BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2241
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2241 (Eggman)
As Amended May 23, 2014
Majority vote
AGRICULTURE 6-0 LOCAL GOVERNMENT 9-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Eggman, Olsen, Dahle, |Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, Alejo, |
| |Pan, Quirk, Yamada | |Bradford, Gordon, |
| | | |Melendez, Mullin, Rendon, |
| | | |Waldron |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 16-0
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
| |Gomez, Holden, Jones, |
| |Linder, Pan, Quirk, |
| |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| |Weber |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Changes the rescission fee charged by a city or county
when land under the Williamson Act (WA) contract or land
designated as a farmland security zone (FSZ) enters into a
solar-use easement, to 10% of the fair market value of the
property. Requires 50% of the rescission fees collected to be
deposited in the state General Fund (GF), until January 1, 2020.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Raises the rescission fee for land exiting a WA contract to
enter into a solar-use easement from 6.25 % to 10%.
2)Lowers the rescission fee for land designated FSZ exiting a WA
contract to enter into a solar-use easement from 12.5 % to
10%.
3)Changes from 100% to 50% the amount of a rescission fee for
exiting a WA or FSZ contract to enter into a solar-use
AB 2241
Page 2
easement the county transmits to the state GF.
4)Provides that this provision will be active until January 1,
2020.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, the effect on fee revenue to the Department of
Conservation and the GF is unknown.
COMMENTS : Current law allows marginally productive or
physically impaired land, restricted by a WA contract, to be
converted to a solar use easement agreement for the sole purpose
of siting large-scale solar facilities, provided certain
conditions are met.
SB 618 (Wolk), Chapter 596, Statutes of 2011, provided both
perpetual and term easement as an alternative for nonprime
farmland that could be reclaimed to its previous agricultural
condition after the useful life of the power facility. The use
of marginally productive or physically impaired land for solar
facilities could help California meet its Renewables Portfolio
Standard goals without jeopardizing more valuable food producing
prime farmland. The intent of solar use easements was to
provide an alternative mechanism for counties to exit a contract
under WA, as well as provide statewide uniformity with respect
to financial assurances for subsequent reclamation of the site.
Supporters state to date, the implementation of solar use
easements has not been widely embraced. WA contract
cancellations continue on prime farmland.
This bill proposes to change the fee for solar use easements to
10% for both WA and FSZ contracts and allow the counties to
retain half of the fee, could provide a significant financial
incentive for counties to implement the solar use easement
program.
Analysis Prepared by : Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916)
319-2084
FN: 0003659
AB 2241
Page 3