BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1 X2
Page 1
( Without Reference to File )
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1 X2 (Perata)
As Amended August 28, 2008
2/3 vote. Urgency
SENATE VOTE :23-11
SPEC. CMTE. ON WATER 8-4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wolk, Arambula, Berg, | | |
| |Caballero, Eng, Feuer, | | |
| |Huffman, Salas | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Maze, Huff, Keene, La | | |
| |Malfa | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT : Water bond appropriations
SUMMARY : Amends integrated regional water management program
statute and appropriates $820,973,000 in funding from currently
authorized general obligation bonds for various water-related
purposes. Specifically, this bill :
1)Exempts Department of Water Resources (DWR) regulations for
water conservation in landscaping from requirements for Water
Commission approval, until January 1, 2010.
2)Authorizes DWR to use a "program manager" class series
established for the California Bay-Delta Authority for
critical water program activities.
3)Requires the Director of Finance to administratively establish
positions necessary to implement the appropriations contained
in this bill.
4)Repeals and re-enacts Part 2.2 of Division 6 of the Water
Code, relating to integrated regional water management (IRWM)
plans:
SB 1 X2
Page 2
a) Defines certain terms used in integrated regional water
management.
b) Allows incorporation of other water management planning
processes into the IRWM process, including groundwater
management, urban water management, water supply
assessments and land-use general plans.
c) Sets minimum standards for IRWM plans, including water
supply reliability, water quality, watershed resources,
needs of disadvantaged communities, but does not require a
local agency to fund any particular project.
d) Requires DWR to develop new guidelines, through a
specified process, for IRWM project solicitation and
evaluation to enable broad and diverse participation in
IRWM planning, through consultation with other agencies and
public meetings. Allows DWR to use existing guidelines to
implement Proposition 84 IRWM funding.
e) Requires new DWR grant solicitation/evaluation
guidelines to require IRWM plans to include consideration
of certain factors, including the California Water Plan,
climate change, measurable regional objectives, regional
project priorities, multi-benefit-projects, and water needs
of disadvantaged communities.
f) Expands list of organizations eligible to participate in
IRWM planning and provides for "a balance of interested
persons or entities representing different sectors and
interests.
g) Requires a regional water management group to publish a
public notice of intent to prepare and adopt an IRWM plan
and make certain materials available to the public.
h) Conditions state IRWM funding on plan/project compliance
with water quality laws.
i) Provides a funding preference for regional projects or
programs.
5)Appropriates $285 million from bond revenues authorized by
Proposition 1E (2006) to DWR for flood protection, including:
SB 1 X2
Page 3
a) $135 million for emergency preparedness projects in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta), including stockpiling
emergency preparedness supplies, and not less than $35
million for reinforcing levees that protect drinking water
aqueducts
b) $150 million for urban stormwater flood protection,
including:
i) $100 million for flood control facilities that
address seismic safety issues.
ii) $20 million to prevent sewage discharges into state
waters.
iii) $20 million to reduce the frequency and impacts of
flooding in watersheds that drain to the San Francisco
Bay.
6)Appropriates $526,491,000 from bond revenues authorized by
Proposition 84 (2006):
a) $50 million to the State Department of Public Health
(DPH) for small community drinking water system
infrastructure improvements.
b) $50.4 million to DPH to prevent or reduce the
contamination of groundwater, including:
i) Priorities for funding for certain kinds of
groundwater projects.
ii) Up to $10 million for projects at sites on the
National Priorities List for cleanup.
iii) $2 million to contract with the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to develop pilot projects
in Salinas and Tulare to address groundwater nitrate.
c) $181,791,000 to DWR for IRWM, including:
i) $100 million for implementation grants.
SB 1 X2
Page 4
ii) $39 million for planning grants, local groundwater
assistance grants and CALFED scientific research grants.
iii) $22,091,000 for projects with inter-regional or
statewide benefits.
iv) $20.7 million for program delivery costs.
v) Allowance for project grants for currently adopted
plans, under certain conditions.
vi) Requirement that not less than 10% to facilitate
participation in disadvantage communities in IRWM
planning and projects to address critical water supply or
water quality needs for disadvantaged communities.
vii) $2 million for Tulare County to develop an
integrated water quality and wastewater treatment program
for its disadvantaged communities.
viii) $20 million of implementation grant funding for
water conservation projects to meet a 20% reduction in
per capita water use by 2020.
ix) Not less than $10 million for "interties" of
drinking water aqueducts.
d) $90 million to DWR (unless otherwise specified) for
Delta drinking water quality projects, including:
i) $50 million for moving Delta drinking water intakes,
including environmental review, design and construction.
ii) $40 million for projects at Franks Tract and other
Delta locations to reduce salinity or other pollutants at
water intakes.
e) $100 million in Delta levee funding for acquisition,
preservation, protection and restoration of Delta
resources, pursuant to priorities that reflect the value of
the protected resources and land uses, with priority for
improving conditions for native Delta fish, and including
up to $5 million for emergency communications equipment in
the Delta.
SB 1 X2
Page 5
f) $37 million in statewide water planning funding,
including:
i) $12 million to complete surface storage planning and
feasibility studies, including certain requirements for
completing those studies.
ii) $15 million for planning and feasibility studies to
re-operate the flood protection and water supply systems
to achieve optimal integration of the two related
systems.
iii) $10 million to update the California Water Plan,
including climate change, and up to $2 million to support
implementation of the Delta Vision Strategic Plan.
g) $17.3 million for protection of rivers, lakes and
streams, including:
i) $10 million to State Coastal Conservancy to expand
and improve the Santa Ana River Parkway, as specifically
provided in subdivision (i) of Public Resources Code
75050.
ii) $7.3 million for Urban Streams Restoration Program.
7)Appropriates $3.76 million from bond authorized by Proposition
50 (2002) to DWR for completion of the surface storage studies
under California Bay-Delta Program.
8)Appropriates $5,722,000 from bond revenues authorized by
Proposition 13 (2000) to DWR:
a) $2,272,000 of river parkway funding for Sacramento River
Hamilton City Area Flood Damage Reduction Project.
b) $3.45 million for the Franks Tract Pilot Project under
CALFED Drinking Water Quality.
9)Requires SWRCB to develop pilot projects in the Tulare Lake
Basin and the Salinas Valley that focus on nitrate
contamination, including:
SB 1 X2
Page 6
a) Collaboration with other agencies to gather and/or
develop certain information on groundwater contamination.
b) Collaboration with DPH to identify methods/costs for
treatment of nitrate contamination and provision of
alternative water supply to groundwater-reliant
communities.
10) Establishes a program for the SWRCB to develop 2
pilot projects to cleanup groundwater used for drinking that
is contaminated by nitrate, in Salinas and Tulare.
11) Takes effect immediately upon enactment to
address urgent need to address drought.
12) Makes legislative findings regarding integrated
regional water management, climate change, and the connection
between flood protection and water supply.
EXISTING LAW authorizes DWR to lead the development of
California's water resources and the State to issue general
obligation bonds to pay for various water-related projects.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriates $820,973,000 for water projects in
the next two years.
COMMENTS : This bill appropriates $820,973,000 from the
proceeds of currently authorized general obligation bonds. Many
of the appropriations originated in last year's SB 1002
(Perata), which the Governor vetoed the October weekend after
the Senate failed to pass a water bond in this 2nd Extraordinary
Session. Last year, the 2007-08 State Budget excluded these
water bond appropriations, in anticipation of SB 1002 making
those appropriations. This year, the Budget Conference
Committee again removed water bond appropriations from the
budget, and SB 1XX was amended to include certain
appropriations. Many arise out of the Governor's budget change
proposals (BCP).
APPROPRIATIONS OF
CURRENTLY AUTHORIZED BOND FUNDING
SB 1 X2
Page 7
This bill draws on appropriations from four different
voter-approved bond measures - Propositions 13 (2000), 50
(2002), 84 (2006) and 1E (2006). Two measures were initiatives
(50 and 84) and two were legislative measures (13 and 1E). The
appropriations are all consistent with the terms of the bond
authorizations, which vary as to specificity.
Delta Emergency Preparedness ($135 M): This appropriation, from
the $3 billion in authorized funding for Central Valley flood
protection improvements, provides for stockpiling of levee
repair materials, improving certain levees protecting drinking
water aqueducts, and other projects to improve emergency
preparedness in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta). This
funding responds to the growing awareness of the risk of mass
Delta levee failure, and will support, among other things, an
existing program by DWR and the State Water Project (SWP)
contractors to stockpile rock and other levee repair material at
key locations in the Delta. By using the words "essential
emergency preparedness supplies and projects," this
appropriation could be used for a variety of activities that
contribute to emergency preparedness for Delta levee failure,
including projects to improve coordination among federal, state
and local agencies with emergency response duties. SB 27
(Simitian), in the regular session, would establish a Delta
emergency preparedness program to develop a joint state-local
plan for emergency response, which may be funded by this
appropriation.
Stormwater Flood Protection ($150 M): Drawing on an
authorization for "stormwater flood management projects," this
DWR funding provides for projects that are "designed to manage
stormwater runoff to reduce flood damage and where feasible,
provide other benefits, including groundwater recharge, water
quality improvement, and ecosystem restoration." These projects
may be different than traditional stormwater projects funded by
the State Water Pollution Control Revolving [Loan] Fund that
focus on water quality.
Small Community Drinking Water Systems ($50 M): Proposition 84
allocated these funds to the State Department of Public Health,
to support an existing program for these water systems. This
appropriation gives first priority for these funds to
disadvantaged or severely disadvantaged communities lacking
resources to provide safe drinking water to residents.
SB 1 X2
Page 8
Groundwater Contamination - Prevention/Cleanup ($50.4 M): This
appropriates the remaining funds in the $60 M allocation for
groundwater prevention or cleanup, from Proposition 84. The
language specifies certain priorities focused on drinking water
and requires allocation of up to $10 M for groundwater cleanup
projects on the state or federal priority list, which would
include the San Gabriel Valley aquifer. The appropriation also
allocates $2 M for development of two pilot projects to address
nitrate contamination in groundwater in the Tulare Lake Basin
and the Salinas Valley. (See pilot project discussion below.)
Integrated Regional Water Management ($181,791,000): Last year,
the Legislature intentionally did not appropriate project
funding from Proposition 84's $1 B authorization for integrated
regional water management (IRWM), because DWR had indicated
intent to prepare new grant guidelines consistent with
Proposition 84's provisions. Although the guidelines are not
complete, this appropriation allows for a limited amount of
funding for projects in existing plans - $100M or 10% of the
total IRWM funding in Proposition 84. The bill includes some
"grandfathering" language, which will allow funding for
already-completed IRWM plans.
Delta Drinking Water Intakes ($50 M): Proposition 84 authorized
$130 M for Delta drinking water quality improvements, including
a specific priority for relocating drinking water intake
facilities. This $50 M will contribute to moving all three
drinking water intakes in the Delta - Contra Costa, North Bay
Aqueduct (Solano County) and City of Stockton. The conditions
for construction funding favor Contra Costa, which is closer to
construction than the other projects. There is, however,
provision for the other two to receive funding for their project
environmental documentation, as they are in that stage of design
and development.
Franks Tract Water Quality Project ($43.45 M): The Franks Tract
project has been developing for several years. Franks Tract,
which is a long-flooded Delta island, suffers from a
concentration of salinity and other contaminants. This project
would create some flow control facilities, to prevent saline
water from San Francisco Bay from flowing in and remaining in
this area, which is near water intake facilities for Contra
Costa and the federal/state water projects.
SB 1 X2
Page 9
Delta Levee Funding ($100 M): This appropriation concentrates
on protecting "Delta resources," but in accordance with
Proposition 84's Section 75033, which provides funding for
existing Delta levee programs - the Delta Levee Subventions and
Special Projects programs. DWR therefore may allocate funding
to both programs. The language introduces a new way of
allocating this funding - priorities based on the value of the
resources and land uses protected by the levees. While this
value is assessed as "to the state as a whole, consistent with
the Delta Vision," this remains only a priority, not a
limitation, which still allows allocation to local levee
subventions that do not reflect this kind of priority. The
language also gives a preference to projects that improve Delta
levee system stability, reduce subsidence, assist in restoring
the ecosystem of the Delta and improve conditions for native
fish. Finally, up to $5 million may be used for emergency
communications equipment in the Delta.
Surface Storage Feasibility Studies ($15.76 M): Drawing from
both Proposition 84 and the last of Proposition 50 funding, this
appropriation pushes the current surface storage feasibility
studies toward completion by the end of 2009. The language
requires the studies to include certain information related to
surface storage costs, financing, construction and climate
change.
Water/Flood System Reoperation ($15 M): In the Central Valley,
the water supply and flood control systems rely on some of the
same facilities (e.g. dams, rivers), but are operated separately
for the most part. This funding will help water managers
coordinate and rearrange the two systems' operations to achieve
optimal integration for maximum benefits for both water supply
and flood protection.
California Water Plan/Climate Change ($10 M): Since 2006, DWR
has made progress toward addressing and adapting to the effects
of climate change on California's water resources. In the last
year, DWR and the SWRCB have co-chaired the Water-Energy Climate
Action Team, to focus more on mitigation of water use's
greenhouse gas emissions. (Water use accounts for 19% of
California electrical energy use.) This funding will support
the DWR/SWRCB efforts in this area. It also allows DWR to offer
technical assistance on climate change to local water agencies.
SB 1 X2
Page 10
AB 7XX (Wolk) outlines state/local climate change and water
resources efforts, which this funding would support.
Protection of Rivers ($17.3 M): This appropriation commits $10
M to the Santa Ana River, and $7.3 M for the urban streams
restoration program, which are the only authorized purposes for
the specified subdivisions in Proposition 84.
Hamilton City Flood Project ($2.272 M):This re-appropriation
from Proposition 13 (2000) was originally appropriated in 2001,
but was never expended.
INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT POLICY
Sections 4 and 5 of the bill repeal and re-enact the statutory
foundation for the integrated regional water management (IRWM)
program, in light of the IRWM provisions in Proposition 84.
This effort started in AB 1489 (Huffman) and was amended into AB
1654 (Huffman). Assembly Huffman worked with a wide array of
IRWM stakeholders, including DWR representatives, to work out
this new IRWM framework.
Proposition 84 authorized $1 billion in bond funding for IRWM,
but changed some of the terms of the program. One Proposition 84
provision, however, allows DWR to begin implementing the program
under existing guidelines, and this bill allows for existing
IRWM plans to receive project funding under certain conditions.
By overhauling the IRWM statutory framework, this bill updates
the IRWM program to reflect and expand on those changes. This
Section 5 sets some new directions for IRWM:
Expands public involvement, particularly from disadvantaged
communities: By expanding the definition of an integrated
regional water management group and the requirements for IRWM
plans, the bill ensures a place at the table for the broader
public, beyond just water agencies. The bill also requires
DWR to consult with other state agencies in developing new
IRWM guidelines.
Requires new IRWM guidelines: DWR already indicated that it
intends to draft new grant guidelines, to be consistent with
Proposition 84's requirements. This bill specifies the
development process and requirements for those guidelines,
which will broaden the nature of future IRWM plans. New
issues that will be addressed in the DWR guidelines include:
SB 1 X2
Page 11
compliance with water quality standards, multi-benefit
approaches to selection and design of projects, climate
change, and avoidance of conflicts.
Expands IRWM considerations: The bill changes the current
provision allowing discretion for regional water management
groups to address a wide range of water issues to a list of
required issues that IRWM plans must address, including water
supply reliability (including water-use efficiency), water
quality, groundwater contamination and overdraft, stewardship
of watershed resources, and disadvantaged communities. The
bill clarifies, however, that the local agencies are not
obligated to fund projects to address these concerns. The new
guideline requirement suggests that future IRWM plans will
address a wide range of issues.
Prefers regional projects/programs: As DWR developed the IRWM
program in response to the funding authorized in Proposition
50 (2002), it introduced statewide priorities. Those
statewide priorities were helpful in identifying why the State
was investing in local water projects, which formerly was not
a common aspect of State water policy. Those statewide
priorities garnered some controversy. This bill requires
state agencies, when selecting projects for funding, to
include "a criterion that provides a preference for regional
projects or programs." This provision allows a funding
preference for - but not a limitation to - regional projects.
In its new guidelines, DWR may provide for some consideration
of statewide priorities, which may justify state funding for
regional water projects.
OTHER ISSUES
During negotiations of both recent amendments and the State
Budget, several issues regarding implementation of these
appropriations arose. In response, amendments were crafted to
address these issues.
Nitrate Pilot Projects: SB 1XX allocates $2 million of the
groundwater cleanup funding for SWRCB development of pilot
projects to improve understanding and identify remediation
solutions for nitrate contamination of groundwater used for
drinking. SWRCB representatives suggested that they could
either go through the process of developing both pilot
projects or concentrate on developing and implementing one of
the projects. SB 1XX establishes a specific process for the
SB 1 X2
Page 12
SWRCB to develop these pilot projects and does not provide for
actual implementation, which may start with subsequent
funding.
DWR Requests:In order to implement the actions funded by these
appropriations, DWR requested certain administrative
provisions. Those provisions include: exemption from Water
Commission approval of certain water conservation regulations;
authorization for using the "program manager" personnel
classification; and requirement that the Department of Finance
administratively authorize the necessary personnel positions
for DWR.
Analysis Prepared by : Alf W. Brandt / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0007697