed (upstream of the City of
Vernon); the RM Conservancy implements the plan in the San
Gabriel River and lower LA River watershed. State resource
AB 1818
Page 6
bond funds allocated for LA River protection have respected
the same bifurcation of jurisdiction (Prop 84 allocated $36
million to both conservancies). Moreover, the Safe, Clean,
and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010 provides $75
million to both conservancies for projects consistent with
section 79508 and specifically for projects identified in the
LARRMP.
The Watershed Plan articulates a vision for the future of the
San Gabriel and LA Rivers Watersheds and provides a framework
for future watershed and open space planning. It outlines a
set of guiding principles and strategies to guide and
implement open space planning in the watersheds, and
identifies conceptual projects such as the creation of open
space, paths, trails, recreation areas, and wildlife habitat
along the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Rio Hondo Rivers;
acquisition of open space and; maintenance and enhancement of
flood protection. Both conservancies committed to developing
specific projects and planning documents following adoption of
the Watershed Plan; in fact, one of the Conservancy's
strategic objectives is to implement the plan.
In the Budget Act of 2007, the Legislature requested a
supplemental report from both conservancies on individual or
collaborative actions taken to protect and restore habitat
along the LA River. The conservancies reported that "The two
agencies continue to work with each other and many partners to
accomplish goals in river planning, restoration, watershed
protection, public access, and watershed-related recreational
opportunities along the [LA] River and its tributaries?. Both
[conservancies] look forward to continued implementation of
the [LA River] Master Plan and other plans?and will continue
to coordinate with each other and our partners to maximize the
investment of state, federal, local and private funds."
Given existing authority and funding to implement projects
along the entire LA River watershed, the framework for
watershed protection provided by the Watershed Plan, the
Plan's near identical purposes with this bill, and, more
importantly, the Legislature's clear preference for
collaborative planning and implementation efforts, it is not
clear why a separate Program on only one-half of the river (23
of 51 miles). By codifying the Program, would the Legislature
unduly elevate the upper LA River over the lower LA River,
which has a higher population density and concentration of
AB 1818
Page 7
lower-income communities most in need of access to open space
and recreational opportunities? Should the Legislature also
create a lower LA River Program or rely on the existing
collaborative relationship among both conservancies to make
the most efficient use of limited bond resources?
It is worth noting that the San Francisco Bay Area Conservancy
Program was created in 1997, in part, because the bay did not
fall within the jurisdiction of any conservancy. It was also
created as a coordinating entity to lead the conservation and
restoration efforts of like-minded local and regional
government and non-governmental entities. While this Program
appears to be intended to emulate this coordinating role,
despite excluding one-half of the LA River, there are several
on-going watershed coordinating and cooperative efforts
including three entities created to oversee the implementation
of the above river planning efforts: the LA City and County
River Cooperation Committee, the River Revitalization
Corporation, and the River Foundation. Additionally,
stakeholders in a multi-county planning initiative, comprised
of 5 sub-regions including the lower and upper LA River,
adopted an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan in 2006
to improve water supplies, enhance water supply reliability,
improve surface water quality, preserve flood protection,
conserve habitat, and expand recreational access in the
region. By definition, this initiative requires local
agencies and stakeholders, including both conservancies, to
work together to coordinate planning activities across
jurisdictional boundaries. Certain stakeholders have
expressed concerns that yet another planning effort as
envisioned by this bill could be redundant and unnecessarily
complicate existing efforts.
5)Conservancy should have greater role in convening Stakeholder
Advisory Committee : This bill creates a 15-member Advisory
Committee, comprised of gubernatorial and legislative
appointments, LA City and County elected and appointed
officials, state agency heads, and others, to, among other
things, propose watershed projects and encourage public
participation in the development of other projects. The
Conservancy currently has a 26-member advisory committee,
comprised mostly of local government representatives, charged
with similar responsibilities.
Generally, an advisory committee is created, and its members
AB 1818
Page 8
are appointed, by the entity seeking its advice. Otherwise,
that advice may not be heeded. For example, the membership of
the advisory committee of the newly created San Francisco Bay
Restoration Authority (AB 2954, Chapter 690, Statutes of 208),
is entirely determined by the authority provided it has broad
representation of community and agency interests. However,
this bill authorizes the Conservancy to appoint only one
member to the 15-member committee.
6)Suggested amendments :
a) Page 6, lines 30-39: This section inappropriately
includes all LAARMP and Master Plan projects in the Program
by default. While these projects may be consistent with
the Conservancy's mission and the Watershed Plan, most
projects pursuant to the LAARMP and Master Plan have yet to
be defined. Instead of identifying specific projects to
include in the Program, which creates undue pressure to
fund a project, the committee and author may wish to
specify Program objectives and priorities (e.g., are
supported by adopted local or regional plans, serve a
regional constituency, include matching funds). Projects
that meet these objectives may then be considered by the
Conservancy for funding. The author indicates that Section
33225(b) may accomplish this purpose but this should be
clarified.
b) Page 7, line 1: This section requires all projects for
watershed protection to be consistent with the Watershed
Plan. However, the Watershed Plan all includes conceptual
public access and recreation projects, for example. Thus,
subdivision (b) should read: "All projects for watershed
protection shall be consistent with the [Watershed Plan]."
c) Page 9, lines 3-6: This paragraph inappropriately
authorizes unconditional use of staff of any public or
private entity to implement the bill. This paragraph
should, instead, read: "The conservancy may accept
donations of money or services or utilize the staff of any
qualified public or private entity that shares the same
mission or objectives of the Program to assist the
stakeholder committee and the conservancy in implementation
of this chapter."
d) Page 9, lines 7-9, 32-34: These subdivisions authorize
AB 1818
Page 9
the Conservancy to undertake a project directly and award
grants in accordance with Program requirements. However,
as written, the Program requirements do not include those
typically applied to acquisitions, project development or
grant-making (e.g., property acquisition requirements of
the Government Code, residual funds should be returned to
the state to be appropriated by the Legislature) pursuant
to the Conservancy's underlying statute. Program projects
should not be treated any differently than other projects.
e) Page 9, line 28: This subdivision authorizes the
Conservancy to approve, disapprove, or modify a grant or
proposed project to better comply with the Program.
"Proposed project" should be deleted; it is only within the
purview of an applicant to modify its proposed project.
f) Page 9, lines 35-40: This section directs the Advisory
Committee to submit an annual report to the Legislature on
or before December 1. This is an inappropriate delegation
of responsibility to a voluntary, advisory body. Instead,
the Conservancy should include Program reporting in its
existing annual reporting to the Legislature pursuant
section 33208 of the Public Resources Code.
g) Page 10, lines 20-23: This section continuously
appropriates any funds, including state bond funds, to a
newly created Program account. This continuous
appropriation should be deleted to ensure proper
legislative oversight.
h) Technical amendments: the word "Master" should be added
after "Revitalization" on page 6; section 33221(b) should
be referenced instead of section 33225(b) on page 9.
7)Dual-referral : Should the committee approve this bill, it will
be re-referred to the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife
Committee.
AB 1818
Page 10
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file
Opposition
The City Project
Analysis Prepared by : Dan Chia / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092