HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05221990 - 2.2 0 sti�
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator t~ Costa
May 16 , 1990 County
s-
DATE: '°`���2'oun''t'` �P
SUMMARY OF PROPOSITION 117, the California Wildlife
SUBJECT: protection Act of 1990
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
Determine what position the Board of Supervisors wishes to take
on Proposition 117, the California Wildlife Protection Act of
1990 .
BACKGROUND:
on January 9, 1990 , the Board of Supervisors adopted the attached
order endorsing the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990
(prior to the time it was placed on the ballot and numbered as
.Proposition 117 ) .
On February 27 , 1990, the Board asked for a staff analysis of
Proposition 117 .
On April 10 , 1990 the County Administrator' s Office presented the
following analysis of Proposition 117 to the ' Board of
Supervisors. The Board referred this report to the Fish and
Wildlife Committee for their review and recommendation.
On May 15 , 1990 the Board of Supervisors received testimony from
a member of the Fish & Wildlife Committee opposing Proposition
117. At this point the Board of Supervisors indicated its intent
on May 22, 1990 to repeal its previous support of the California
Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 and instead oppose Proposition
117 .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:YP�YES SIGNATURE: Lllz��/-Z"
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON May 2 2, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X
The Board rescinded its previously adopted posit-ion .in support of Proposition 117,
the Cal.ifO n.ia Wildlife Protection Act of 1990; and adopted a position in
opposition to Proposition 117.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
__ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: ATTESTED May 22, 1990
County Administrator
Members, Board of Supervisors PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Community Development Director SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Health Services Director
County Counsel
M382 (10/88) BY DEPUTY
-2-
The Board of Supervisors may wish to consider the report from the
Fish and Wildlife Committee in conjunction. with the following
analysis.
Proposition 117 . creates a Habitat Conservation Fund for the
following purposes:
1. The acquisition of habitat, including native oak woodlands,
necessary to protect deer and mountain lions.
2. The acquisition of habitat to protect rare, endangered,
threatened or fully protected species.
3 . The acquisition of habitat to further implement the Habitat
Conservation Program.
4. The acquisition, enhancement or restoration of wetlands.
5. The acquisition, restoration or enhancement of aquatic
habitat for spawning and rearing of anadromous salmonids and
trout resources.
6. The acquisition, restoration or enhancement of riparian
habitat.
Of the money in the Habitat Conservation Fund, $14 ,000 ,000
annually is appropriated directly for various purposes as follows
with the balance being appropriated to the Wildlife Conservation
Board:
$4,500,000 annually to the Department of Parks and Recreation, to
be allocated as follows:.
$1 ,500,000 for projects in the Santa Lucia Mountain Range in
Monterey County and for grants to the Monterey Peninsula
Regional Park District.
$1 ,000,000 for acquisitions in and adjacent to units of the
state park system.
$2 , 000,000 for 50% matching grants to local agencies for
projects meeting the purposes specified above for the
Habitat Conservation Fund as well as for the acquisition of
wildlife corridors and urban trails, nature interpretation
programs and other programs which bring urban residents into
park and wildlife areas.
$4 ,000 ,000 annually to the State Coastal Conservancy.
$5,000 , 000 annually for the next ten fiscal years, beginning with
the 1990-91 fiscal year, to the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy. These funds must be spent for the purposes spelled
out above for the Habitat Conservation Fund for wildlife habitat
and for related open-space projects within the Santa Monica
Mountains Zone, the Rim of the Valley Corridor and the Santa
Clarita Woodlands. Of the total of $50 ,000 ,000 appropriated for
this purpose over the ten years, not less than $10,000,000 must
be spent within the Santa Susana Mountains and the Simi Hills and
not less than an additional $10,000, 000 must be spent within the
Santa Clarita Woodlands.
$500 , 000 annually to the California Tahoe Conservancy.
The balance of the funds are. appropriated to the Wildlife
Conservation Board.
-3-
These appropriations are effective July 1, 1990 and are repealed
July 1, 2020. Upon the repeal of these specific appropriations
all remaining funds are appropriated to the Wildlife Conservation
Board.
The Habitat Conservation Fund is guaranteed $30,000,000 per year
in appropriations which may come from a variety of non-General
Fund sources. However, any such funds which do not come from the
other specified sources must be made up by .the General Fund as
follows:
100 of the funds each year in the Unallocated Account in the
Cigarette and Tobacco Products Surtax Fund (Proposition 99 )
are appropriated to the Habitat Conservation Fund. The
Legislature is prohibited from appropriating any additional
funds from the Unallocated Account in the Cigarette and
Tobacco Products Surtax Fund (Proposition 99 ) for the
purposes of this proposition or for any other natural
resource or environmental protection program.
$30,000,000 each year is transferred from the General Fund
to the Habitat Conservation Fund. However, from this
$30,000,000 are deducted any funds which are transferred to
the Habitat Conservation Fund from any of the following
sources:
* The Public Resources Account in the Cigarette and
Tobacco Products Surtax Fund (Proposition 99) .
* The funds which are transferred from the Unallocated
Account in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Surtax
Fund (Proposition 99 ) pursuant to the loo requirement
above.
* The California Environmental License Plate Fund.
* The Endangered and Rare Fish, Wildlife, and Plant
Species Conservation and Enhancement Account in the
Fish and Game Preservation Fund.
* Any other non-General Fund accounts and funds created
by the Legislature or the people which may be used for
purposes which are consistent with the purposes of this
act.
* Any bond funds which are authorized by the people after
July 1, 1990 which may be used for purposes which are
identical to the purposes specified for the Habitat
Conservation Fund noted above.
* The Wildlife Restoration Fund.
Certain additional transfers or donations are specified to
be in addition to and are not to be considered transfers
which are to be offset against the $30,000,000 General Fund
appropriation.
Additional sections of Proposition 117 address the manner in
which the. Proposition shall be administered.
The Proposition provides that except for certain provisions
extending the operative dates of the sections, the balance of
Proposition can be amended by the Legislature only by a 4/5 vote
in both houses and only then to further and be consistent with
the Proposition.
-4-
Language now in the Fish and . Game Code dealing with the
protection of mountain lions is repealed and replaced with
language added by Proposition 117 dealing with the protection of
mountain lions, which specifies that it can only be amended by
the Legislature by a 4/5 vote and must be to further and be
consistent with the Proposition.
The argument in support of Proposition was signed by. Attorney
General Van de Kamp, Senator Ed Davis and Assemblyman Richard
Katz. The rebuttal to the argument. against Proposition 117 is
signed by Assemblyman Friedman.
The argument against Proposition 117 is signed by Senator Robert
Beverly, among others.