BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 2598 HEARING DATE: June 29, 2010
AUTHOR: Brownley URGENCY: No
VERSION: June 16, 2010 CONSULTANT: Marie Liu
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Tidelands and submerged lands: sea level action plan.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The State Lands Commission (Commission) is charged with managing
and protecting the state's tide and submerged lands for the
public trust. With legislative approval, the Commission may
grant state tidelands to local governments for their use and
maintenance. The Legislature has transferred certain sovereign
lands in trust to 85 cities, counties, and harbor districts.
These "granted" lands include the ports of Los Angeles, Long
Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, Richmond, Benicia, and
Eureka. The Commission has oversight responsibilities over the
trustees to ensure compliance with the grant terms, California
law, and the Public Trust Doctrine.
Report on Sea Level Rise Preparedness: In December 2009, the
Commission released a Report on Sea Level Rise Preparedness
which summarized the efforts of state agencies, federal
agencies, and other coastal states to address sea level rise.
The report also contained the results of a survey to the state's
major lessees and grantees to assess the extent which they have
considered the potential impacts of seal level rise on
facilities on granted lands. The survey revealed that, "the
majority of survey respondents have not yet begun to
comprehensively consider the impacts of sea level rise." The
report also made 16 recommendations for Commission consideration
including:
Require all new coastal development projects to consider the
implications of and include adaptation strategies for
projected sea level rises of 16" and 55", depending on the
life of the project.
Adopt engineering design standards that would require major
facilities to withstand a defined storm event, such as a
1
100-year storm, taking into account sea level rise.
Evaluate structures subject to the ocean environment (wharves,
docks, levees, piers, etc.) for structural integrity and
potential hazards as sea level rises.
California Climate Adaptation Strategy: In December 2009, the
Resources Agency released the California Climate Adaptation
Strategy (CAS), pursuant to Executive Order S-13-2008, which
directed the Resources Agency to identify how state agencies can
respond to rising temperatures, changing precipitation patterns,
sea level rise, and extreme natural events. The report noted
that climate change is already affecting California with
increased average temperatures, more extreme hot days, fewer
cold nights, shifts in the water cycle, and the lengthening of
the growing season. Not addressing these changes can cause
significant economic damages to the state in the trillions of
dollars. The report argues that the state must address climate
change challenges with both climate adaptation and mitigation.
The report made a number of preliminary recommendations
including:
Preparation of agency-specific adaptation plans for sea-level
rise.
Considering project alternatives that avoid significant new
development in areas that cannot be adequately protected from
climate change impacts.
Amending general plans and local coastal plans to assess
climate change impacts, identify areas most vulnerable to
those impacts, and develop reasonable and rational risk
reduction strategies.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would require a local trustee of granted public trust
lands to prepare a sea level action plan, by July 1, 2011, that
shall be transmitted to the Natural Resources Agency, the
Governor's Office of Planning and Research, and the State Lands
Commission. The plan shall include the following:
An assessment of sea level rise impacts on the granted lands.
Maps indicating the areas affected by predicted sea level rise
in the years 2050 and 2100.
Estimates of the fiscal costs of sea level rise on granted
lands, including repair costs, lose of use costs, and
anticipated mitigation costs.
Strategies to prevent or mitigate damage to existing
development and infrastructure and to protect and enhance
undeveloped shorelines. Grantees shall consider, where
feasible, using nonengineered measures in accomplishing these
strategies.
2
Design standards that would avoid impacts to new development
and infrastructure.
Implementation measures and timetables.
The State Lands Commission may exempt a trustee from these plan
requirements or allow the trustee to submit a modified plan if
(1) none of the trustee's granted lands are subject to sea level
rise by 2100, (2) the cost of preparing the plan substantially
outweighs the economic and environmental benefits that the plan
would bring in respect to sea level rise on their granted lands,
and (3) revenues derived from the granted tidelands and outside
funding are insufficient to pay for the cost of developing the
plan.
The bill also makes a number of findings regarding
responsibilities of trustees of granted lands, the trustee's
fiduciary duties to the control and preservation of the granted
lands, and the impacts of climate change and sea level rise to
the state and port activities specifically.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The State Controller John Chiang, the sponsor of this bill,
states, "[This] measure will improve the State's overall
understanding of sea level rise readiness and yield valuable
input from local granted lands stakeholders on how the State, as
a whole, should address this pressing climate issue.
Specifically, the bill would require all trustees to estimate
the cost, prepare maps, identify strategies, and provide
timelines to implement sea level rise action plans. The risks of
sea level rise must be assessed as soon as possible. With
projected increases of 16" in 2050 and 55" by 2100, it won't be
long before sea level rise will threaten entire communities.
Furthermore, inaction puts the State and nation at grave
economic risk. California's coast is crucial to the state and
national economy, producing more than a half million jobs in
California [and] 2 million jobs nationally. Port activities in
California generate an estimated $7 billion annually in state
and local tax revenues."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The California State Association of Counties (CSAC), in
opposition to the bill, states, "The impacts of sea level rise
have the potential to dramatically impact multiple aspects of
human life, including our environment, the economy and public
health and safety. While CSAC supports the development of local
strategies to protect our communities from sea level rise, we
are concerned that AB 2598 would impose additional planning
requirements on local agencies without providing any source or
3
funding."
A joint letter from the California Business Properties
Association, California Chamber of Commerce, California
Manufactures & Technology Association, and Western States
Petroleum Association also opposes the measure because "absent a
clear resolution of how issues such as sea level change will be
addressed under CEQA, as well as how the recently released
California Climate Adaptation Strategy document is implemented
over time, this bill appears likely to result in costly and
duplicative work for local governments, other trustees, and
lessees and other users of trust lands."
COMMENTS
Funding for plans and hardship exemption: Recent amendments to
this bill add findings language stating that it is the trustee's
financial responsibility to take reasonable steps to manage and
preserve the trust property. Furthermore, the bill declares that
evaluation of sea level rise impacts on granted lands is
directly related to the management of the trust property. Thus,
the bill finds that it is appropriate for the trustee to use any
revenues received from the trust lands and trust assets to
prepare a sea level rise plan. While opponents to the bill argue
that these revenues are already being utilized to protect the
public trust on the granted lands, the bill does provide a
"hardship provision" that allows the commission to exempt or
modify a local trustee's requirements should the trustee have
insufficient funds. The committee may wish to also allow the
commission to grant a deadline extension with the thought that
some trustees will be able to find sufficient funds if they are
given additional time. [see amendment 1]
In further acknowledgement of the limited funds available for
plan preparation and in recognition of the workload involved in
preparing a sea level action plan, the committee may wish to
extend the deadline in this bill to July 1, 2012. [see amendment
2]
What is the projected sea level change in 2050 and 2100? There
is a range of predictions on sea level changes that California
may see in the future. Additionally, the extent of sea level
rise is still being studied, and projections are likely to be
modified with this additional information. While this bill does
not explicitly specify the increases that the trustees should
plan to, the bill does state that the plan should be developed
using relevant information contained in the 2009 California
Climate Adaptation Strategy and the Commission's Report on Sea
4
Level Rise Prepardness. Both these documents site a paper by the
California Climate Change Center (sponsored by the California
Energy Commission, the Ocean Protection Council, and CalEPA)
which estimates sea level rises of 30-45cm/12-18in by 2050 and
50-140cm/20-55in by 2100. The committee may find that it is
valuable for all trustees to plan to approximately the same sea
level rise projections to create uniformity in plans.
Taking advantage of existing sea level rise maps : Several
sources of maps of sea level rise currently exist, including
those produced by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission. The committee may wish to explicitly
allow trustees to meet the map requirements of the plan with
maps created by other sources that are included either in the
Resources Agency's Climate Adaptation Strategy or the
commissions' report on sea level rise prepardeness. [see
amendments 3 and 4]
Other amendments : This bill currently has an unnecessary
"notwithstanding" provision that the committee may find
desirable to delete. Also, the committee may wish to delete an
erroneous reference to beach replenishment as a nonengineered
measure to prevent and mitigate damage from sea level rise.
Lastly, the committee may wish to see the bill state the need
for design standards that would both avoid and mitigate impacts
to new development and infrastructure, similar to the
requirements for existing development and infrastructure.
[see amendments 5, 6, and 7]
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
On page 5, line 19, after "section" insert "grant a deadline
extension,"
AMENDMENT 2
On page 4, line 20, delete "2011" and insert "2012"
AMENDMENT 3
On page 4, line 24, delete "," and insert "and any subsequent
updates to this report,"
AMENDMENT 4
On page 4, line 30, after "events." insert: "A trustee may rely
on appropriate maps generated by other entities."
AMENDMENT 5
On page 4, line 15, delete "Notwithstanding any other law"
AMENDMENT 6
On page 5, line 3, delete "beach replenishment,"
AMENDMENT 7
On page 5, line 5, after "avoid" insert "or mitigate"
5
SUPPORT
California State Controller, John Chiang (sponsor)
Sierra Club California
Support to earlier versions of the bill:
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California State Lands Commission
Global Green USA
Heal the Bay
Port of San Diego
San Diego Coastkeeper
Save the Bay
OPPOSITION
California State Association of Counties
Delta Counties Coalition
Opposition to the 4/15/2010 version of the bill:
American Council of Engineering Companies of California
Automobile Aftermarket Industry Association
California Automobile Wholesalers' Association
California Business Properties Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Manufactures & Technology Association
California Forestry Association
California League of Food Processors
California Manufactures & Technology Association
California Metals Coalition
Western States Petroleum Association
6