BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 467
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 467 (Eng)
As Amended August 21, 2012
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |77-0 |(January 31, |SENATE: |38-0 |(August 22, |
| | |2012) | | |2012) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |77-0 |(August 24, | | | |
| | |2012) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: E.S. & T.M.
SUMMARY : Modifies the allocation of the Safe Drinking Water,
Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal
Protection Act of 2006 (Proposition 84) funds collected from
responsible parties for groundwater contamination cleanup.
Specifically, this bill :
1) Specifies that the regulations prepared by Department of
Public Health (DPH) for allocation of Proposition 84
recovered funds must:
a) Be adopted as emergency regulations and specify the
process for the recovery of cost from responsible parties;
and,
b) Authorize DPH to enter into an agreement with a
recipient of a Proposition 84 grant that would authorize
the expenditure of the recovered funds from responsible
parties to implement ongoing remediation and treatment
activities.
2) Establishes the Groundwater Contamination Prevention Account
in the State Treasury and requires funds recovered from
AB 467
Page 2
responsible parties to be deposited into the account.
3) Authorizes DPH to expend up to 3% of the recovered funds to
pay for DPH oversight costs to ensure the grantee expends the
recovered funds on additional groundwater cleanup activities.
4) Authorizes DPH to enter into an agreement with the Department
of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to use recovered funds for
groundwater cleanup projects. Such an agreement would allow
the expenditure of such funds to be counted against existing
state funding obligations under federal law.
5) Provides that this is an urgency measure, two-thirds vote
required.
The Senate amendments :
1)Provide for the creation of the Groundwater Contamination
Prevention Account for the deposit of Proposition 84 funds
collected from responsible parties to groundwater
contamination cleanup.
2)Authorize the DPH to enter into agreement with DTSC to manage
funds recovered from responsible parties for groundwater
cleanup projects that meet the requirements of Proposition 84.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes, under Proposition 84, the state to sell about $5.4
billion in general obligation bonds for safe drinking water;
water quality; water supply; flood control; natural resource
protection; and, park improvements.
2)Requires the DPH, when implementing the provisions of
Proposition 84, among other things, to develop and adopt
guidelines and regulations, consult with other entities,
conduct studies, and follow certain procedures for
establishing a project, grant, loan or other financial
assistance program.
3)Provides that the DPH must require repayment of Proposition 84
AB 467
Page 3
funds from parties responsible for contamination.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , provided authority for the DPH to
allow Proposition 84 grantee to not reimburse the state from
funds collected from responsible parties and instead to use
those cost recovery funds for groundwater cleanup and ongoing
management of water treatment systems.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee
this bill would result in ongoing costs of $150,000 per year
from the General Fund beginning in 2013-14 for staff time to
review and track recovered funds.
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill is needed, "to
allow local agencies that have been awarded Proposition 84 funds
from DPH for groundwater projects that are able to subsequently
recover funds from responsible parties to keep the money to fund
additional groundwater cleanup activities. Should local
agencies be successful in recovering the costs from responsible
parties, this bill will save significant State administrative
costs and allow the local agencies to use all of the recovered
funds for groundwater cleanup."
Proposition 84 . Approved by the voters in 2006, authorized $60
million to the DPH for loans and grants for projects to prevent
or reduce contamination of groundwater that serves as a source
of drinking water for the San Gabriel Valley. The DPH requires
repayment for costs that are subsequently recovered from parties
responsible for the contamination.
Is this a modification to Proposition 84 ? When the voters
approved Proposition 84, the initiative included specific
language requiring the repayment of funds from those persons or
businesses that caused the toxic contamination. The initiative
included Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 75025, which
mandates that the DPH require repayment of subject funds. The
full text of PRC Section 75025 is as follows:
The sum of sixty million dollars ($60,000,000)
AB 467
Page 4
shall be available to the Department of Health
Services for the purpose of loans and grants for
projects to prevent or reduce contamination of
groundwater that serves as a source of drinking
water. The Department of Health Services shall
require repayment for costs that are subsequently
recovered from parties responsible for the
contamination. The Legislature may enact
legislation necessary to implement this section.
While the language of Proposition 84 allows the Legislature to
enact legislation to implement the programs, on the other hand,
it is not clear if the repayment requirements to the state as
provided in the original bond act would be met under the
provisions of this bill.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
This bill would allow recipients of Proposition 84
groundwater clean-up funds to leverage those funds by
removing the requirement of having to pay back those
state funds when they recover funding from parties
responsible for the contamination, if they used the
recovered funds for continued clean-up of their
groundwater.
I support the leveraging of all available funding by
ensuring that recovered funds are effectively used in
the jurisdictions that recover them. Unfortunately,
the structure that was developed is cumbersome and
inefficient. I am directing the Department of Public
Health and the Department of Toxic Substances Control,
to once again work with the Legislature to develop a
more streamlined way to reinvest these funds.
Analysis Prepared by: Bob Fredenburg / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965
AB 467
Page 5
FN: 0005937