The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 08022005 - C14 Iggi . ..... Contra - � Costa TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County FROM: TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTE� Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Chair Supervisor Federal Glover DATE: August 2, 2005 SUBJECT: REPORT ON AB 797, WOLK: SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION 1) ADOPT a 'watch' position on AB 797, sponsored by Assemblymember Wolk, as recommended by the Transportation, Water& Infrastructure (TWI) Committee. 2) AUTHORIZE Chair to sign a letter to the author and any other relevant parties commenting on this legislation. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the County from the abovementioned action. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: /I YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUAD IS BATOR x RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE TO SIGNATURE(S): 00" $uperyjdor . Pie ho, Chair /Supervisor Federal Glover ACTION OF BOAR&6tq- APPROVED At RECOMMENDED X. OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT tjo,49 AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Roberta Goulart (925) 335-1226) ATTESTED �g��'/o cc: Community Development Department (CDD) JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF County Administrator Office (CAO) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR It, 0 B< 4' DEPUTY Board of Supervisors August 2, 2005 Page 2 REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND At their June 13 meeting, the TWI Committee reviewed the status of AB 797 sponsored by Assemblymember Wolk, which deals with changes to the scope and function of the Delta Protection Commission. This bill is similar to a bill Assemblymember Wolk introduced last year (AB 2476), which attempted to provide the Delta Protection Commission with jurisdictional authority over part of the Delta known as the Secondary Management Zone, in addition to their existing authority over the Primary Management Zone {PMZ). The County opposed the bill;the bill eventually died during the 2004 legislative process. In early June, 2005 The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)took a position opposing the current bill, due to language prohibiting certain LAFCO actions. Since that time,the bill was amended (June 16, 2005), removing the bulk of the LAFCO-related language and significantly softening the remaining bit of language related to LAFCO (page 8 of the bill). AB 797, as amended, provides for an additional option in circumstances when a landowner wishes to terminate a Williamson Act contract on his/her property. Existing law provides for a landowner wishing to rescind a Williamson Act contract to 1)file a notice of non-renewal initiating a ten-year withdrawal period, 2) cancel the contract and payment of a cancellation fee, if required findings can be made, or 3) buy an agricultural conservation easement in the same County. The bill would allow an agricultural conservation easement to be purchased anywhere in the primary or secondary zone, without regard to county boundaries. AB 797 also makes changes to the Commission, by adding two members, and changing the composition of the Commission, removing several different state department representatives, and replacing them with one CALFED representative and 6 members appointed by the Resources Agency. (interestingly, Delta Protection Commission staff does not feel the proposed changes in composition of the Commission to be particularly helpful). The Commission would be required to provide a report detailing land use changes, growth pressures in the primary area and in the secondary zone which affects the primary zone. The report would include recommendations for improved coordination and review of development projects by the Commission. The bill also lifts the funding limit for use by the Commission and sets up an account for the Commission's use. The intent of this legislation is clearly to stem growth into the Delta, particularly into the primary zone (core of the Delta area), and a revised Commission is thought to be the best method by which to accomplish this goal. In a conversation with Susan Trebess, staff to Lois Wolk, Susan explained that a revised Commission needs to focus back to growth issues, that a greater degree of oversight of development is needed, particularly in Sacramento and San Joaquin counties,where large scale development is planned. In response to concerns regarding lack of direction of the current Commission, Susan commented that improvements have already occurred within the Commission that have resulted in positive change, such as the new Chairperson, Supervisor McGowan from Yolo County. Committee Concerns with the legislation include the following; • It is not clear that the current or a reinvigorated Commission is the appropriate entity to be dealing with land use issues. (Lois Wolk believes a revised Commission-could be of use in this area). • The legislation continues to provide emphasis on preservation and support of agricultural uses, over other Delta uses for which the Commission has authority, such as wildlife habitat, recreation and flood protection (also, agriculture may not be entirely compatible with these other, mandated uses). • Continued heavy promotion of agricultural use may be or may become in conflict with CALFED goals, such as levee integrity(particularly related to subsidence),water quality& supply, and ecosystem restoration. Board of Supervisors August 2, 2005 Page 3 • The Commission as facilitating agency for flood control, habitat restoration etc. as suggested in the legislation is redundant; this is already being addressed through CALFED and other agencies. • Generally,the Board of Supervisors has not supported out-of-county mitigation activities; mitigation for impacts occurring within Contra Costa County have historically had to take place within the County as well. Whether this applies to conservation easements, and to what degree this would affect the County remains to be determined. • The County has a seat on this Commission, and has not found it to be a particularly effective body, as presently configured. (This Commission was slated for elimination as part of the Governor's efforts, in the California Performance Review, which subsequently has been shelved). Even after discussions with legislative staff, it is not clear how the revised Commission would become more efficient,why development remains a threat to the Delta, and how the revised commission would stem this threat. A letter providing County comments on this legislation is suggested by the TWI Committee. The Board of Supervisors John Sweeten County Administration Building Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Costa and Martinez,California 94553-1293 County Administrator County (925)335-1900 John Gioia,1st District Gayle B.Uilkema,2nd District Mary N.Piepho,3rd District _� -__• `. Mark DeSaulnier,4th District Federal D.Glover,5th District 1 1 August 2, 2005 {.. _ ;•�� SrA couKK�` The Honorable Lois Wolk State Capitol P.O. Box 942849 Sacramento, CA 94249-0008 Dear Assemblymember Wolk: The Contra, Costa County Board of Supervisors authorized this letter in corder to communicate our position and comments on AB 797; Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. We have adopted a `watch' position on this bill, for the reasons set forth below. Where we understand the need to carefully control the degree of growth in the Delta for a number of reasons, we also question whether the Delta Protection Commission can effectively manage this responsibility, and remain uncertain as to exactly what needs to be rectified. Our comments are as follows; • It-is not clear to us that the current or reinvigorated Commission is the appropriate entity to be dealing with land use issues. We do not know that the, proposed `reconfigured' Commission would be more efficient, or whether the reconfigured Commission would have the expertise in the range of related fields that comprise land use planning. The prior direction of the Commission, to focus on growth through resource protection activities (through the Resource Management Plan..), seemed a more sound approach. • Cities and counties have revised their respective General Plans to conform to the Commission's Resource Management Plan, and the Commission reviews any planning activities impacting the Primary Management Zone. It is not clear to us that development remains a threat to the Delta Primary Management Zone, and how the revised Commission would stem this perceived threat. • The legislation continues to provide emphasis on preservation and support of agricultural uses, over other Delta uses for which the Commission has authority, such as wildlife habitat, and recreation. Agriculture may not be entirely compatible with these other, mandated uses. Agricultural uses may be or may come into conflict with CALFED goals, such as levee integrity (particularly related to subsidence), water quality&supply, and ecosystem restoration. 1 • Designating the Commission as facilitating agency for flood control, habitat restoration etc. is duplicative; this is already being addressed through CALFED, a much larger and more inclusive body. Coordination is occurring among agencies with responsibility for flood control; it is questionable whether the Commission could add value there. Rather than duplicate efforts relative to flood control, ecosystem restoration. and other activities, it may be helpful to see how the Commission could best support CALFED in their ongoing efforts in these areas. • Generally, the Board of Supervisors has not supported out-of-county mitigation activities; mitigation for impacts occurring within Contra Costa County have historically been required to take place within the County as well. However, it is not anticipated that the proposed change in Williamson Act options will affect the County significantly. Thank you for consideration of our concerns. We look forward to working with you on the best way to protect the Delta. If you have questions, please contact Roberta Goulart at (925) 335-1226. Sincerely, Gayle B. Uilkema Chair, Board of Supervisors 2