BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WILDLIFE BILL NO: AB 398
Senator Tom Hayden, Chair AUTHOR: Migden
VERSION: Amended
Original: February 12,
1999
Amended: August 18,
2000
FISCAL: Yes
URGENCY: No
CONSULTANT: Michael Pipe
HEARING DATE: August 22,
2000
SUBJECT:
Cargill Salt Flats Purchase
ISSUE:
Should land be purchased in south San Francisco Bay to help
implement findings of a report regarding San Francisco Bay
wetlands restoration?
SUMMARY:
AB 398 requires the Wildlife Conservation Board to
authorize the acquisition of property in San Francisco Bay
currently owned by the Cargill Salt Division, and
appropriates up to $150 million for the purchase.
BACKGROUND & EXISTING LAW:
The Cargill Salt Ponds are located at the south end of San
Francisco Bay in Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo
counties. Cargill says that these ponds are still being
used for commercial salt purposes. However, it seems that
in recent years, the commercial use of these ponds has
seriously diminished and Cargill is now willing to sell
part of the acreage.
The ponds cover an area of 29,000 acres. Cargill is
offering 19,000 acres for sale. The total estimated cost of
the acquisition of the salt ponds is $300 million. Congress
is moving legislation to have the federal government pay 50
percent of the acquisition cost up to $150 million if the
State of California also participates in the acquisition.
Existing law requires the Wildlife Conservation Board to
authorize the acquisition of real property, rights in real
property, water, or water rights as necessary to carry out
the purposes of the Wildlife Conservation Law of 1947.
PROPOSED LAW:
AB 398 creates within the Wildlife Restoration Fund the San
Francisco Baylands Restoration Program Account to acquire
and restore wetlands in the San Francisco Bay area to
achieve the objectives of the Baylands Ecosystem Habitat
Goals Report.
The bill also transfers $150 million from the General Fund
to the account.
The bill allows the Wildlife Conservation Board to buy land
if:
(a) the price does not exceed the fair market value as
described in state and federal law, including the
McAteer-Petris Act, and
(b) the board determines that:
(1) funds are available to implement the Goals
Report for a "significant portion" of the
property acquired, or
(2) no long-term maintenance of levees and dikes
and other land-use management requirements are
necessary to avoid environmental degradation to
the property, or that the funds and authority
exists to meet these requirements.
(c) the board decides to buy the Cargill Salt Ponds
and a matching federal appropriation for the purchase
has been made available, and
(d) the board consults with the State Coastal
Conservancy and determines that the purchase is
consistent with most of the goals of the San Francisco
Bay Area Conservancy Program.
The bill also makes findings and declarations regarding the
San Francisco Bay area and the Goals Report.
COMMENTS:
The Goals Report found that:
In this subregion [South Bay], achieving
the Goals will depend largely on the
willingness of the Cargill Salt Division
to undertake major changes in its
operations or to cease commercial salt
production.
If the Cargill property is purchased the estimated cost of
restoring the first 10,000 acres is between $150 million
and $300 million. While restoration funds are not yet
identified, San Francisco International Airport has said
that some $200 million is currently available for
restoration. However, this bill does not provide that the
restoration funds must come from SFO.
This bill makes no mention of SFO and is not contingent
upon expansion of the SFO. If some other restoration funds
were to be made available, those funds could be used and
this acquisition would move forward. At this time, no
alternate source is known.
The airport sits directly on San Francisco Bay.
SFO has one of the worst track records in the world for
delayed and cancelled flights, and has proposed to expand
the airfield by adding two runways. To do so they would
have to fill in up to 1,400 acres of San Francisco Bay.
This would require that the impacts of this expansion on
San Francisco Bay be mitigated should the expansion be
approved.
Opponents object to using state funds to purchase property
for mitigation before the environmental impact report for
the project is complete, but still support an interim
management strategy. Specifically on the Cargill property,
opponents object to the appropriation as too large and say
it is premature considering that appraisal of the property
in question is not complete.
SUPPORT:
Air Transport Association
Alameda County Building & Construction Trades Council
BFI Waste Systems
Brandfusion
Browning-Ferris Industries
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
California Manufactures & Technology Association
California Chamber of Commerce
Cargill
Century 21 Alliance
Chinese Chamber of Commerce, San Francisco
Clarion Hotel, San Francisco International Airport
Contra Costa Council
Daly City/Colma Chamber of Commerce
First National Bank
Hilderbrand Properties
Hotel Council of San Francisco
Larkspur Hospitality
National Air Traffic Controllers Association
Northern California Carpenters Regional Council
Pasha, Bay Area small business
Providian Financial
Restore San Francisco Bay Associates
Samceda, San Mateo County Peninsula
San Benito County Building & Construction Trades Council
San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council
San Francisco Central Labor Council
City and County of San Francisco
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
San Francisco Visitors and Convention Bureau
San Francisco International Airport
San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO
Sanitary Truck Drivers and Helpers Local No. 350
San Mateo Building and Construction Trades Council
San Mateo County Central Labor Council
Santa Clara County Building & Construction Trades Council
Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group
Teamsters Joint Council No. 7
Teamsters, Local 350
United Airlines
The Westin, San Francisco Airport
James T. Beall, Jr. Santa Clara County Supervisor
L. Blitch, Chair, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
Mary Griffin, San Mateo County Supervisor
Michael P. Guingona, Councilmember, City of Daly
Pete McHugh, Santa Clara County Supervisor
Michael King, San Carlos City Councilmember
Michael D. Nevin, Supervisor, San Mateo County
Ralph Nobles, Restore San Francisco Bay Associates
SUPPORT IF AMENDED:
National Audubon Society
Save the Bay
Sierra Club
OPPOSED:
None on file