BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: SB 1443 HEARING DATE: April 13, 2010
AUTHOR: Simitian URGENCY: No
VERSION: As Introduced CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Multi-Hazard Coordination
Task Force.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Emergency Preparedness
Act of 2008, the Office of Emergency Services (later renamed the
California Emergency Management Agency, or Cal-Ema) is required
to establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Multi-Hazard
Coordination Task Force, upon the availability of funding.
The task force is to be led by Cal-Ema, and is to include the
Delta Protection Commission, the Department of Water Resources,
and a single representative from each of the five Delta
counties.
The task force is charged to do all of the following:
Make recommendations to Cal-Ema relating to the creation of an
interagency unified command system organizational framework.
Coordinate the development of a draft emergency preparedness
and response strategy for the Delta region.
Develop and conduct an all-hazard emergency response exercise
in the Delta, designed to test regional coordination protocols
already in place.
The task force is required to submit a report with its
strategy and recommendations to the Legislature and the
Governor prior to January 1, 2011, and shall cease to exist
on or before January 1, 2011.
These provisions sunset on January 1, 2011.
1
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would extend the reporting due date and the sunset to
January 1, 2013.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, there is a possibility that the Task
Force will not complete their work on time. Cal-Ema has
experienced furloughs which have resulted in lost worked days to
the Task Force. Cal-Ema believes that they will finish on time
by January 1, 2011; however, if they do experience any
additional delays the task force may have to come back in 2011
to seek reauthorization for their work. This in turn would
further delay the ultimate work product. Extending the
reporting due date and sunset date, as proposed by this bill,
will eliminate the risk of additional delay, should the task
force not complete its work by January 1, 2011.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None
COMMENTS
By all accounts, everyone wants the final report be completed on
time. However, there is a legitimate concern that, despite best
intentions, the task force may miss its deadline, and, given the
way the statute was written, the consequences of missing the
deadline are an even greater delay.
This bill would extend the due date for the final report by two
years. The implication is that the Legislature would be OK if
the report was delayed two years. However, no one appears to be
arguing that they want the report delayed. Rather, they simply
want to avoid having to reauthorize the task force should the
report not be completed on time. One way to resolve this issues
is to maintain the current due date for the report, but change
the expiration date of the Task Force to whenever the report is
submitted to the Legislature. This way, if the report happens
to be late, the Task Force would still exist and could complete
its work.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
Delete lines 30 though 32 and insert:
January 1, 2011, and shall cease to exist on the date on
which the report is submitted.
2
SUPPORT
None Received
OPPOSITION
None Received
3