BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2011-2012 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 1077 HEARING DATE: June 28, 2011
AUTHOR: Carter URGENCY: No
VERSION: May 27, 2011 CONSULTANT: Marie Liu
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: State parks: Colonel Allensworth State Historic Park.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The Colonel Allensworth State Historic Park (Allensworth SHP)
was established in 1976 to preserve and honor a unique part of
California's history at the town of Allensworth.
Allensworth is the only California town founded, financed and
governed by African Americans. The small farming community was
founded in 1908 by Colonel Allen Allensworth and others as a
place where African Americans could escape discrimination and
live and thrive without persecution. After only a few years, the
town grew to over 200 inhabitants and became a voting precinct
and a judicial district in 1914. Eventually, uncontrollable
circumstances, including a drop in the area's water table, the
onset of the Great Depression, and arsenic contamination of
groundwater wells, led to the town's decline. However, with
continuing restoration and special events, the town is coming
back to life as a state historic park. A yearly rededication
ceremony reaffirms the vision of the pioneers. Recently, the
state has invested millions in capital improvements to the park
that were completed in time for the park's centennial
celebration in 2008. The park has a visitor center, video and
audio presentations, historic buildings, a picnic area, and
year-round camping facilities.
The park is located north of Bakersfield, and is 20 miles north
of Wasco on Hwy 43.
Existing law establishes the State Park and Recreation
Commission (Commission), consisting of nine members appointed by
the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation. Under Public
Resources Code �539, the Commission is responsible for
1
establishing general policies to guide the Department of Parks
and Recreation (DPR) in the administration, protection, and
development of the state park system. More specifically, the
Commission is responsible for approving the classification of
and general plans for individual state park units.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would prohibit the development of any area within two
and a half miles of the boundary of Allensworth SHP for purposes
incompatible with the historical, cultural, or recreational
significance of the park, except if that development was
approved by Tulare County before March 11, 2011. Specifically
this bill would:
Require the Commission to determine whether a use is
incompatible at a public hearing.
Define an "incompatible use" as one that would conflict
with or diminish the existing use or enjoyment of the park.
The benefits of a proposed development to the park and
surrounding community, including economic benefits, must be
considered by the Commission.
Allow a determination by the Commission to be appealed
to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency.
Require DPR to study the feasibility of recommending
Allensworth SHP to be designated as a National Historic
Landmark.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The California Legislative Black Caucus, in support of the bill
states, "Assembly Bill 1077 supports growth and economic
development around Colonel Allensworth State Historic Park while
also providing protection of this unique historical and cultural
resources as well as the environmental and geological condition
of the area from incompatible use. More than 30 years ago,
Governor Reagan designated the colony area as a state park and
in 2008, Allensworth State Park celebrated its centennial.
However, its very existence has been threatened in the past and
continues to be threatened by the potential establishment of
dairies, chicken farms, and other incompatiable use development.
The preservation of Allensworth is essential to the accurate and
historical representation of not only African Americans in
California, but of all Californians."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The California Farm Bureau Federation, in opposition to an
earlier version of the bill, states, "While we would agree that
Allensworth State Historic Park is an important historic
resource, we do not believe that such a massive buffer zone is
2
warranted or desirable?AB 1077 would set a very undesirable
precedent by which the Legislature assumes land use authority
from local elected officials despite their duly adopted General
Plans and zoning ordinances. Previous attempts to usurp local
land use decisions in the area of Allensworth sought to prohibit
agricultural operations surrounding the park. We cannot think of
a more compatible use for lands around this 1908 farming
community than ongoing farming activities."
COMMENTS
Past - and potential future - incompatible uses around
Allensworth: In 2007, Tulare County approved a final
environmental impact report (EIR) and a special use permit to
allow two large dairy complexes, known collectively as the
Etchegaray Dairy Projects, to be developed within a mile of
Allensworth SHP. The project would have housed over 12,000
animals on 320 acres. The entire complex would have included
approximately 2,300 additional acres of support land for the
collection and disposal of liquid and solid manure wastes from
the dairy that was planned 1,001 feet from the park's boundary.
There were significant concerns with the project- including
concerns raised by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality
Control Board, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District, and the Department of Fish and Game, in addition to
the DPR. The Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Tulare
County alleging violations of the California Environmental
Quality Act, including insufficiently responding to the concerns
raised by the responsible and trustee agencies.
Also in response to the proposed Etchegaray Dairy Project,
Assemblymember Carter introduced AB 576 in 2007 that would have
restricted the creation of an animal feeding operation within a
two and a half mile radius of Allensworth SHP. AB 576 was passed
by this Committee and the Senate Floor. However, AB 576 was
never brought up for concurrence since the Governor and DPR
negotiated a compromise with the land owners that resulted in
the state's purchase of a Land Use Restriction Easement from the
landowners for $3.5M. The easement prohibits any type of animal
operation on two parcels of land within one mile of the park.
Despite resolution on the Etchegaray Dairy Project, the author
is concerned on how future development might affect Allensworth
SHP. Currently approximately 27% of the area in a 2.5 mile
radius from the park is protected either by the Etchegaray
easement, the Allensworth Ecological Reserve, the Pixly National
Wildlife Refuge, or the park itself.
3
While the author's office did not cite high speed rail as a
specific concern, one of the proposed high speed rail routes
between Bakersfield and Fresno comes within 1,000 feet of the
park's boundaries.
What is the appropriate role for the Commission in protecting a
park outside the park boundaries? Allensworth SHP is certainly
not the only state park that has faced conflicting uses in and
surrounding the park. In fact, in 2007, the State Park
Foundation conducted a survey of threats to state parks and
found 122 threats to 73 parks. While this bill only applies to
Allensworth SHP, it sets a precedent for other parks to
essentially give the Commission land use authority outside the
park boundaries. The bill's current approach raises a number of
questions- primarily, whether this bill would constitute a
regulatory takings of property in the 2.5 mile radius of the
park, thereby exposing the state to significant financial
liabilities.
According to the author's office, the intent of this bill is not
to prohibit development in the area surrounding the park, but
rather to assure that impacts of a particular development on the
park are properly discussed. In fact, the author expressed a
desire to encourage compatible development around the park in
hopes of assisting an economically depressed area.
Given the author's intent, the committee may wish to consider
whether it would be more suitable for this bill to instead
require the Commission to hold a public hearing when they have
received notice from DPR that there is a development that may
impact the historical, cultural, or recreational significance of
Allensworth SHP. The purpose of the hearing would be for the
Commission to receive public input and to discuss the potential
impacts of the development. Following the hearing, the
Commission must submit its conclusions on the project's park
impacts to DPR for transmittal to the appropriate local
government. This approach does not give the Commission land use
authority while still assuring that a project's impact to the
park is specifically considered. (See amendments 1 and 2)
Related legislation : Earlier this year, this committee passed SB
580 (Wolk and Kehoe) that would require replacement park land to
be established for any incompatible park use allowed inside park
boundaries.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
4
On page 2, delete lines 24 to 38, inclusively and insert:
5006.10 (a) The department shall notify the State Parks and
Recreation Commission of any development that may substantially
impact the historical, cultural, or recreational significance of
Allensworth State Historic Park. Upon such notification, the
Commission shall hold a duly noticed public hearing to receive
public input regarding the potential impacts of the development
on the park. Following the public hearing, the Commission shall
submit in writing its conclusions on potential park impacts to
the department for transmission to the appropriate local
government.
AMENDMENT 2
On page 3, delete lines 5 to 7, inclusively
SUPPORT
Allensworth Development Group
Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church
CA State Conference of the National Assoc. for the Advancement
of Colored
California Black Chamber of Commerce
California Black Media
California League of Park Associations
California Legislative Black Caucus
Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment (CRPE)
Claesson Edwards Audio, LLC
Congress of Racial Equity of California (CORE-CA)
Crankin'Time Cycling
Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. ~ Elk Grove Alumnae Chapter
Downs United Methodist Men's Club
Friends of Allensworth
Inland Empire African American Chamber of Commerce (IEAACC)
Inland Empire Section, National Council of Negro Women, Inc.
People (NAACP)
The Black Group
The Los Banos Buffalo Soldiers Association
The Observer Newspapers - Publishers of America's Premier Black
Newspapers
Westside Action Group
Two individuals
OPPOSITION
California Farm Bureau Federation (to an earlier version of the
bill)
5
6