BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2669
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2669 (V. Manuel Perez)
As Introduced June 1, 2010
Majority vote
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY 7-2
APPROPRIATIONS 12-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Nava, Miller, Chesbro, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Ammiano, |
| |Davis, Feuer, Monning, | |Bradford, |
| |Ruskin | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| | | |Davis, Monning, Ruskin, |
| | | |Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Torlakson, Torrico |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Blakeslee, Smyth | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Establishes legislative intent to encourage the
Department of Water Resources (DWR), if it elects to expend
integrated regional water management (IRWM) funds to implement a
pilot program for disadvantaged community assistance, to require
a recipient of funds under the pilot program to conduct
specified activities. Specifically, this bill :
1)Establishes legislative intent to encourage DWR, if it elects
to expend specified IRWM funds to implement a pilot program
for disadvantaged community assistance, to require a recipient
of funds under the pilot program to do all of the following:
a) Implement a community engagement process that includes
consultation with appropriate stakeholders, including, but
not limited to, the county in which the project is located,
local environmental health departments, tribes with
existing or ancestral land within or adjacent to the
region's boundaries, community-based organizations, and
representatives of disadvantaged communities, and other
appropriate entities with experience or interest in
drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and other
water-related issues affecting disadvantaged communities;
b) For purposes of contracting or subcontracting services
AB 2669
Page 2
to complete pilot program requirements, give consideration
to non-profit organizations or other organizations with
relevant experience in the region in which the project is
located; and,
c) Consider methods that provide cost savings for
high-priority water-related problems affecting
disadvantaged communities, including consolidation of
community water systems, wastewater systems, and flood
systems, and steps to implement consolidation of those
systems, where appropriate and feasible.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Pursuant to Proposition 84, which was approved by voters in
2006:
a) Authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of
$5,388,000,000 for the purpose of financing a safe drinking
water, water quality and supply, flood control, and
resource protection program;
b) Authorizes $1,000,000,000 of those funds to be available
to DWR, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for grants
for projects that assist local public agencies in meeting
the long-term water needs of the state, including the
delivery of safe drinking water and the protection of water
quality and the environment; and,
2)Appropriates, of the $1,000,000,000 of Proposition 84 funds
mentioned above, $181,791,000 to DWR for integrated regional
water management activities, including $22,091,000 for
projects with interregional or statewide benefits.
FISCAL EFFECT : Negligible costs to DWR.
COMMENTS : According to the author's office, "Small rural
communities in Eastern Coachella Valley lack adequate waste
treatment and drinking water infrastructure. Currently, most
AB 2669
Page 3
mobile home parks in the Eastern Coachella Valley are rural and
remote, and are served by private wells, where land owners are
responsible for the water quality. In the Eastern Coachella
Valley, numerous small community water systems serving mobile
home park communities have been found to contain levels of
arsenic that far exceed legal limits and should not be consumed.
Yet many of these wells remain untreated and residents remain
without a consistent and reliable source of drinking water. To
ensure a consistent and reliable source of water we need to do
all we can to connect these communities to the regional water
and waste water provider- the Coachella Valley Water District
(CVWD)."
In 2006, voters approved Proposition 84, The Safe Drinking
Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and
Coastal Protection Bond Act. Proposition 84 authorizes about
$5.4 billion in bonds to finance programs for safe drinking
water, water quality and supply, flood control, and resource
protection. Of that amount, $1 billion is available to DWR,
upon appropriation by the Legislature, for grants for projects
that assist local public agencies in meeting the long-term water
needs of the state, including the delivery of safe drinking
water and the protection of water quality and the environment.
From this $1 billion, the Legislature allocated $181,791,000 to
DWR for IRWM activities, including $22,091,000 for projects with
interregional or statewide benefits. This bill sets
requirements for recipients of funding from the $22,091,000 IRWM
funds specified for projects with interregional or statewide
benefits, should DWR elect to expend any of funds to implement a
pilot program for disadvantaged community assistance.
Analysis Prepared by : Shannon McKinney / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965
FN: 0004772