BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    





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

          BILL NO: SB 262                    HEARING DATE: May 12, 2009  
          AUTHOR: Lowenthal                  URGENCY: No  
          VERSION: May 11, 2009              CONSULTANT: Bill Craven  
          DUAL REFERRAL: No                  FISCAL: Yes  
          SUBJECT: Coastal resources: California Coastal Commission:  
          meeting.  
          
          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
          Section 30315.2 of the Coastal Act requires the California  
          Coastal Commission (CCC) to meet monthly. 

          The CCC is subject to various statutes that impose deadlines for  
          the review and approval of pending permit applications that are  
          filed with the commission. 

          PROPOSED LAW
          This bill would delete the requirement of the CCC to meet  
          monthly and instead would require that it meet at least 10 times  
          each year. The bill would also add a provision that extends any  
          applicable statutory deadlines to the subsequent meeting of the  
          CCC. 

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
          According to the author, the bill is needed to give the CCC some  
          flexibility for legally canceling a meeting, should that be  
          necessary for fiscal reasons, and to do so in a manner that  
          would not cause the CCC to lose jurisdiction over pending items,  
          which may otherwise be resolved by operation of law. These items  
          typically include coastal development permits and amendments to  
          local coastal plans, and the review of other local government  
          decisions, among other items.

          The fiscal circumstances of the CCC are often dicey. In recent  
          years, those circumstances have further deteriorated, and the  
          future, as with many agencies relying to some extent on General  
          Fund revenues, is even bleaker.  Last year, for example, the  
          Governor line-item vetoed 5% of the CCC general fund budget, and  
                                                                      1







          reduced overall personnel years from 145 to 139. In recent  
          years, the CCC has lost 26 general fund positions and $2.7  
          million in funding from FY 01-02 through the most recently  
          completed fiscal year. In 2008 it notified 46 employees that  
          they are at risk of layoffs. The CCC has a total workforce of  
          136 permanent and part-time employees. It has also instituted  
          voluntary unpaid leave days, eliminated training, and reduced  
          hearings to a maximum of 3 days. In 2008, the CCC increased  
          filing fees which is projected to generate $524,000. A  
          significant part of the CCC budget is dependent on  
          reimbursements and contracts from other agencies which are  
          themselves facing budget pressures. The Commission has reduced  
          its workload on several key Coastal Act provisions as well. 

          The author also noted that the CCC has had internal discussions  
          about the possibility of canceling meetings in recent years.  
          Meetings are a significant budget issue for the CCC which  
          involves staff and member travel, hotel rooms, per diems, and  
          other costs. The CCC now meets only in public meeting rooms,  
          eliminated all but essential staff travel, and commissioners  
          have tried to reduce their own travel costs. The issue facing  
          the CCC is how to maintain a reduced workforce while complying,  
          at least minimally, with the most important of its statutory  
          mandates, in the face of its shrinking budget.  The author  
          believes that the CCC should have the flexibility, if necessary,  
          to reduce its monthly meeting requirement while preserving its  
          right to consider pending business matters at its next hearings.  


          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
          Opposition from a coalition of business interests argues first  
          that the CCC should not be allowed to decrease its meeting  
          schedule "under the guise of" budgetary savings. The opposition  
          memo, representing the views of the California Chamber of  
          Commerce, the Business Properties Association, the CBIA, and  
          others, also argue that the CCC could streamline the review of  
          many agenda items in order to reduce meeting times. Lastly, the  
          coalition argues that the term "regularly" is not defined. This  
          correspondence was received prior to the amendments. 

          COMMENTS 
          Because of the budget situation facing the CCC, the amended  
          version of the bill creates the possibility that up to two  
          monthly meetings could be eliminated, although such a result  
          would not be required. Regular monthly meetings would continue  
          to occur unless it became necessary to eliminate one or two  
          meetings.
                                                                      2








          AUTHOR'S AMENDMENT. The author will amend the bill in committee  
          to delete the reference to "ten times per year" and will restore  
          the reference to "regularly." The recent amendment on May 11  
          keyed the bill as fiscal rather than non-fiscal. The author's  
          amendment will allow this Committee to hear the bill and report  
          it to the floor. The author will then adopt the "ten times per  
          year" amendment in the Assembly. 

          SUPPORT
          None Received

          OPPOSITION
          American Council of Engineering Companies of California
          California Business Properties Association
          California Building Industry Association
          California Chamber of Commerce
          California Manufacturers and Technology Association 





























                                                                      3