BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1334
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1334 (Wolk)
As Amended May 10, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :23-12
NATURAL RESOURCES 5-2 WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE
9-4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Chesbro, Brownley, De |Ayes:|Huffman, Arambula, |
| |Leon, Hill, Huffman | |Blumenfield, Caballero, |
| | | |De La Torre, Gatto, |
| | | |Bonnie Lowenthal, Salas, |
| | | |Yamada |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Gilmore, Logue |Nays:|Fuller, Anderson, Tom |
| | | |Berryhill, Fletcher |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fuentes, Bradford, |
| |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Davis, De Leon, Gatto, |
| |Hall, Skinner, Solorio, |
| |Torlakson, Torrico |
| | |
|-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, |
| |Nielsen, Norby |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)
planning to include cooperation with local entities.
Specifically, this bill requires the Department of Fish and Game
(DFG), when it makes findings that an NCCP meets state law, to
specify that development of the NCCP included cooperation with a
local agency that has land use permit authority over plan
activities.
SB 1334
Page 2
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits the taking (i.e., hunting, pursuing, killing) of
species listed pursuant to the California Endangered Species
Act (CESA) without authorization from DFG.
2)Provides three avenues for authorizing take of CESA-listed
species: A consistency determination, which is a finding by
DFG that a previously-issued authorization under the Federal
Endangered Species Act also meets CESA's requirements; a
permit issued by DFG pursuant to CESA; or, a permit issued by
DFG for species whose conservation and management is provided
for in an NCCP.
3)Allows DFG to enter into a planning agreement with any person
or public entity for the purpose of preparing an NCCP, in
cooperation with a local agency that has land use permit
authority over the activities proposed to be addressed in the
plan, to provide comprehensive management and conservation of
multiple wildlife species, including, but not limited to,
those species listed pursuant to CESA.
4)Requires DFG to approve an NCCP after making certain findings,
including that the plan was prepared consistent with the
process identified in the planning agreement.
FISCAL EFFECT : Negligible costs to DFG.
COMMENTS : According to the author's office, this bill seeks to
maximize the successful implementation of NCCPs by encouraging
early participation of local land use entities. To ensure that
DFG involves the local planning entity, as required by existing
law, this bill requires DFG to make an affirmative finding that
the local entity has been cooperated with, prior to approving an
NCCP for implementation. While earlier NCCPs typically only
encompassed one county, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP)
as well as the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, two of
the more recent NCCPs in development, span multiple counties,
highlighting the need to coordinate with multiple local agencies
in order for the plan to be successful. However, the author's
office has emphasized that they are not interested in reopening
existing planning agreements. The author's office adds that,
while current law establishes the need to involve local land use
agencies in the planning phase of NCCP development, current law
SB 1334
Page 3
does not provide a specific check point to ensure that
cooperation has taken place.
DFG, in general comments opposing this bill, states that it
could jeopardize existing NCCP flexibility by forcing it to
cooperate with a local land use permitting authority.
While there is no existing requirement for DFG to make a finding
that cooperation with local agencies has been achieved, it is
unclear how DFG can claim this bill will force it to cooperate
with local agencies when existing law states that NCCP planning
agreements, while voluntary, are to be entered into in
cooperation with a local agency that has land use permit
authority over the activities proposed to be addressed in the
plan.
Prior amendments by the author to make this bill require
cooperation with a local agency that has land use permit
authority over the activities to be addressed in the plan,
instead of all local agencies with land use permit authority,
removed all other opposition.
Analysis Prepared by : Tina Cannon Leahy / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0005625