BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    





           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |         SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER         |
          |                   Senator Fran Pavley, Chair                    |
          |                    2009-2010 Regular Session                    |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

          BILL NO: AB 2775                   HEARING DATE: June 22, 2010
          AUTHOR: Huffman                    URGENCY: Yes
          VERSION: June 17, 2010             CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
          DUAL REFERRAL: No                  FISCAL: Yes
          SUBJECT: Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of  
          2010: surface storage projects: joint powers authorities.  
          
          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
          As a part of the water package passed in the 2009/10 7th  
          extraordinary session, was SBX7 2 (Cogdill).  That bill enacted  
          the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2010,  
          which, if approved by the voters in November 2010, would  
          authorize $11.14 billion in general obligation bonds to fund  
          various water resources programs and project.  The funding by  
          chapter is as follows:

             $455 M            Chapter  5.        Drought Relief
             $1,050            Chapter  6.Water Supply Reliability
             $2,250            Chapter  7.Delta Sustainability
             $3,000            Chapter  8.Statewide Water System  
          Operational Improvement
             $1,785            Chapter  9.Conservation And Watershed  
          Protection
             $1,000            Chapter  10.Groundwater Protection And  
          Water Quality
              $1,250             Chapter  11.Water Recycling Program
          $11,140 M            Total

          Chapter 8 would provide $3.0 B for surface and groundwater  
          storage projects.  Chapter 8 specified, among other things, that  
          funds allocated construction of surface storage projects  
          identified in the CALFED Bay-Delta Record of Decision may be  
          provided for those purposes to local joint powers authorities  
          formed by irrigation districts and other local water districts  
          and local governments within the applicable hydrologic region to  
          design, acquire, and construct those projects.  

                                                                      1







          Chapter 8 further specified that the joint powers authorities  
          (JPA) may include in their membership governmental and  
          nongovernmental partners that are not located within their  
          respective hydrologic regions in financing the surface storage  
          projects, including, as appropriate, cost share participation or  
          equity participation. Also the Department of Water Resources  
          (DWR) would be an ex-officio member of each joint powers  
          authority subject to this section, but the DWR would be  
          prohibited from controlling the governance, management, or  
          operation of the surface water storage projects.





          PROPOSED LAW
          
          This bill would delete the provision authorizing JPAs to include  
          in their membership governmental and nongovernmental partners  
          that are not located within their respective hydrologic regions  
          in financing the surface storage projects.

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT

          According to the Author, "AB 2775 clarifies that the intent of  
          the bond funds is to be used only for public benefits.  These  
          amendments remove unnecessary language to avoid possible  
          confusion regarding private partners in a public JPA"

          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None

          COMMENTS 
          
           Is This The Only Correction Needed?   The press periodically  
          reports on one group or another asserting that the bond includes  
          too much pork, is tilted too much towards environmental  
          programs, includes too much money for traditional water  
          projects, includes too many carve outs, or is simply too large.   
          It is not clear whether additional amendments to the bond are  
          necessary or desirable to address other perceived deficiencies.

          SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: None 

          SUPPORT
          None Received

          OPPOSITION
                                                                      2







          None Received














































                                                                      3