BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2092|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2092
Author: Huffman (D)
Amended: 8/18/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 5-3, 6/22/10
AYES: Pavley, Lowenthal, Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
NOES: Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff
NO VOTE RECORDED: Kehoe
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-3, 8/12/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Corbett, Leno, Price, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 47-26, 6/2/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Delta Plan: financing
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires the Delta Stewardship Council
to develop a long-term finance plan to pay for the costs of
implementing a management plan for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta Estuary, by January 1, 2013.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Declares there are two basic co-equal goals for the
Delta: a) to provide a more reliable water supply for
CONTINUED
AB 2092
Page
2
California; and, b) to protect, restore, and enhance the
Delta ecosystem.
2.Requires the co-equal goals to be achieved in a manner
that also protects and enhances the unique cultural,
recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values
of the Delta as an evolving place.
3.Establishes the DSC, a seven member body charged with
Delta governance through the development and
implementation of a comprehensive Delta Plan to achieve
the co-equal goals while protecting and enhancing the
Delta as an evolving place.
4.Sets out specific requirements for inclusion in the Delta
Plan.
This bill requires the Delta Stewardship Council, by
January 1, 2013, to develop a long-term finance plan to pay
for the costs of implementing the Delta Plan, including all
projects, programs, and related administrative costs
identified in the Delta Plan.
The finance plan will be required to include all of the
following information:
1.An annual expenditure plans for at least each of the five
years implementation of the Delta Plan.
2.An estimate of all existing state and federal funds.
3.An evaluation of existing programs and projects to
determine if funding could be redirected to the Delta
Plan.
4.A definition of public and private benefits.
5.An analysis and description of the basis for allocating
program and project costs among private and public
entities.
6.An enforceable mechanism that ensures that fees,
contractual payments, cost-share agreements, and
contributions are expended as intended, and not diverted
to other purposes.
This bill states that that finance plan shall recognize and
reflect the broad public benefit to the state and nation of
restoring and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.
AB 2092
Page
3
The finance plan shall identify and evaluate, pursuant to
the beneficiary pays principle, the benefits to, and
negative impacts caused by, all entities, including, but
not limited to, all of the following:
1.The public.
2.Urban and agricultural water users diverting water from
the Delta for use outside of the Delta, including, but
not limited to, the state and federal water contractors.
3.Urban and agricultural water user diverting water from
the Delta tributaries for use outside of the Delta
watershed.
4.Urban and agricultural water users diverting water for
use within the Delta and the Delta watershed.
5.Delta interests benefiting from flood protection.
6.Delta recreational interests.
7.Dischargers into the Delta and the Delta watershed,
including, but not limited to, wastewater dischargers and
sources of invasive species.
8.Commercial fishing interests within and outside of the
Delta.
9.Other interests with infrastructure or operations in the
Delta, including business and transportation entities.
The finance plan shall recognize that mitigation costs for
projects included in the Delta Plan are the responsibility
of the project beneficiaries.
The finance plan will be required to allocate costs based
on the beneficiary pays principle. Financing proposals to
pay for public benefits or impacts would include new and
existing state and federal funding including proceeds from
the sale of bonds. Financing proposals to pay for private
benefits or negative impacts will include new and existing
fees, contractual payments, and cost-share agreements.
To the extent existing fees, contractual payments,
cost-share agreements, and other contributions, support
programs and projects included in the Delta Plan, the
finance plan developed by the council shall identify which
of these existing contributions are eligible to be credited
against future funding requirements. The council shall
develop a baseline for the purposes of determining credit.
AB 2092
Page
4
The council will be required to review the finance plan at
least once every five years and update the plan as the
council deems appropriate.
The council will be prohibited from adopting new fees
unless a statute is enacted that specifically authorizes
the council to adopt such a fee.
The council will be authorized to seek to obtain early
funding contributions from groups that may benefit from the
implementation of the Delta Plan, for purposes of funding
the council's planning and administrative activities
related to the preparation of the Delta Plan. The council
will be required to track early funding contributions and
provide credit for those contributions against future
funding requirements.
Background
The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary
is the largest estuary on the West Coast supporting over
750 plant and animal species. Since late 2004, scientific
and public attention has focused on the unexpected collapse
of several Delta pelagic (i.e., open-water) fish species,
the delta smelt, longfin smelt, juvenile striped bass, and
threadfin shad. These fish are considered indicators of
the estuary's health.
From 2007 to 2009 moderate to severe drought conditions
and, to a lesser extent, federal biological opinions
necessary to protect Delta smelt, winter-run Chinook
salmon, spring-run Chinook salmon, steelhead, and green
sturgeon, led to reduced State Water Project and federal
Central Valley Project exports from the Delta. In 2008 and
again in 2009, unprecedented declines in the Chinook salmon
populations which migrate through the Delta led to the
complete closure of the commercial and recreational salmon
fisheries.
Last November, the Legislature passed the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta Reform Act (SB 1, Simitian, Chapter 5,
Statutes of 2009, 7th Extraordinary Session) to address the
long-troubled and deteriorating Delta. Among other things,
AB 2092
Page
5
SB 1 7X established the DSC, a seven member body charged
with developing, adopting, and commencing implementation of
a comprehensive management plan for the Delta by January 1,
2012.
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
Developing a financing plan
absorbable within existing resources
Bond*
*Proposition 84
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/18/10)
Audubon California
California Council of Land Trusts
City of San Diego
Contra Costa Water District
Cucamonga Valley Water District
Delta Counties Coalition
East Bay MUD
Eastern Municipal Water District
Irvine Ranch Water District
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Natural Resources Defense Council
Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District
Santa Clara Valley Water District
The Nature Conservancy
Three Valleys Municipal Water District
Westlands Water District
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/18/10)
City of Roseville
Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District
North Delta Water Agency
AB 2092
Page
6
Northern California Water Association
Placer County Water Agency
Sacramento Regional Water Alliance
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"The 2009 water legislation was in large part based on the
Delta Vision Strategic Plan prepared by the Blue Ribbon
Task Force in 2008. The Strategic Plan states:
"Successful governance of the Delta will depend on a
coherent, effective, and reliable financing structure.
That system must include financing to pay capital costs,
whether by GO bond or Revenue bonds, and Council authority
to impose reasonable fees related to implementation of the
Delta Plan.
"The Delta Vision Strategic Plan includes Finance
recommendations (Strategy 7.3) and indicates that financing
should come from multiple sources and the new system of
financing 'must be premised on beneficiaries of
improvements paying commensurate to their benefit.'
"Successful implementation of the Delta Plan will require a
financing structure that includes funding from the primary
beneficiaries of the Delta Plan and from those groups that
are continuing to impose negative impacts on the Delta
watershed. The Delta Plan will include actions related to
ecosystem restoration, improved water quality, improved
water supply reliability, and Delta levee improvements and
stability. A finance plan for implementing the Delta Plan
should recognize that public and private interests should
contribute in proportion to the benefits received or
negative impacts caused."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents are largely concerned
that they might be inappropriately required to pay fees to
fund the Delta Plan. The Northern California Water
Association's concerns are typical:
"If fees are to be established to pay for the Delta
Stewardship Council and the Delta Plan, then they should be
tied to direct benefits that will be derived from the
implementation of the Plan. It is difficult to see any
benefits to upstream water users that are not statewide or
public benefits. For example, the potential recovery of
AB 2092
Page
7
listed fish species is a public benefit that would be
realized at the state level. Suggestions that this would be
a measurable benefit to specific water users assumes that
the recovery would occur and that the actions implemented
as part of the plan would be less onerous than actions that
would be taken if the Plan is not implemented.
"We are also concerned with the potential perception that
allowing pre-payment of fees could bias the decision as to
who will pay fees and how much they will pay. Specifically,
the likely candidates to pre-pay fees are those who will
benefit from the implementation of the Delta Plan. If the
group required to pay fees is expanded to include those who
do not directly benefit from the Plan (and obviously did
not pre-pay fees), it will be difficult to not see this as
rewarding those who pre-pay."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro,
Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Emmerson, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Hall, Hayashi,
Hernandez, Hill, Huffman, Jones, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Villines, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee,
Buchanan, Conway, DeVore, Fuller, Gaines, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Huber, Jeffries, Knight, Logue,
Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth,
Tran, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Caballero, Cook,
Galgiani, Lieu, Audra Strickland
CTW:nl 8/18/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****