BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: SB 833 HEARING DATE: April 28, 2009
AUTHOR: Natural Resources and WaterURGENCY: No
VERSION: As Introduced CONSULTANT: Estella Cisneros
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Natural Resources: mining: conservation lands
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Section 1
In order to get permission to mine, an owner must file a
reclamation plan, which includes financial resources to cover
the clean-up costs of the mine and the mine operations in case
of bankruptcy or other kinds of financial insolvency. In order
to insure consistency across the state, clarifications on what
must be included in the actual reclamation plan form must be put
into statue.
Section 2
SB 1285 (Corbett 2008) resulted in several changes to the
appraisal process and the acquisition of conservation lands,
including changing the definition of acquisition agency and
conservation lands and required a workgroup to develop and adopt
appraisal process standards.
Section 3
When a county coroner receives notice of a discovery of Native
American human remains, it must inform the Native American
Heritage Commission, which is required to then attempt to locate
the most likely descendents. When the commission cannot identify
a descendant, the descendants do not make a recommendation, or
the landowner and the descendants do not agree, the landowner
must reinter the human remains on his/her property in a location
that is not subject to further and future disturbance. To
protect this site, the landowner must do one of several things,
including submitting a form with the county. In order to insure
1
consistency across state records, specification of what
information is on that document requires statutory change.
Sections 4&5
Treasure Island, located in San Francisco, includes lands that
were historically tidelands subject to the public trust. The
tidelands that would become Treasure Island were transferred to
the city in 1933 and 1935. Yerba Buena Island, also located in
San Francisco, was acquired by the US Navy in 1898. In 1941, the
city leased Treasure Island to the US and both Islands became
the Naval Station Treasure Island military base. The Naval
Station was closed in 1997. In 1997, the CA Legislature granted
authority to the Treasure Island Development Authority to
redevelop the lands once the land was transferred from the Navy
to the city.
As negotiations took place, the State asserted that Treasure
Island, a man-made island built on filled tide and submerged
lands, was comprised of sovereign lands subject to the public
trust for commerce, navigation and fisheries upon its transfer
out of federal ownership. The federal government asserted that
the nature and extent of the State's sovereign interest in the
property was uncertain.
In order to facilitate the productive reuse of the property and
to clear up this point of contention, the Treasure Island Public
Trust Exchange Act (Chapter 543 of the Statutes of 2004, as
amended) authorized the State Lands Commission to carry out a
land exchange that would place the trust on portions of Yerba
Buena Island and terminate the trust on portions of Treasure
Island.
This 'switch' was necessary because the configuration of trust
and non-trust lands within the property was such that the
purposes of the public trust could not be fully realized.
Certain uplands on Yerba Buena Island of high value to the
public trust were not subject to the public trust. Likewise, a
portion of the trust lands on Treasure Island had been cut off
from access to navigable waters and were not useful for public
trust purposes.
Sections 6&7
SB 815 (Midgen 2007) authorized the City and County of San
Francisco to lease, sell, or otherwise transfer all or any
portion of certain tidelands and submerged lands constituting
"paper streets" in the City and County of San Francisco. It also
authorized designated seawall lots as free from the public
2
trust, with the San Francisco Port Commission authorized to
lease the seawall lots.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would do the following:
1) Section 1 : Specify what information must be on the mine
reclamation form, including the name of the owner of the
mine, the name of the lead agency, and the signature of the
lead agency representative.
2) Section 2 : Amend the section of law that requires the
seller of conservation lands to substantiate his or her tax
benefit with an appraisal. The change in wording will
conform with the common term the Franchise Tax Board uses
for a tax return.
3) Section 3 : Specify what information the document that
must be filed by the property owner with the county in
order to protect sites where Native American remains lay.
The form will be titled "Notice of Reinterment of Native
American Remains" and will include a description of the
property, the property owner's name and the property
owner's signature.
4) Section 4 : Makes clarifying changes to the provision of
the Treasure Island Public Trust Exchange Act requiring the
protection of views from public areas on Yerba Buena Island
that will be exchanged into the public trust.
5) Section 5 : Revises the diagram (map) in the Exchange Act
depicting the trust exchange to reflect a change in the
location of the proposed Treasure Island ferry terminal and
other clarifications and corrections to the diagram
consistent with current ownership boundaries and the
proposed development plan for the island.
6) Section 6 : Makes clarifying changes to the "paper
streets" provision in the statutes.
7) Section 7 : Section 15 of the pertinent statutes contains
a place holder for a map of the designated seawall lots.
This section adds that missing map to the statutes.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The contents of the bill provide technical clean-up and
clarification to previous legislation.
1) Section 1 : Specification of information included on the
reclamation form via statute is necessary in order to
insure the consistency statewide of records.
2) Section 2 : The change in wording will conform with the
term the Franchise Tax Board uses for a tax return, thereby
3
providing clarification and preventing confusion.
3) Section 3 : Specification of information included on the
reinternment document via statute is necessary in order to
insure the consistency statewide of records.
4) Section 4 : The changes regarding the protection of views
from public areas on Yerba Buena Island provide
clarification with respect to the views previously
described in statute.
5) Section 5 : The revision of the map in the Exchange Act
are consistent with current ownership boundaries and the
proposed development plan for the island. Updating the map
prevents future issue with the provisions.
6) Section 6 : The clarifying changes to the "paper streets"
provision in the statutes aide in the consistent
implementation of the statutes.
7) Section 7 : Adding a missing map to existing statues
completes the passage of the bill.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received
SUPPORT
None Received
OPPOSITION
None Received
4