BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2082
                                                                  Page 1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 2082 (Atkins)
          As Amended  April 19, 2012
          Majority vote 

           NATURAL RESOURCES   6-2         JUDICIARY           8-2         
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Chesbro, Brownley,        |Ayes:|Feuer, Atkins, Dickinson, |
          |     |Dickinson, Huffman,       |     |Gorell, Huber, Monning,   |
          |     |Monning, Skinner          |     |Wieckowski, Alejo         |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Knight, Halderman         |Nays:|Wagner, Jones             |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           APPROPRIATIONS      12-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield,     |     |                          |
          |     |Bradford, Charles         |     |                          |
          |     |Calderon, Campos, Davis,  |     |                          |
          |     |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara,  |     |                          |
          |     |Mitchell, Solorio         |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly,         |     |                          |
          |     |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner    |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

           SUMMARY  :  Authorizes the State Lands Commission (Commission) to 
          impose administrative penalties against a person who constructs, 
          places, maintains, owns, uses, or possesses a structure or 
          facility on land that is under the Commission's jurisdiction 
          without first obtaining the necessary easements, leases, or 
          permits from the Commission.  Specifically,  this bill  :  
           
          1)Prohibits a person from constructing, placing, maintaining, 
            owning, using, or possessing a structure or facility on land 
            that is under the Commission's jurisdiction and that is owned 
            by the state without first obtaining the necessary 
            authorization from the Commission.  A "structure or facility" 
            includes, but is not limited to buildings, boat houses, docks, 
            piers, revetments, fill, pilings, pipelines, groins, jetties, 








                                                                  AB 2082
                                                                  Page 2


            seawalls, breakwaters, and bulkheads.

          2)Authorizes the Commission to impose a penalty of not more than 
            $1,000 a day or an amount that is not more than 60% higher 
            than the full fair market rental against a person who violates 
            1) above.  The penalty shall be imposed from the first day of 
            an order to the day when the violation is cured.  

          3)Requires the Commission, in determining the appropriate 
            penalty for a violation of 1) above, to consider:  a) the 
            physical extent of the violation on the land under the 
            Commission's jurisdiction; b) the degree of culpability of the 
            violator; c) the degree of cooperation of the violator and 
            whether the structure or facility is susceptible to removal or 
            the violation is susceptible to resolution; d) any prior 
            history of violations of statutes or leases pertaining to 
            lands under the Commission's jurisdiction, including the past 
            history of the violator in taking all feasible steps or 
            procedures necessary or appropriate to correct a violation; e) 
            the extent to which the violation causes environmental harm or 
            impairs public access to trust lands; and, f) any factor 
            determined by the Commission to be relevant to a fair and just 
            result, and in the best interest of the state.

          4)Requires the Commission to first provide a written notice to 
            the person against whom it seeks to impose a penalty.  The 
            Commission shall send the notice not less than 30 days before 
            the date set for conducting a hearing. 

          5)Authorizes a person to appeal a Commission order to the court 
            through a writ of mandate.

          6)Provides an amnesty period from penalties if a person either 
            remedies a violation by July 1, 2013, or submits a notice to 
            the Commission that his/her structure or facility is 
            potentially in violation of 1) above and the person remedies 
            the violation within six months of the notice.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Establishes the Commission, which consists of the Lieutenant 
            Governor, State Controller, and Director of Finance, for the 
            purpose of managing the state's filled and unfilled tide and 
            submerged lands and navigable waterways (i.e., public trust 








                                                                  AB 2082
                                                                  Page 3


            lands) and school lands.

          2)Provides that a person who trespasses on lands under the 
            Commission's jurisdiction without lawful authority is liable 
            to the state for damages assessed by a court in a civil 
            action.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations 
          Committee:

          1)Minor costs to the Commission to assess and levy penalties, 
            likely more than offset by a reduction in Commission staff 
            time spent preparing civil action requests to the Attorney 
            General (AG) and in staff time of the AG in carrying out such 
            requests.  In recent years, the Commission has estimated these 
            cases to have required 3,500 hours of the AG's time at a cost 
            of $585,000.

          2)Potential revenue of an unknown amount from increased lease 
            revenue on land under the Commission's jurisdiction resulting 
            from improved enforcement and deterrence brought about by this 
            bill (General Fund (GF)).

          3)Potential savings of an unknown amount to the Commission and 
            AG resulting from reduced violations and ensuing enforcement 
            actions (GF).

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author's office, "this bill is 
          intended to address the costly and time consuming legal process 
          currently required to address illegal structures or facilities 
          on lands under the Commission's jurisdiction and to deter 
          trespass."  The bill does this by authorizing the Commission to 
          take administrative action against a trespasser.  Such 
          administrative action may include fines and/or injunctions.  Due 
          process protections, such as notice and public hearing, are 
          specifically provided in the bill.

          Trespass cases before the Commission generally involve scenarios 
          in which a person constructs, places, maintain, owns, uses, or 
          possesses a structure on state lands without proper 
          authorization from the Commission.  More specifically, these 
          cases fall under the following categories:  a person did not 
          obtain a lease for a structure; the Commission issued a lease, 
          but a structure was built beyond what was authorized; or, the 








                                                                  AB 2082
                                                                  Page 4


          Commission issued a lease, but the lease has expired without 
          either being renewed or placed into holdover status.

          Currently, the Commission's only recourse is to file a civil 
          action (with the assistance of the AG) in court seeking 
          compensation or rent for the use of state lands or an order for 
          a structure to be removed.  Litigation is a timely and costly 
          endeavor and in many instances of trespass, not cost-effective 
          given the value of the remedy pursued.  Moreover, according to 
          the Commission, the threat of litigation does not sufficiently 
          deter would-be trespassers since potential damages are roughly 
          equal to the cost of compliance (e.g., paying rent).  Thus, it 
          pays to roll the dice and trespass.

          This bill was inspired by laws adopted in Texas, Washington, 
          Oregon, and New York regarding trespass on state submerged 
          lands.  The bill's specific penalty provisions, such as the 
          maximum $1,000 per day penalty, are mostly derived from Texas 
          law.  Key distinctions, however, are that Texas has a minimum 
          per day penalty and the penalty accrues at the time of the 
          violation.  In contrast, this bill does not include a minimum 
          penalty and penalties only begin to accrue after notice, 
          hearing, and an order.  This bill is, therefore, less aggressive 
          on trespassers than Texas.

          According to the author, this bill is consistent with the Bureau 
          of State Audits' August 2011 report and the Commission staff's 
          Audit Action Plan.  The audit criticizes the Commission for not 
          consistently taking actions, such as evicting delinquent 
          lessees, to ensure that it is protecting the state's interest in 
          its properties.  This bill would provide the Commission with a 
          significant tool to efficiently take action against delinquent 
          lessees.  

           In 2010, a similar bill, AB 2664 (Chesbro), was vetoed by the 
          Governor, who expressed concerns about the scope of the bill and 
          due process protections.  The author of the bill has scaled back 
          several of the provisions in AB 2664.  Most notably, the current 
          bill only assesses penalties once a notice of violation is 
          served and an order is issued.  Under AB 2664, the penalties 
          began to accrue at the time of the violation, which would have 
          allowed the Commission to impose penalties well before a person 
          was served with a notice of violation.  Additionally, unlike AB 
          2664, the current bill does not authorize the Commission to 








                                                                  AB 2082
                                                                  Page 5


          place liens on property or take ownership of structures or 
          facilities.  


          Analysis Prepared by  :  Mario DeBernardo / NAT. RES. / (916) 
          319-2092 


                                                                FN: 0003596