BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 372
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 30, 2009

                   ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
                            Jared William Huffman, Chair
                     SB 372 (Kehoe) - As Amended:  June 23, 2009

          SENATE VOTE  :   21-16
           
          SUBJECT  :   State Park System Units

           SUMMARY  :   Prohibits a modification or adjustment in the  
          boundaries or uses of a state park unit that is incompatible  
          with state park purposes and would significantly reduce the  
          public use, or material, cultural, or historic significance of  
          the park, or the removal of a state park unit from the state  
          park system, unless the State Park and Recreation Commission  
          (Commission) recommends the change and the change is approved by  
          the Legislature through enactment of legislation. 

           EXISTING LAW  :  

          1)Provides for the state park system which is managed by the  
            Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR).  DPR is responsible  
            for administering, protecting, developing and interpreting  
            state park property under its jurisdiction for the use and  
            enjoyment of the public.

          2)Establishes the Commission which is composed of nine members  
            appointed by the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation.   
            Requires Commission members to be selected from areas  
            distributed throughout the state.  Responsibilities of the  
            Commission include approval of general plans governing state  
            park units and classification of units of the state park  
            system. 

          3)Requires the Commission to hold a public hearing to consider  
            approval of a state park general plan and to consider each  
            matter of classification or reclassification of a state park  
            unit.

          4)Prohibits a facility from being developed in any unit of the  
            state park system unless it is compatible with the  
            classification of the state park unit. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Senate Appropriations  








                                                                  SB 372
                                                                  Page  2

          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.

           COMMENTS  :   The author has introduced this bill to give the  
          Legislature final authority over whether a proposed project that  
          would result in the removal of a state park, or a modification  
          to the boundaries or uses within a state park that is  
          incompatible with park purposes, is critical enough to override  
          existing preservation and conservation of the park.  The author  
          notes that several agencies, departments and commissions are  
          involved with reviewing proposals for development within state  
          parks, as exhibited by recent proposed projects within San  
          Onofre and Anza Borrego state parks.  In each of these instances  
          final authority rested with a different entity - the Coastal  
          Commission with regard to San Onofre and the Public Utility  
          Commission with regard to Anza Borrego.  As future projects  
          affecting state parks are proposed the author asserts that the  
          public should be able to look to one process for public input  
          and accountability by elected officials for state park lands  
          under the state's jurisdiction.  
          The author notes that increasingly the public benefits of  
          proposed public infrastructure projects are competing with the  
          public benefits of state parks.   In 2007, the California State  
          Parks Foundation conducted a survey of threats to state parks  
          and found 122 threats to 73 parks.  This bill requires the  
          Commission to make a recommendation to the Legislature regarding  
          proposals that are incompatible with state park purposes, and  
          then rests final authority with the Legislature as to whether to  
          approve or deny the recommendation.  

           Arguments in Support  :  Supporters of this bill point to the many  
          public benefits of state parks, and note that existing law does  
          not provide a consistent process for protecting state parks.   
          Supporters assert this bill appropriately vests the Legislature  
          with authority to balance any competing state interests that  
          threaten state park uses, and builds on the existing authority  
          of the Commission.  Other supporters note that many state parks  
          have been acquired by the state through the hard work and  
          efforts of land trusts who have conveyed properties to the state  
          for state parks purposes with the understanding that the parks  
          will be preserved in perpetuity.  They assert this bill will  
          ensure that any modification to a state park that is  
          incompatible with state park purposes and which significantly  
          reduces public uses, or the material, cultural, or historic  
          significance of the park, will be subject to a transparent  
          process and approval of the Legislature.     








                                                                  SB 372
                                                                  Page  3


           Arguments in Opposition  :  Opponents such as the Orange County  
          Business Council assert this bill would prevent potential new  
          job creation resulting from infrastructure projects on existing  
          parklands because it requires more steps to obtain approval for  
          such projects.  The Orange County Transportation Authority  
          believes this bill includes protections duplicative of existing  
          law, will create delays to already extensive environmental and  
          permitting review processes, and limits local land use and  
          transportation planning authority.  The Orange County Board of  
          Supervisors also asserts this bill diminishes executive  
          authority, and is intended to stop utility, water or  
          transportation infrastructure projects from occurring within or  
          near state park boundaries.  Other opponents point to terms in  
          the bill they believe are broad or undefined and may therefore  
          lead to litigation.

          It should be noted that the amendments to the bill adopted on  
          May 28th require that the modification significantly reduce  
          public use or the material, cultural, or historic significance  
          of the state park, and the June 23rd amendments clarify that the  
          modification applies only to uses within state park boundaries.

           Related Legislation  :  SB 679 (Wolk), also pending in this  
          committee, prohibits land acquired for the state park system  
          from being disposed of or used for other than park purposes  
          without the substitution of other land that the State Park and  
          Recreation Commission has certified is of equal value and meets  
          other specified conditions.
           

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          American Land Conservancy
          Anza Borrego Foundation
          Audubon California
          Bay Area Open Space Council
          Big Sur Land Trust
          California Coastal Protection Network
          California Council of Land Trusts
          California League of Conservation Voters
          California Park & Recreation Society
          California State Park Foundation








                                                                  SB 372
                                                                  Page  4

          Central Valley Land Trust Council
          Elkhorn Slough Foundation
          Environment California
          Lake County Land Trust
          Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County
          Land Trust of Napa County
          Land Trust of Santa Cruz County
          Lassen Land & Trails Trust
          Mattole Restoration Council
          Mountain Meadows Conservancy
          Muir Heritage Land Trust
          Peninsula Open Space Trust
          Placer Land Trust
          Planning and Conservation League
          Redwood Coast Land Conservancy
          Sacramento Valley Conservancy
          San Diego River Park Foundation
          San Francisco Bay Joint Venture
          San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust
          Sequoia Riverlands Trust
          Sierra Club California
          Sierra-Cascade Land Trust Council
          Sonoma Land Trust
          The Trust for Public Land
          Tri-Valley Conservancy
           
            Opposition 
           
          American Council of Engineering Companies of California
          California Chamber of Commerce
          California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance
          Orange County Board of Supervisors
          Orange County Business Council
          Orange County Transportation Authority
          Resources Landowners Coalition
          Sempra Energy (unless amended)
          Southern California Edison (unless amended)
          Transportation Corridor Agencies of Orange County

           Analysis Prepared by :    Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)  
          319-2096