Existing law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020, and requires all other groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2022, except as specified. The act authorizes any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin. The act deems certain agencies created by statute to manage groundwater the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the act and authorizes these agencies to opt out of being the exclusive groundwater management agency.

This bill would create the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, would establish the initial boundaries of the agency, and would authorize the agencys boundaries to be changed by the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing, as specified. The bill would require the agency to be a groundwater sustainability agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the agency and would require the agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency. The bill would generally specify the powers and purposes of the agency. The bill would prescribe the composition of the 7-member board of directors of the agency and would require members and alternates to be chosen by certain member agencies, as specified. By imposing duties on the agency and the member agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the agency to establish a rural community advisory committee to assist the board of directors in considering the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater and would deem the agency the exclusive local agency with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 10723 of the Water Code proposed by both this bill and SB 37 to become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020, and requires all other groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2022, except as specified. The act authorizes any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin. The act deems certain agencies created by statute to manage groundwater the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the act and authorizes these agencies to opt out of being the exclusive groundwater management agency.

This bill would create the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, would establish the initial boundaries of the agency, and would authorize the agencys boundaries to be changed by the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing, as specified. The bill would require the agency to be a groundwater sustainability agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the agency and would require the agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency. The bill would generally specify the powers and purposes of the agency. The bill would prescribe the composition of the 7-member board of directors of the agency and would require members and alternates to be chosen by certain member agencies, as specified. By imposing duties on the agency and the member agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the agency to establish a rural community advisory committee to assist the board of directors in considering the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater and would deem the agency the exclusive local agency with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 10723 of the Water Code proposed by both this bill and SB 37 to become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020, and requires all other groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2022, except as specified. The act authorizes any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin. The act deems certain agencies created by statute to manage groundwater the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the act and authorizes these agencies to opt out of being the exclusive groundwater management agency.

This bill would create the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, would establish the initial boundaries of the agency, and would authorize the agencys boundaries to be changed by the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing, as specified. The bill would require the agency to be a groundwater sustainability agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the agency and would require the agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency. The bill would generally specify the powers and purposes of the agency. The bill would prescribe the composition of the 7-member board of directors of the agency and would require members and alternates to be chosen by certain member agencies, as specified. By imposing duties on the agency and the member agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill require the agency to establish a rural community advisory committee to assist the board of directors in considering the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater and would deem the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency agency the exclusive local agency with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 10723 of the Water Code proposed by both this bill and SB 37 to become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020, and requires all other groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2022, except as specified. The act authorizes any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin. The act deems certain agencies created by statute to manage groundwater the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the act and authorizes these agencies to opt out of being the exclusive groundwater management agency.

This bill would create the West North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, would establish the initial boundaries of the agency, and would authorize the agencys boundaries to be changed by the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing. hearing, as specified. The bill would require the agency to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the agency and would require the agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency. The bill would generally specify the powers and purposes of the agency. The bill would prescribe the composition of the 7-member board of directors of the agency and would require members and alternates to be chosen by certain member agencies, as specified. By imposing duties on the agency and the member agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would deem the West North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency the exclusive local agency with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 10723 of the Water Code proposed by both this bill and SB 37 to become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020, and requires all other groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2022, except as specified. The act authorizes any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin. The act deems certain agencies created by statute to manage groundwater the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the act and authorizes these agencies to opt out of being the exclusive groundwater management agency.

This bill would create the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, would establish the initial boundaries of the agency, and would authorize the agencys boundaries to be changed by the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing. The bill would require the agency to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the agency and would require the agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency. The bill would generally specify the powers and purposes of the agency. The bill would prescribe the composition of the 7-member board of directors of the agency and would require members and alternates to be chosen by certain member agencies, as specified. By imposing duties on the agency and the member agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would deem the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency the exclusive local agency with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, in the case of specified violations relating to rules of the road and driving under the influence, doubles the fine in the case of misdemeanors, and increases the fine, as specified, in the case of infractions, if the violation is committed by the driver of a vehicle within a highway construction or maintenance area during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted by the Department of Transportation or local authorities pursuant to existing law or is committed within a designated Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone.

This bill would also require that an additional fine of $35 be imposed if the violation occurred when passing a school building or school grounds, as specified, and the highway is posted with a standard SCHOOL warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations that are committed within that school zone. The bill would require that these additional fines be deposited in the State Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund, for purposes of funding school zone safety projects within the Active Transportation Program.

 UNFINISHED BUSINESS  

Bill No: SB 564

Author:

:

Vote:

PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT

SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 8-0, 8/25/16 (Pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10)

AYES: Pavley, Stone, Allen, Hertzberg, Jackson, Monning, Vidak, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Hueso

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-1, 8/24/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill creates the North Fork Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the board composition of the Agency, and adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

Assembly Amendments delete prior language regarding Proposition 1E funding and replace it with the current language creating the North Fork Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Includes the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA, among other things:
   1. Requires that a groundwater sustainability plan be adopted for high and medium priority groundwater basins in California.
      1. Limited to “high & medium priority basins” – 127 out of 515 basins in the state.
      2. Adjudicated basins are exempt (except for minimal reporting), bringing the number to fewer than 100 affected basins.
      3. “Low & very low priority” basins are exempt, though they are encouraged to adopt plans.
   2. Establishes a timetable for adoption of groundwater sustainability plans.
      1. By 2017, local groundwater sustainability agencies must be identified.
      2. By 2020, overdrafted basins must be covered by a groundwater sustainability plan. Other high and medium priority basins not in overdraft must have plans by 2022.
      3. By 2040, each high and medium priority basin must achieve sustainability, though this can be extended by 10 years for good cause.
   3. Empowers local agencies to manage their basins sustainably.
      1. Gives local agencies new authority to adopt and enforce rules, require reporting, raise funds and build new water projects.
      2. Department of Water Resources (DWR) will provide technical assistance to local agencies.
   4. Establishes basic requirements for groundwater sustainability plans.
      1. Long-term planning and implementation horizon.
      2. Measurable objectives and interim milestones to achieve sustainability in 20 years.
      3. Most requirements similar to the current, voluntary groundwater plan requirements adopted 22 years ago.
      4. DWR will develop new regulations for updating basin boundaries and criteria to evaluate sustainability plans.
2. Creates 15 special act districts to manage groundwater, which are also deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with SGMA. These include districts, for example:
   1. Alameda County Water District.
   2. Desert Water Agency.
   3. Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency.
   4. Monterey Peninsula Water Management District.
   5. Ojai Groundwater Management Agency.
   6. Orange County Water District.

This bill:

1. Enacts the North Fork Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act, which creates the North Fork Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency (agency) created in the Counties of Fresno and Tulare.
   1. The boundaries of the agency generally comprise the north-central portion of the Kings groundwater subbasin.
      1. The initial boundaries of the agency may be changed upon a petition to the boards of supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Tulare after a noticed public hearing in the county in which the change is proposed.
      2. The boundaries of the agency shall not be adjusted to include an area of the basin within the management area of another groundwater sustainability agency unless the agency has entered into a memorandum of agreement or other legal agreement with that groundwater sustainability agency that permits the area to be included.
   2. The agency shall be governed by a board of directors that shall consist of seven members, as follows:
      1. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the County of Fresno.
      2. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
         1. Clark’s Fork Reclamation District.
         2. Laguna Irrigation District.
         3. Upper San Jose Water Company.
      3. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of special districts that are authorized to provide drinking water within the territory of the agency, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts, including, but not limited to, the following special districts:
         1. Laton Community Services District.
         2. Riverdale Public Utility District.
         3. Lanare Community Services District.
      4. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
         1. Crescent Canal Company.
         2. Stinson Canal and Irrigation Company.
      5. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
         1. Riverdale Irrigation Company.
         2. Reed Ditch Company.
      6. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
         1. Liberty Mill Race Company.
         2. Burrel Ditch Company.
      7. One member shall be chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following special districts, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts:
         1. Liberty Water District.
         2. Liberty Canal Company.
   3. The board may adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the agency.
   4. The agency shall enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the agency’s plan with other agencies or groundwater sustainability plans within the Kings Subbasin as required by SGMA.
   5. The agency may exclude from any of the requirements of the act, or the operation of any ordinance, any operator who annually extracts less than a minimum amount of groundwater as specified by an ordinance adopted by the board.
   6. The agency may collect data and conduct technical and other investigations of all kinds in order to carry out the provisions of this act.
   7. The agency shall develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan pursuant to SGMA to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the agency.
   8. The agency may exercise any of the powers granted to groundwater sustainability agencies by SGMA.
   9. The agency may establish advisory committees that include persons representing interests of beneficial uses and users of groundwater for purposes of assisting the board in the development and operation of the groundwater sustainability agency and the development and implementation of the agency’s groundwater sustainability plan.
   10. The agency shall establish a rural community advisory committee for purposes of assisting the board to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater.
   11. The agency may impose fees, including groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program.
2. Adds North Fork Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency to the list of special act districts which are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with SGMA.
3. Includes chaptering instructions should both this bill and SB 37 (Vidak) pass.

Comments

Kings Groundwater Subbasin. The Kings subbasin has been designated by DWR as a high-priority basin. DWR has also identified it as being one of 21 basins in critical overdraft.

Seats For Mutual Water Companies? This bill allows for several mutual water companies to have a say in choosing board members, and for the board members to either be a “resident” or a “landowner.” Essentially, the bill allows several of the seven-member board to be representatives of mutual water companies.

As noted in the Assembly Local Government Committee analysis of this bill, “Most mutual water companies are organized, pursuant to the General Corporation Law or the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Law. Shareholders in a mutual water company hold a right to purchase water from the company. Stock in a company is usually linked to the ownership of a parcel served by the company and transfers with the land when the parcel is sold to successive owners. This type of corporate structure allows landowners to establish, essentially, a customer-owned water provider to serve their properties. State law exempts a mutual water company from state regulation if it is organized to deliver water to its stockholders and members, with specified exceptions. Governance of a mutual water company is generally limited to shareholders, or members, of the company. While the details of any particular company’s governing structure are determined by its articles and bylaws, most mutual water companies allow only shareholders and members to vote on organizational matters and serve on the company’s governing board.”

The Legislature has, on occasion, excluded mutual water companies from participation in some water projects and programs. Most notably, the recent water bond authorized by Proposition 1 included specific language in Chapter 8 that prevented mutual water companies from being a part of a joint powers authority (JPA) that sponsors a surface storage project funded by that bond.

It is not clear, from a water policy perspective, if a groundwater sustainability agency is analogues to a JPA sponsoring a surface storage project.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 37 (Cannella, 2016) creates the Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency, also overlaying a portion of the Kings subbasin and located south east of the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, “Negligible state fiscal impact. Although a state mandate, costs are not reimbursable because the Agency has authority to levy fees sufficient to cover any costs.”

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/25/16)

Burrel Ditch Company

Clark's Fork Reclamation District #2069

Community Water Center

Crescent Canal Company

Laguna Irrigation District

Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability

Liberty Canal Company

Liberty Mill Race Co.

Liberty Water District

Reed Ditch Company

Riverdale Irrigation District

Riverdale Public Utility District

Stinson Canal & Irrigation Co.

Upper San Jose Water Company

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/25/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to ‘manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible, while minimizing state intervention to only when necessary to ensure that local agencies manage groundwater in a sustainable manner’ [Water Code Section 10720.1(h)].

“This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the groundwater sustainability for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent for a number of reasons. First, the portion of the basin to be covered by the GSA would not contain any so-called "white areas" as the territory of the GSA would cover the entire area. Second, this is important because significant acreage in the territory is not served by local agencies, but by mutual water companies. The special act agency would include in its governing body traditionally disparate interests, including representatives appointed by the principal land use agency, local agencies providing drinking water to disadvantaged communities, local agencies providing farm water supplies and mutual water companies that provide farm water supplies. Mutual water companies would not be a member of the GSA, but a representative of a mutual water company may be appointed to serve on the governing body.

“The goal of this legislation is to provide 'a seat at the table' for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers the best governance model for achieving sustainable groundwater management in this area. A GSA that consists of only local agencies would require other interested parties to participate only through attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. It will be far better to provide equal and equitable access to the decision making process.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-1, 8/24/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NOES: Harper

NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough

Prepared by:

8/25/16 17:37:31

**** END ****

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 564

Author:(Cannella)

As Amended Ver:August 18, 2016

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 30-2

SUMMARY: Creates the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the Board composition of the Agency, and adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Specifically, this bill:

1. Establishes the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act (Act) and creates the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) within the Counties of Fresno and Kings.
2. Adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
3. Specifies the Agency's governing board, consisting of seven members, as follows:
   1. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen within the territory of the Agency by the County of Fresno. The member shall have experience or expertise in land use, water management, or improving access to drinking water in economically disadvantaged communities.
   2. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the Agency chosen by the members of the governing board of the following entities:
      1. Clark's Fork Reclamation District;
      2. Laguna Irrigation District; and,
      3. Upper San Jose Water Company;
   3. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the Agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of special districts that are authorized provide drinking water within the territory of the Agency, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts, including, but not limited to, the following special districts:
      1. Laton Community Services District;
      2. Riverdale Public Utility District; and,
      3. Lanare Community Services District.
   4. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the Agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Crescent Canal Company; and,
      2. Stinson Canal and Irrigation Company.
   5. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the Agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities;
      1. Riverdale Irrigation Company; and,
      2. Reed Ditch Company.
   6. One member shall be a resident or landowner within the territory of the Agency chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Liberty Mill Race Company; and,
      2. Burrel Ditch Company.
   7. One member shall be chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following special districts, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts:
      1. Liberty Water District; and,
      2. Liberty Canal Company.
4. Requires there to be an alternate for each board member, chosen in the same manner and by the same entities as the board member. The alternate member shall act in place of the board member he or she is an alternate for in case of that board member's absence or inability to act. Requires initial members and their alternates to be chosen on or before January 31, 2017.
5. Requires the members to serve for a four-year term of office. Allows a member to serve for more than one term of office.
6. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to provide compensation to members of the Board in an amount not to exceed $100 per day for each day's attendance at meetings of the Board or for each day's service rendered as a member of the Board by request of the Board.
7. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to increase the compensation received by members of the Board above the amount of $100 per day. Prohibits a Board member from being compensated for more than a total of 10 days in any calendar month.
8. Allows the board to adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the Agency.
9. Specifies that an ordinance adopted by the Board shall become effective 30 days from the date of its passage.
10. Requires all ordinances to be adopted at noticed, public hearings by a majority vote of the Board. Prohibits any ordinance from being adopted by the Board, except at a public hearing. Requires notice of the hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation, as specified.
11. Provides that no provision of this Act shall be construed as denying to any member agency any rights or powers that they already have or that they may be granted.
12. Allows the Agency to contract with member entities for staff and other services. Allows the Agency to hire contractors and consultants as it considers appropriate.
13. Requires the Agency to enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the Agency's plan with other agencies or groundwater sustainability plans with the Kings Subbasin, as required by the SGMA.
14. Allows the Agency to exclude from any of the requirements of this Act, or the operation of any ordinance, any operator who annually extracts less than a minimum amount of groundwater, as specified by an ordinance adopted by the Board.
15. Allows the Agency to collect data and conduct technical and other investigations of all kinds in order to carry out the provisions of this Act. Requires all hydrological investigations and studies carried out by or on behalf of the Agency to be constructed by or under the supervision of licensed engineers or other persons qualified in groundwater geology or hydrology.
16. Allows the Agency to recommend and encourage water recycling and other water development projects, where those projects will enhance and contribute to the responsible management of groundwater resources, as part of its annual plan for implementation of groundwater management objectives.
17. Requires the Agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan, pursuant to existing law, to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency.
18. Requires the Agency to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency, pursuant to existing law, for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency.
19. Allows the Agency to establish advisory committees that include persons representing interests of beneficial uses and users of groundwater for purposes of assisting the board in the development and operation of the groundwater sustainability agency and the development and implementation of the Agency's groundwater sustainability plan. Requires the Agency to develop rules for the operation of advisory committees and specifies that members shall serve without compensation.
20. Requires, pursuant to 19) above, the Agency to establish a rural community advisory committee for purposes of assisting the board to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater. Specifies that the committee members shall serve at the pleasure of the board and shall include, but not be limited to, representatives of domestic well owners, municipal well operators, local land use planning agencies, residents served by a public water system that serves 200 or more connections, residents served by a small community water systems, residents served by a public water system that serves fewer than 200 connections, and environmental justice organizations or community benefit organizations with demonstrated experience working with disadvantaged communities and with expertise in drinking water, groundwater, or land use.
21. Allows the Agency to exercise specified powers, pursuant to SGMA.
22. Specifies, in the event of any conflict between the Act and provisions of SGMA, that the provisions of SGMA shall prevail.
23. Allows, pursuant to SGMA, the Agency to impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, that include, but are not limited to, the preparation, adoption, and amendments of a groundwater sustainability plan, investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program administration, including a prudent reserve.
24. Allows the initial boundaries of the Agency to be changed upon a petition to the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing in the county in which the change is proposed. Requires the boundaries to be depicted on a map that shall be maintained by the Boards of those counties and thereafter recorded in the office of the county recorder of each county.
25. Prohibits the boundaries of the Agency from being adjusted to include an area of the basin within the management area of another groundwater sustainability agency unless the agency has entered into a memorandum of agreement of other legal agreement with the groundwater sustainability agency that permits the area to be included. Prohibits the boundaries of the agency to be adjusted to include any part of a proposed management area, as defined in a notice of intent pursuant to a specified section of the Water Code, unless the agency has entered into a memorandum of agreement of other legal agreement with all agencies listed in the notice of intent that permits the area to be included.
26. Declares that the availability of supplemental water to any operator shall not subject that operator to regulations that are more restrictive than those imposed on other operators.
27. Specifies that the Agency shall only exercise the powers granted by this Act and the SGMA for purposes of groundwater management within the boundaries of the Agency, together with any other powers as are reasonably implied, necessary, and proper to carry out the objectives and purposes of the Agency to implement the SGMA. Requires the Agency to abide by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) to implement the SGMA.
28. Defines terms, as follows:
    1. "Agency" to mean the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency;
    2. "Aquifer" to mean a geologic formation or structure that transmits water in sufficient quantities to supply pumping wells or springs;
    3. "Basin" to mean a groundwater basin or subbasin identified and defined in the Department of Water Resources' "California Groundwater: Bulletin 118" updated in 2003, as it may be subsequently updated or revised, as specified;
    4. "Board" to mean the Board of Directors of the Agency;
    5. "Coordination agreement" to mean a legal agreement adopted between two or more groundwater sustainability agencies that provides the basis for coordinating multiple agencies or groundwater sustainability plans within a basin;
    6. "County" to mean either the County of Fresno or the County of Kings, as the context requires. "Counties" to mean the County of Fresno and the County of Kings;
    7. "Extraction" to mean the act of obtaining groundwater by pumping or other controlled means;
    8. "Groundwater" to mean water beneath the surface of the earth within the zone below the water table in which the soil is completely saturated with water, but does not include water that flows in known and definite channels;
    9. "Groundwater management activities" to mean programs, measures, or actions taken to preserve, protect, and enhance groundwater resources within the territory of the Agency;
    10. "Kings Subbasin" to mean the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin;
    11. "Member" to mean any person or entity entitled to representation on the Agency's Board of Directors;
    12. "Operator" to mean a person operating a groundwater extraction facility. The owner of a groundwater extraction facility shall be conclusively presumed to be the operator, unless a satisfactory showing is made to the governing body of the groundwater sustainability agency that the groundwater extraction facility actually is operated by some other person;
    13. "Person" has the same meaning as defined in Section 10735 of the Water Code;
    14. "Plan" to mean a groundwater sustainability plan prepared by the Agency; and,
    15. "Supplemental water" to mean surface water or groundwater imported from outside the watershed or watersheds of the basin or aquifer and floodwaters that are conserved and saved within the watershed or watersheds that would otherwise have been lost or would not have reached the basin or aquifer.
29. States that no reimbursement is required by this act because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, as specified.
30. Contains chaptering out language to avoid conflicts with SB 37 (Vidak) of the current legislative session.
31. Makes findings and declarations.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the SGMA to provide local groundwater agencies with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater.
2. Requires, by January 31, 2020, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that have been designated in Bulletin 118, as may be updated or revised on or before January 1, 2017, as basins that are subject to critical conditions of overdraft, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
3. Requires, by January 31, 2022, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that are not subject to 2), above, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
4. Allows any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin, except as specified.
5. Requires the local agency or agencies to hold a public hearing in the county or counties overlying the basin, prior to electing to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA), and to provide specified notice of that hearing, pursuant to existing law.
6. Requires a local agency or combination of local agencies that elects to be the GSA to submit a notice of intent to DWR, as specified.
7. Allows a combination of local agencies to form a GSA by using either of the following methods: a) a joint powers agreement (JPA); or, b) a memorandum of agreement (MOA) or other local agreement.
8. Requires a groundwater sustainability plan to be developed and implemented for each medium- or high- priority basin by a GSA to meet the sustainability goal established, pursuant to SGMA.
9. Specifies that a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) may be any of the following:
   1. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by one GSA;
   2. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by multiple GSAs; or,
   3. Multiple plans implemented by multiple GSAs and coordinated, pursuant to a single coordination agreement that covers the entire basins, as specified.
10. Allows the State Water Board, after notice and public hearing, to designate a basin as a probationary basin, if the board makes certain specified findings.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this bill contains negligible state fiscal impacts. Although a state mandate, costs are not reimbursable because the Agency has authority to levy fees sufficient to cover any costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Local Groundwater Management and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The Legislature passed SGMA (SB 1168 (Pavley), Chapter 346, AB 1739 (Dickinson), Chapter 347 and SB 1319 (Pavley), Chapter 348, Statutes of 2014), creating a statewide requirement to sustainably manage groundwater resources. The package of bills was signed by Governor Brown with the objective to ensure the long-term reliability of groundwater resources and connected surface water resources by requiring sustainable management. GSAs must by formed by 2017, GSPs for critically overdrafted basins must be written by 2020, and sustainability must be reached by 2040. Prior to 2014, there was no statutory mandate to manage groundwater in California.

Prior to SGMA, there were several ways that groundwater was managed at the local level. A local agency that provided water service was authorized to develop and implement a groundwater management plan, known as an AB 3030 plan. The Legislature also created a number of "special act special districts" that addressed groundwater management – these local agencies were created via statute to establish unique governance structures and grant powers that were customized to the problems and solutions of a particular groundwater basin. The acts creating these special act districts are located in the Water Appendix.

Local Control and Governance Options under SGMA. SGMA requires local entities in medium- and high-priority basins to establish GSAs by June 2017, to avoid state intervention. GSAs must self-identify by June 30, 2017, to the DWR, and can include a city, a county, a special district, or a combination of these agencies organized via a legal agreement, like a JPA or MOA. One agency can form a GSA for the entire basin, or multiple agencies can form individual GSAs and coordinate for basin sustainability. There are multiple options for local agencies to manage groundwater under SGMA, including alternatives to forming a GSA and developing a GSP. SGMA does not specify exactly how GSAs should govern local groundwater resources to achieve sustainability goals.

All groundwater basins designated as medium- or high-priority and identified as subject to critical conditions of overdraft must be managed under one or more GSPs by January 31, 2020. The deadline is two years later (January 31, 2022) for other medium- or high-priority basins. The goal of the GSPs is to achieve operation within the basins' sustainable yield within 20 years of plan implementation.

Because of the June 30, 2017, date to have GSAs in place, the timeline for local agencies to make decisions on management at the local level, and governance, is very short.

1. Bill Summary. This bill creates a special act district called the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, and requires the Agency to be the GSA under SGMA for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency, and would require the Agency to develop and implement a GSP to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency. The bill additionally specifies the powers and purposes of the Agency, and prescribes the composition of the seven-member board of directors of the Agency, including the terms, how the members are chosen, and their compensation and reimbursement. The bill also adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with SGMA.

This bill is sponsored by the West Kings Basin Groundwater Coalition.

1. Author's Statement. According to the author, "It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to "manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible, while minimizing state intervention to only when necessary to ensure that local agencies manage groundwater in a sustainable manner" [Water Code Section 10720.1(h)].

"This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the groundwater sustainability for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent for a number of reasons. First, the portion of the basin to be covered by the GSA would not contain any so-called "white areas" as the territory of the GSA would cover the entire area. Second, this is important because significant acreage in the territory is not served by local agencies, but by mutual water companies. The special act agency would include in its governing body traditionally disparate interests, including representatives appointed by the principal land use agency, local agencies providing drinking water to disadvantaged communities, local agencies providing farm water supplies and mutual water companies that provide farm water supplies. Mutual water companies would not be a member of the GSA, but a representative of a mutual water company may be appointed to serve on the governing body.

"The goal of this legislation is to provide 'a seat at the table' for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers the best governance model for achieving sustainable groundwater management in this area. A GSA that consists of only local agencies would require other interested parties to participate only through attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. It will be far better to provide equal and equitable access to the decision making process."

1. Policy Considerations. The Legislature may wish to consider the following:
   1. Mutual Water Company Involvement. This bill allows for several mutual water companies to have a say in choosing board members, and for the board members to either be a "resident" or a "landowner." Essentially, the bill allows several of the seven-member board to be representatives of mutual water companies.

SGMA specifically allows any local public agency or combination of local agencies to elect to be a GSA for that basin or subbasin. In this manner, SGMA places requirements on local public agencies.

Most mutual water companies are organized, pursuant to the General Corporation Law or the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Law. Shareholders in a mutual water company hold a right to purchase water from the company. Stock in a company is usually linked to the ownership of a parcel served by the company and transfers with the land when the parcel is sold to successive owners. This type of corporate structure allows landowners to establish, essentially, a customer-owned water provider to serve their properties. State law exempts a mutual water company from state regulation if it is organized to deliver water to its stockholders and members, with specified exceptions. Governance of a mutual water company is generally limited to shareholders, or members, of the company. While the details of any particular company's governing structure are determined by its articles and bylaws, most mutual water companies allow only shareholders and members to vote on organizational matters and serve on the company's governing board.

The Legislature may wish to consider the policy of allowing certain mutual water companies to have the power to appoint representatives to the North Fork Kings GSA's Board, and whether that runs contrary to the legislative intent of SGMA.

• 1. Other Alternatives to Special Act District. The Legislature may wish to ask the author to discuss why other local management options (JPA, MOA, electing to have an existing district serve as the GSA) do not suffice.

1. Arguments in Support. According to the supporters, it is the intent of all the interested parties to work collaboratively to solve the groundwater issues in the region and to develop the governance structure that will facilitate implementing a groundwater sustainability plan.
2. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0004326

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 564

Author:(Cannella)

As Amended Ver:August 4, 2016

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 30-2

SUMMARY: Creates the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the Board composition of the Agency, and adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Specifically, this bill:

1. Establishes the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act (Act) and creates the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) within the Counties of Fresno and Kings.
2. Adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
3. Specifies the Agency's governing board, consisting of seven members, as follows:
   1. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the County of Fresno. The member shall have experience or expertise in land use, water management, or improving access to drinking water in economically disadvantaged communities.
   2. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing board of the following entities:
      1. Clark's Fork Reclamation District;
      2. Laguna Irrigation District; and,
      3. Upper San Jose Water Company;
   3. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of special districts that are authorized provide drinking water within the territory of the Agency, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts, including, but not limited to, the following special districts:
      1. Laton Community Services District;
      2. Riverdale Public Utility District; and,
      3. Lanare Community Service District.
   4. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Crescent Canal Company; and,
      2. Stinson Canal and Irrigation Company.
   5. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities;
      1. Burrel Ditch Company; and,
      2. Liberty Canal Company.
   6. One member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Liberty Mill Race Company; and,
      2. Reed Ditch Company.
   7. One member shall be chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following special districts, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts:
      1. Liberty Water District; and,
      2. Riverdale Irrigation District.
4. Requires there to be an alternate for each board member, chosen in the same manner and by the same entities as the board member. The alternate member shall act in place of the board member he or she is an alternate for in case of that board member's absence or inability to act.
5. Requires the members to serve for a four-year term of office. Allows a member to serve for more than one term of office.
6. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to provide compensation to members of the Board in an amount not to exceed $100 per day for each day's attendance at meetings of the Board or for each day's service rendered as a member of the Board by request of the Board.
7. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to increase the compensation received by members of the Board above the amount of $100 per day. Prohibits a Board member from being compensated for more than a total of 10 days in any calendar month.
8. Allows the board to adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the Agency.
9. Specifies that an ordinance adopted by the Board shall become effective 30 days from the date of its passage.
10. Requires all ordinances to be adopted at noticed, public hearings by a majority vote of the Board. Prohibits any ordinance from being adopted by the Board, except at a public hearing. Requires notice of the hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation, as specified.
11. Provides that no provision of this Act shall be construed as denying to any member agency any rights or powers that they already have or that they may be granted.
12. Allows the Agency to contract with member entities for staff and other services. Allows the Agency to hire contractors and consultants as it considers appropriate.
13. Requires the Agency to enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the Agency's plan with other agencies or groundwater sustainability plans with the Kings Subbasin, as required by the SGMA.
14. Allows the Agency to exclude from any of the requirements of this Act, or the operation of any ordinance, any operator who annually extracts less than a minimum amount of groundwater, as specified by an ordinance adopted by the Board.
15. Allows the Agency to collect data and conduct technical and other investigations of all kinds in order to carry out the provisions of this Act. Requires all hydrological investigations and studies carried out by or on behalf of the Agency to be constructed by or under the supervision of licensed engineers or other persons qualified in groundwater geology or hydrology.
16. Allows the Agency to recommend and encourage water recycling and other water development projects, where those projects will enhance and contribute to the responsible management of groundwater resources, as part of its annual plan for implementation of groundwater management objectives.
17. Requires the Agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan, pursuant to existing law, to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency.
18. Requires the Agency to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency, pursuant to existing law, for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency.
19. Allows the Agency to establish advisory committees that include persons representing interests of beneficial uses and users of groundwater for purposes of assisting the board in the development and operation of the groundwater sustainability agency and the development and implementation of the Agency's groundwater sustainability plan. Requires the Agency to develop rules for the operation of advisory committees and specifies that members shall serve without compensation.
20. Requires, pursuant to 19), above, the Agency to establish a groundwater quality advisory committee for purposes of assisting the board to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater. Specifies that the committee members shall serve at the pleasure of the board and shall include, but not be limited to, representatives of domestic well owners, municipal well operators, local land use planning agencies, residents served by a public water system that serves 200 or more connections, residents served by a small community water systems, residents served by a public water system that serves fewer than 200 connections, and environmental justice organizations or community benefit organizations with demonstrated experience working with disadvantaged communities with expertise in drinking water, groundwater, or land use.
21. Allows the Agency to exercise specified powers, pursuant to SGMA.
22. Specifies, in the event of any conflict between the Act and provisions of SGMA, that the provisions of SGMA shall prevail.
23. Allows, pursuant to SGMA, the Agency to impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, that include, but are not limited to, the preparation, adoption, and amendments of a groundwater sustainability plan, investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program administration, including a prudent reserve.
24. Allows the initial boundaries of the Agency to be changed upon a petition to the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing at the county in which the change is proposed. Requires the boundaries to be depicted on a map that shall be maintained by the Boards of those counties and thereafter recorded in the office of the county recorder of each county.
25. Prohibits the boundaries of the Agency from being adjusted to include an area of the basin within the management area of another groundwater sustainability agency unless the agency has entered into a memorandum of agreement of other legal agreement with the groundwater sustainability agency that permits the area to be included. Allows the boundaries of the agency to be adjusted to include any part of a proposed management area, as defined in a notice of intent pursuant to a specified section of the Water Code, unless the agency has entered into a memorandum of agreement of other legal agreement with all agencies listed in the notice of intent that permits the area to be included.
26. Declares that the availability of supplemental water to any operator shall not subject that operator to regulations that are more restrictive than those imposed on other operators.
27. Specifies that the Agency shall only exercise the powers granted by this Act and the SGMA for purposes of groundwater management within the boundaries of the Agency, together with any other powers as are reasonably implied, necessary, and proper to carry out the objectives and purposes of the Agency to implement the SGMA. Requires the Agency to abide by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) to implement the SGMA.
28. Defines terms, as follows:
    1. "Agency" to mean the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency;
    2. "Aquifer" to mean a geologic formation or structure that transmits water in sufficient quantities to supply pumping wells or springs;
    3. "Basin" to mean a groundwater basin or subbasin identified and defined in the Department of Water Resources' "California Groundwater: Bulletin 118" updated in 2003, as it may be subsequently updated or revised, as specified;
    4. "Board" to mean the Board of Directors of the Agency;
    5. "Coordination agreement" to mean a legal agreement adopted between two or more groundwater sustainability agencies that provides the basis for coordinating multiple agencies or groundwater sustainability plans within a basin;
    6. "County" to mean either the County of Fresno or the County of Kings, as the context requires. "Counties" to mean the County of Fresno and the County of Kings;
    7. "Extraction" to mean the act of obtaining groundwater by pumping or other controlled means;
    8. "Groundwater" to mean water beneath the surface of the earth within the zone below the water table in which the soil is completely saturated with water, but does not include water that flows in known and definite channels;
    9. "Groundwater management activities" to mean programs, measures, or actions taken to preserve, protect, and enhance groundwater resources within the territory of the Agency;
    10. "Kings Subbasin" to mean the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin;
    11. "Member" to mean any person or entity entitled to representation on the Agency's Board of Directors;
    12. "Operator" to mean a person operating a groundwater extraction facility. The owner of a groundwater extraction facility shall be conclusively presumed to be the operator, unless a satisfactory showing is made to the governing body of the groundwater sustainability agency that the groundwater extraction facility actually is operated by some other person;
    13. "Person" has the same meaning as defined in Section 10735 of the Water Code;
    14. "Plan" to mean a groundwater sustainability plan prepared by the Agency; and,
    15. "Supplemental water" to mean surface water or groundwater imported from outside the watershed or watersheds of the basin or aquifer and floodwaters that are conserved and saved within the watershed or watersheds that would otherwise have been lost or would not have reached the basin or aquifer.
29. States that no reimbursement is required by this act because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, as specified.
30. Contains chaptering out language to avoid conflicts with SB 37 (Vidak) of the current legislative session.
31. Makes findings and declarations.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the SGMA to provide local groundwater agencies with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater.
2. Requires, by January 31, 2020, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that have been designated in Bulletin 118, as may be updated or revised on or before January 1, 2017, as basins that are subject to critical conditions of overdraft, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
3. Requires, by January 31, 2022, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that are not subject to 2), above, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
4. Allows any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin, except as specified.
5. Requires the local agency or agencies to hold a public hearing in the county or counties overlying the basin, prior to electing to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA), and to provide specified notice of that hearing, pursuant to existing law.
6. Requires a local agency or combination of local agencies that elects to be the GSA to submit a notice of intent to DWR, as specified.
7. Allows a combination of local agencies to form a GSA by using either of the following methods: a) a joint powers agreement (JPA); or, b) a memorandum of agreement (MOA) or other local agreement.
8. Requires a groundwater sustainability plan to be developed and implemented for each medium- or high- priority basin by a GSA to meet the sustainability goal established, pursuant to SGMA.
9. Specifies that a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) may be any of the following:
   1. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by one GSA;
   2. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by multiple GSAs; or,
   3. Multiple plans implemented by multiple GSAs and coordinated, pursuant to a single coordination agreement that covers the entire basins, as specified.
10. Allows the State Water Board, after notice and public hearing, to designate a basin as a probationary basin, if the board makes certain specified findings.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this bill contains negligible state fiscal impacts. Although a state mandate, costs are not reimbursable because the Agency has authority to levy fees sufficient to cover any costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Local Groundwater Management and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The Legislature passed SGMA (SB 1168 (Pavley), Chapter 346, AB 1739 (Dickinson), Chapter 347 and SB 1319 (Pavley), Chapter 348, Statutes of 2014), creating a statewide requirement to sustainably manage groundwater resources. The package of bills was signed by Governor Brown with the objective to ensure the long-term reliability of groundwater resources and connected surface water resources by requiring sustainable management. GSAs must by formed by 2017, GSPs for critically overdrafted basins must be written by 2020, and sustainability must be reached by 2040. Prior to 2014, there was no statutory mandate to manage groundwater in California.

Prior to SGMA, there were several ways that groundwater was managed at the local level. A local agency that provided water service was authorized to develop and implement a groundwater management plan, known as an AB 3030 plan. The Legislature also created a number of "special act special districts" that addressed groundwater management – these local agencies were created via statute to establish unique governance structures and grant powers that were customized to the problems and solutions of a particular groundwater basin. The acts creating these special act districts are located in the Water Appendix.

Local Control and Governance Options under SGMA. SGMA requires local entities in medium- and high-priority basins to establish GSAs by June 2017, to avoid state intervention. GSAs must self-identify by June 30, 2017, to the DWR, and can include a city, a county, a special district, or a combination of these agencies organized via a legal agreement, like a JPA or MOA. One agency can form a GSA for the entire basin, or multiple agencies can form individual GSAs and coordinate for basin sustainability. There are multiple options for local agencies to manage groundwater under SGMA, including alternatives to forming a GSA and developing a GSP. SGMA does not specify exactly how GSAs should govern local groundwater resources to achieve sustainability goals.

All groundwater basins designated as medium- or high-priority and identified as subject to critical conditions of overdraft must be managed under one or more GSPs by January 31, 2020. The deadline is two years later (January 31, 2022) for other medium- or high-priority basins. The goal of the GSPs is to achieve operation within the basins' sustainable yield within 20 years of plan implementation.

Because of the June 30, 2017, date to have GSAs in place, the timeline for local agencies to make decisions on management at the local level, and governance, is very short.

1. Bill Summary. This bill creates a special act district called the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, and requires the Agency to be the GSA under SGMA for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency, and would require the Agency to develop and implement a GSP to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency. The bill additionally specifies the powers and purposes of the Agency, and prescribes the composition of the seven-member board of directors of the Agency, including the terms, how the members are chosen, and their compensation and reimbursement. The bill also adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with SGMA.

This bill is sponsored by the West Kings Basin Groundwater Coalition.

1. Author's Statement. According to the author, "It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to "manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible, while minimizing state intervention to only when necessary to ensure that local agencies manage groundwater in a sustainable manner" [Water Code Section 10720.1(h)].

"This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the groundwater sustainability for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent for a number of reasons. First, the portion of the basin to be covered by the GSA would not contain any so-called "white areas" as the territory of the GSA would cover the entire area. Second, this is important because significant acreage in the territory is not served by local agencies, but by mutual water companies. The special act agency would include in its governing body traditionally disparate interests, including representatives appointed by the principal land use agency, local agencies providing drinking water to disadvantaged communities, local agencies providing farm water supplies and mutual water companies that provide farm water supplies. Mutual water companies would not be a member of the GSA, but a representative of a mutual water company may be appointed to serve on the governing body.

"The goal of this legislation is to provide 'a seat at the table' for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers the best governance model for achieving sustainable groundwater management in this area. A GSA that consists of only local agencies would require other interested parties to participate only through attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. It will be far better to provide equal and equitable access to the decision making process."

1. Policy Considerations. The Legislature may wish to consider the following:
   1. Mutual Water Company Involvement. This bill allows for several mutual water companies to have a say in choosing board members, and for the board members to either be a "resident" or a "landowner." Essentially, the bill allows several of the seven-member board to be representatives of mutual water companies.

SGMA specifically allows any local public agency or combination of local agencies to elect to be a GSA for that basin or subbasin. In this manner, SGMA places requirements on local public agencies.

Most mutual water companies are organized, pursuant to the General Corporation Law or the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Law. Shareholders in a mutual water company hold a right to purchase water from the company. Stock in a company is usually linked to the ownership of a parcel served by the company and transfers with the land when the parcel is sold to successive owners. This type of corporate structure allows landowners to establish, essentially, a customer-owned water provider to serve their properties. State law exempts a mutual water company from state regulation if it is organized to deliver water to its stockholders and members, with specified exceptions. Governance of a mutual water company is generally limited to shareholders, or members, of the company. While the details of any particular company's governing structure are determined by its articles and bylaws, most mutual water companies allow only shareholders and members to vote on organizational matters and serve on the company's governing board.

The Legislature may wish to consider the policy of allowing certain mutual water companies to have the power to appoint representatives to the North Fork Kings GSA's Board, and whether that runs contrary to the legislative intent of SGMA.

• 1. Other Alternatives to Special Act District. The Legislature may wish to ask the author to discuss why other local management options (JPA, MOA, electing to have an existing district serve as the GSA) do not suffice.

1. Arguments in Support. According to the supporters, it is the intent of all the interested parties to work collaboratively to solve the groundwater issues in the region and to develop the governance structure that will facilitate implementing a groundwater sustainability plan.
2. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0003932

Date of Hearing: August 10, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 564

Author:(Cannella) – As Amended Ver:August 4, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY: This bill creates the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) in the counties of Fresno and Kings, and specifies the boundaries, Board composition, powers and duties of the Agency, and adds the Agency to the list of exclusive local agencies created to manage groundwater. Specifically, this bill:

1. Adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
2. Requires the Agency to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA), pursuant to existing law, for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency.
3. Requires the Agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency.
4. Provides that the Agency only has the powers granted by this Act and SGMA, for purposes
   of groundwater management within the boundaries of the Agency. Requires the Agency to abide by the rules and regulation promulgated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to implement SGMA.
5. Allows the board to adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the Agency.
6. Requires the Agency to enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the Agency’s plan with other agencies or GSP’s within the Kings Subbasin, as required by SGMA.
7. Allows the Agency to establish advisory committees for assisting the board in the development and operation of the GSA and the development and implementation of the GSP.
8. Allows, pursuant to SGMA, the Agency to impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program that include, but are not limited to, the preparation, adoption, and amendments of a groundwater sustainability plan, investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, program administration, and a prudent reserve.
9. Provides that in the event of a conflict between the Agency's Act and SGMA, the provisions of SGMA prevail.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Negligible state fiscal impact. Although a state mandate, costs are not reimbursable because the Agency has authority to levy fees sufficient to cover any costs.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author, “It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible. This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the GSA for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent for a number of reasons. The special act agency would include in its governing body traditionally disparate interests, including representatives appointed by the principal land use agency, local agencies providing drinking water to disadvantaged communities, local agencies providing farm water supplies and mutual water companies that provide farm water supplies. Mutual water companies would not be a member of the GSA, but a representative of a mutual water company may be appointed to serve on the governing body.

"The goal of this legislation is to provide ‘a seat at the table’ for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers the best governance model for achieving sustainable groundwater management in this area. A GSA that consists of only local agencies would require other interested parties to participate only through attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. It will be far better to provide equal and equitable access to the decision making process."

1. Background. SGMA requires the development of a local process to sustainably manage groundwater. Specifically, in all SGMA regulated basins GSAs must be formed by June 30, 2017, GSPs for critically overdrafted basins must be written by 2020, and sustainability must be reached by 2040 (the timeline is two years later for all other basins).

Prior to SGMA, there were several ways that groundwater was managed at the local level.
A local agency that provided water service was authorized to develop and implement a groundwater management plan, known as AB 3030 plans. The Legislature also created a number of “special act special districts” that addressed groundwater management – these local agencies were created via statute to establish unique governance structures and grant powers that were customized to the problems and solutions of a particular groundwater basin.

SGMA requires local entities in medium- and high-priority basins to establish GSAs by June 2017, to avoid state intervention. GSAs must self-identify by June 30, 2017, to DWR, and can include a city, a county, a special district, or a combination of these agencies organized via a legal agreement, like a Joint Powers Authority or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). One agency can form a GSA for the entire basin, or multiple agencies can form individual GSAs and coordinate for basin sustainability. There are multiple options for local agencies to manage groundwater under SGMA, including alternatives to forming a GSA and developing a GSP. SGMA does not specify exactly how GSAs should govern local groundwater resources to achieve sustainability goals.

All groundwater basins designated as medium- or high-priority and identified as subject to critical conditions of overdraft must be managed under one or more GSPs by January 31, 2020. The Kings Subbasin that is the subject of this bill has been designated to be in a state of critical overdraft.

1. Related Legislation. SB 37(Vidak), before this Committee today, creates the Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency.
2. Prior Legislation. SB 1168 (Pavley), Chapter 346, and AB 1738 (Dickinson), Chapter 347, the Statutes of 2014, enacted SGMA.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 29, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 564

Author:(Cannella) – As Amended Ver:June 16, 2016

SENATE VOTE: Vote not relevant

SUBJECT: West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act.

SUMMARY: Creates the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the Board composition of the Agency, and adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Specifically, this bill:

1. Establishes the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act (Act) and creates the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) within the Counties of Fresno and Kings.
2. Adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
3. Specifies the Agency’s governing board, consisting of seven (7) members, as follows:
   1. One (1) member shall be chosen by the County of Fresno;
   2. One (1) member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing board of the following entities:
      1. Clark’s Fork Reclamation District;
      2. Laguna Irrigation District; and,
      3. Upper San Jose Water Company;
   3. One (1) member shall be chosen by the member of the governing boards of the following special districts that provide drinking water, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts:
      1. Laton Community Services District; and,
      2. Riverdale Public Utility District.
   4. One (1) member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Crescent Canal Company; and,
      2. Stinson Canal and Irrigation Company.
   5. One (1) member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities;
      1. Burrel Ditch Company; and,
      2. Liberty Canal Company.
   6. One (1) member shall be a resident or landowner chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following entities:
      1. Liberty Mill Race Company; and,
      2. Reed Ditch Company.
   7. One (1) member shall be chosen by the members of the governing boards of the following special districts, who shall be chosen from the members of the governing boards of the special districts:
      1. Liberty Water District; and,
      2. Riverdale Irrigation District.
4. Requires there to be an alternate for each board member, chosen in the same manner and by the same entities as the board member. The alternate member shall act in place of the board member he or she is an alternate for in case of that board member’s absence or inability to act.
5. Requires the members to serve for a four-year term of office. Allows a member to serve for more than one term of office.
6. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to provide compensation to members of the Board in an amount not to exceed $100 per day for each day’s attendance at meetings of the Board or for each day’s service rendered as a member of the Board by request of the Board.
7. Allows the Board to adopt an ordinance to increase the compensation received by members of the Board above the amount of $100 per day. Prohibits a Board member from being compensated for more than a total of 10 days in any calendar month.
8. Allows the board to adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the Agency.
9. Specifies that an ordinance adopted by the Board shall become effective 30 days from the date of its passage.
10. Requires all ordinances to be adopted at noticed, public hearings by a majority vote of the Board. Prohibits any ordinance from being adopted by the Board, except at a public hearing. Requires notice of the hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation, as specified.
    
11. Provides that no provision of this Act shall be construed as denying to any member agency any rights or powers that they already have or that they may be granted.
12. Allows the Agency to contract with member entities for staff and other services. Allows the Agency to hire contractors and consultants as it considers appropriate.
13. Requires the Agency to enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the Agency’s plan with other agencies or groundwater sustainability plans with the Kings Subbasin, as required by the SGMA.
14. Allows the Agency to exclude from any of the requirements of this Act, or the operation of any ordinance, any operator who annually extracts less than a minimum amount of groundwater, as specified by an ordinance adopted by the Board.
15. Allows the Agency to collect data and conduct technical and other investigations of all kinds in order to carry out the provisions of this Act. Requires all hydrological investigations and studies carried out by or on behalf of the Agency to be constructed by or under the supervision of licensed engineers or other persons qualified in groundwater geology or hydrology.
16. Allows the Agency to recommend and encourage water recycling and other water development projects, where those projects will enhance and contribute to the responsible management of groundwater resources, as part of its annual plan for implementation of groundwater management objectives.
17. Requires the Agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan, pursuant to existing law, to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency.
18. Requires the Agency to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency, pursuant to existing law, for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency.
19. Allows the Agency to exercise specified powers, pursuant to SGMA.
20. Allows, pursuant to SGMA, the Agency to impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, that include, but are not limited to, the preparation, adoption, and amendments of a groundwater sustainability plan, investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program administration, including a prudent reserve.
21. Specifies the Agency’s boundaries and provides that the Agency’s initial boundaries shall be established by the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Fresno and Kings after a noticed public hearing. Requires the boundaries to be depicted on a map that shall be adopted by the Boards of those counties and thereafter recorded in the office of the county recorder of each county. Allows the Boards to adjust the boundaries of the Agency in the same manner prescribed for in establishment of the initial boundaries if the boundaries of the basin are revised, including the establishment of new subbasins.
22. Declares that the availability of supplemental water to any operator shall not subject that operator to regulations that are more restrictive than those imposed on other operators.
23. Specifies that the Agency shall only exercise the powers granted by this Act and the SGMA for purposes of groundwater management within the boundaries of the Agency, together with any other powers as are reasonably implied, necessary, and proper to carry out the objectives and purposes of the Agency to implement the SGMA. Requires the Agency to abide by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) to implement the SGMA.
24. Defines terms, as follows:
    1. “Actively and primarily engaged in production of agriculture” to mean that a person derives at least 75% of his or her annual income from production agriculture;
    2. “Agency” to mean the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency;
    3. “Aquifer” to mean a geologic formation or structure that transmits water in sufficient quantities to supply pumping wells or springs;
    4. “Basin” to mean a groundwater basin or subbasin identified and defined in the Department of Water Resources’ “California Groundwater: Bulletin 118” updated in 2003, as it may be subsequently updated or revised, as specified;
    5. “Board” to mean the Board of Directors of the Agency;
    6. “Coordination agreement” to mean a legal agreement adopted between two or more groundwater sustainability agencies that provides the basis for coordinating multiple agencies or groundwater sustainability plans within a basin;
    7. “County” to mean either the County of Fresno or the County of Kings, as the context requires. “Counties” to mean the County of Fresno and the County of Kings;
    8. “Extraction” to mean the act of obtaining groundwater by pumping or other controlled means;
    9. “Groundwater” to mean water beneath the surface of the earth within the zone below the water table in which the soil is completely saturated with water, but does not include water that flows in known and definite channels;
    10. “Groundwater management activities” to mean programs, measures, or actions taken to preserve, protect, and enhance groundwater resources within the territory of the Agency;
    11. “Kings Subbasin” to mean the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin;
    12. “Member” to mean any person or entity entitled to representation on the Agency’s Board of Directors;
        
        
    13. “Operator” to mean a person operating a groundwater extraction facility. The owner of a groundwater extraction facility shall be conclusively presumed to be the operator, unless a satisfactory showing is made to the governing body of the groundwater sustainability agency that the groundwater extraction facility actually is operated by some other person;
    14. “Person” to include any state or local governmental agency, private corporation, firm, partnership, limited liability company, individual, group of individuals, or, to the extent authorized by law, any federal agency;
    15. “Plan” to mean a groundwater sustainability plan prepared by the Agency; and,
    16. “Supplemental water” to mean surface water or groundwater imported from outside the watershed or watersheds of the basin or aquifer and floodwaters that are conserved and saved within the watershed or watersheds that would otherwise have been lost or would not have reached the basin or aquifer.
25. States that no reimbursement is required by this act because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, as specified.
26. Makes findings and declarations.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to provide local groundwater agencies with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater.
2. Requires, by January 31, 2020, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that have been designated in Bulletin 118, as may be updated or revised on or before January 1, 2017, as basins that are subject to critical conditions of overdraft, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
3. Requires, by January 31, 2022, all basins designed as high- or medium-priority basins by DWR that are not subject to 2), above, to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans.
4. Allows any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin, except as specified.
5. Requires the local agency or agencies to hold a public hearing in the county or counties overlying the basin, prior to electing to be a GSA, and to provide specified notice of that hearing, pursuant to existing law.
6. Requires a local agency or combination of local agencies that elects to be the GSA to submit a notice of intent to DWR, as specified.
   
   
   
7. Allows a combination of local agencies to form a GSA by using any of the following methods:
   1. A joint powers agreement (JPA); or,
   2. A memorandum of agreement (MOA) or other local agreement.
8. Requires a groundwater sustainability plan to be developed and implemented for each medium- or high- priority basin by a GSA to meet the sustainability goal established, pursuant to SGMA.
9. Specifies that a GSP may be any of the following:
   1. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by one GSA;
   2. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by multiple GSAs; or,
   3. Multiple plans implemented by multiple GSAs and coordinated, pursuant to a single coordination agreement that covers the entire basins, as specified.
10. Allows the State Water Board, after notice and public hearing, to designate a basin as a probationary basin, if the board makes certain specified findings.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS:

1. Local Groundwater Management and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The Legislature passed SGMA (SB 1168 (Pavley), AB 1739 (Dickinson) and
   SB 1319 (Pavley), Statutes of 2014), creating a statewide requirement to sustainably manage groundwater resources. The package of bills was signed by Governor Brown with the objective to ensure the long-term reliability of groundwater resources and connected surface water resources by requiring sustainable management. Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) must by formed by 2017, Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) for critically overdrafted basins must be written by 2020, and sustainability must be reached by 2040. Prior to 2014, there was no statutory mandate to manage groundwater in California.

Prior to SGMA, there were several ways that groundwater was managed at the local level.
A local agency that provided water service was authorized to develop and implement a groundwater management plan, known as an AB 3030 plan. The Legislature also created a number of “special act special districts” that addressed groundwater management – these local agencies were created via statute to establish unique governance structures and grant powers that were customized to the problems and solutions of a particular groundwater basin. The acts creating these special act districts are located in the Water Appendix.

Local Control and Governance Options under SGMA. SGMA requires local entities in medium- and high-priority basins to establish GSAs by June 2017, to avoid state intervention. GSAs must self-identify by June 30, 2017, to the DWR, and can include a city,


a county, a special district, or a combination of these agencies organized via a legal agreement, like a JPA or MOA. One agency can form a GSA for the entire basin, or multiple agencies can form individual GSAs and coordinate for basin sustainability. There are multiple options for local agencies to manage groundwater under SGMA, including alternatives to forming a GSA and developing a GSP. SGMA does not specify exactly how GSAs should govern local groundwater resources to achieve sustainability goals.

All groundwater basins designated as medium- or high-priority and identified as subject to critical conditions of overdraft must be managed under one or more GSPs by January 31, 2020. The deadline is two years later (January 31, 2022) for other medium- or high-priority basins. The goal of the GSPs is to achieve operation within the basins’ sustainable yield within 20 years of plan implementation.

Because of the June 30, 2017, date to have GSAs in place, the timeline for local agencies to make decisions on management at the local level, and governance, is very short.

1. Bill Summary. This bill creates a special act district called the West Kings Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency, and requires the Agency to be the GSA under SGMA for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency, and would require the Agency to develop and implement a GSP to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency. The bill additionally specifies the powers and purposes of the Agency, and prescribes the composition of the seven-member board of directors of the Agency, including the terms, how the members are chosen, and their compensation and reimbursement. The bill also adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with SGMA.

This bill is sponsored by the West Kings Basin Groundwater Coalition.

1. Author’s Statement. According to the author, “It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to “manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible, while minimizing state intervention to only when necessary to ensure that local agencies manage groundwater in a sustainable manner” [subdivision (h), Section 10720.1, Water Code].

“This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the groundwater sustainability for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent for a number of reasons. First, the portion of the basin to be covered by the GSA would not contain any so-called “white areas” as the territory of the GSA would cover the entire area. Second, this is important because significant acreage in the territory is not served by local agencies, but by mutual water companies. The special act agency would include in its governing body traditionally disparate interests, including representatives appointed by the principal land use agency, local agencies providing drinking water to disadvantaged communities, local agencies providing farm water supplies and mutual water companies that provide farm water supplies. Mutual water companies would not be a member of the GSA, but a representative of a mutual water company may be appointed to serve on the governing body.

“The goal of this legislation is to provide ‘a seat at the table’ for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers the best governance model for achieving sustainable groundwater management in this area. A GSA that consists of only local agencies would require other interested parties to participate only through attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. It will be far better to provide equal and equitable access to the decision making process.”

1. Policy Considerations. The Committee may wish to consider the following:
   1. Mutual Water Company Involvement. This bill allows for several mutual water companies to have a say in choosing board members, and for the board members to either be a “resident” or a “landowner.” Essentially, the bill allows several of the seven-member board to be representatives of mutual water companies.

SGMA specifically allows any local public agency or combination of local agencies to elect to be a GSA for that basin or subbasin. In this manner, SGMA places requirements on local public agencies.

Most mutual water companies are organized, pursuant to the General Corporation Law or the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Law. Shareholders in a mutual water company hold a right to purchase water from the company. Stock in a company is usually linked to the ownership of a parcel served by the company and transfers with the land when the parcel is sold to successive owners. This type of corporate structure allows landowners to establish, essentially, a customer-owned water provider to serve their properties. State law exempts a mutual water company from state regulation if it is organized to deliver water to its stockholders and members, with specified exceptions. Governance of a mutual water company is generally limited to shareholders, or members, of the company. While the details of any particular company’s governing structure are determined by its articles and bylaws, most mutual water companies allow only shareholders and members to vote on organizational matters and serve on the company’s governing board.

The Committee may wish to consider the policy of allowing certain mutual water companies to have the power to appoint representatives to the West Kings GSA’s Board, and whether that runs contrary to the legislative intent of SGMA.

• 1. Other Alternatives to Special Act District. The Committee may wish to ask the author to discuss why other local management options (JPA, MOA, electing to have an existing district serve as the GSA) do not suffice.

1. Arguments in Support. According to the supporters, it is the intent of all the interested parties to work collaboratively to solve the groundwater issues in the region and to develop the governance structure that will facilitate implementing a groundwater sustainability plan.
2. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
3. Double-Referral. This bill is double-referred to the Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Burrel Ditch Company

Clark's Fork Reclamation District #2069

Crescent Canal Company

Laguna Irrigation District

Liberty Canal Company

Liberty Mill Race Co.

Liberty Water District

Reed Ditch Company

Riverdale Irrigation District

Riverdale Public Utility District

Stinson Canal & Irrigation Co.

Upper San Jose Water Company

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958

Date of Hearing: June 28, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE

Marc Levine, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 564

Author:(Cannella) – As Amended Ver:June 16, 2016

SENATE VOTE: 30-2

SUBJECT: West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Act

SUMMARY: Creates the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the boundaries, Board composition, powers and duties, and adds the Agency to the list of exclusive local agencies created to manage groundwater. Specifically, this bill:

1. Creates a groundwater management agency in the Counties of Fresno and Kings to be known as the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency).
   1. Defines the boundaries of the Agency.
   2. Provides that the Agency is governed by a Board consisting of seven members, as specified.
2. Adds the Agency to the list of agencies created by statute to manage groundwater that are deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
3. Requires the Agency to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA), pursuant to existing law, for that portion of the Kings Subbasin that lies within the boundaries of the Agency.
4. Requires the Agency to develop and implement a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP), pursuant to existing law, to achieve sustainable groundwater management within the territory of the Agency.
5. Provides that the Agency only has the powers granted by this Act and SGMA, for purposes
   of groundwater management within the boundaries of the Agency, together with any other powers as are reasonably implied, necessary, and proper to carry out the objectives and purposes of the Agency to implement SGMA. Requires the agency to abide by the rules and regulation promulgated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to implement SGMA
6. Allows the board to adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater within the territory of the Agency.
7. Permits the Agency to exclude from any of the requirements of the act, or the operation of any ordinance, any operator who annually extracts less than a minimum amount of groundwater as specified by an ordinance adopted by the board.
8. Requires the Agency to enter into a coordination agreement with other local agencies for purposes of coordinating the Agency’s plan with other agencies or GSP’s within the Kings Subbasin, as required by SGMA.
9. Allows, pursuant to SGMA, the Agency to impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, that include, but are not limited to, the preparation, adoption, and amendments of a groundwater sustainability plan, investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program administration, including a prudent reserve.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the DWR to evaluate groundwater basins and designate them as high, medium, low or very low, according to various factors including, but not limited to, level of dependence upon the basin by municipal and agricultural users.
2. Requires that local agencies in high- and medium-priority basins subject to SGMA form one or more GSAs by June 30, 2017.
3. Allows any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin to elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin, except as specified.
4. Requires that GSAs in basins with chronic overdraft develop and adopt a GSP for their basin by January 31, 2020.
5. Defines the Kings basin in the San Joaquin Valley to be in chronic overdraft.
6. Requires that GSAs in all other high- and medium-priority basins subject to SGMA develop and adopt a GSP by January 31, 2022.
7. Requires the DWR to draft and adopt emergency regulations for the evaluation of GSPs, the implementation of GSPs, and coordination agreements by June 1, 2016.
8. Provides GSAs with optional tools for reaching sustainability including, but not limited to, the ability to conduct investigations, collect fees, limit pumping, require measurement and reporting of groundwater extractions, monitor compliance, charge civil penalties for violations, and implement plans and programs to recharge a basin.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS: Creates the West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, specifies the boundaries, Board composition, powers and duties, and adds the Agency to the list of exclusive local agencies created to manage groundwater.

1. Author’s Statement: It was the expressed intent of the Legislature in writing SGMA to manage groundwater basins through the actions of local governmental agencies to the greatest extent feasible.

This legislation, in creating a special act agency to serve as the GSA for an area encompassing 265 square miles, is fully consistent with legislative intent. The goal of this legislation is to provide ‘a seat at the table’ for all of the entities that have a stake in sustainable groundwater management in this area. This approach offers equal and equitable access to the decision making process.

1. Background: SGMA requires the development of a local process to sustainably manage groundwater. Specifically, in all SGMA regulated basins GSAs must be formed by June 30, 2017, GSPs for critically overdrafted basins must be written by 2020, and sustainability must be reached by 2040 (the timeline is two years later for all other basins).

Prior to SGMA, there were several ways that groundwater was managed at the local level.
A local agency that provided water service was authorized to develop and implement a groundwater management plan, known as AB 3030 plans. The Legislature also created a number of “special act special districts” that addressed groundwater management – these local agencies were created via statute to establish unique governance structures and grant powers that were customized to the problems and solutions of a particular groundwater basin.

Local Control under SGMA: GSAs must self-identify by June 30, 2017, to the DWR, and can include a city, a county, a special district, or a combination of these agencies organized via a legal agreement, like a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). One agency can form a GSA for the entire basin, or multiple agencies can form individual GSAs and coordinate for basin sustainability. There are multiple options for local agencies to manage groundwater under SGMA, including alternatives to forming a GSA and developing a GSP. SGMA does not specify exactly how GSAs should govern local groundwater resources to achieve sustainability goals.

All groundwater basins designated as medium- or high-priority, and identified as subject to critical conditions of overdraft, must be managed under one or more GSPs by January 31, 2020. The Kings Subbasin that is the subject of this bill has been designated to be in a state of critical overdraft.

Prevents formation of other GSA’s: To date, no entity has stepped forward to be the GSA for the area defined in this bill. Designating West Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency as the exclusive local agency will exclude any other eligible entity from coming forward to be the GSA in this portion of the Kings Subasin.

Powers and Duties: This bill specifies that Kings River East shall exercise powers granted by this act and SGMA that are reasonably implied, necessary, and proper to implement SGMA. The bill further specifies that the board may adopt ordinances for the purpose of regulating, conserving, managing, and controlling the use and extraction of groundwater and give the agency the ability to exclude groundwater extraction operators.

Chaptering Out, Double Referral, and Potential Amendments: A portion of this bill amends the same code section as SB 37 (Vidak) Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency. SB 37 will be heard in this committee at the same June 28, 2016 hearing as this bill and if this bill it should pass will be re-referred to Assembly Local Government Committee. Committee staff suggests that these bills be amended to address their chaptering out conflicts.

Committee staff is aware that there are discussions on potential amendments to provide for greater representation for environmental justice organizations, and other revisions to provide for specific expertise of some board representatives, and provide for greater flexibility as to how the board must be constructed as conditions change.

1. Prior and Related Legislation:
   1. SB 37 (Vidak), would establish Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency. To be heard in this committee on June 28, 2016.
   2. SB 1168 (Pavley), Chapter 346, Statutes of 2014, enacted SGMA.
   3. AB 1738 (Dickinson), Chapter 347, Statutes of 2014, enacted SGMA.
2. Supporting Arguments: This bill is the best way to implement SGMA for our area. For over a year there has been a collaborative process with public agencies, landowners, the counties and the local communities engaged in how the water agencies, the landowners, the counties and the disadvantaged communities can work together to develop a GSA. It is the intent of all the interested parties to work cooperatively to solve groundwater issues within our subbasin and to develop the governance structure that will facilitate implementing a GSP.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Burrel Ditch Company

Clark’s Fork Reclamation District #2069

Liberty Mill Race Co.

Liberty Water District

Riverdale Public Utility District

Stinson Canal & Irrigation Co.

Upper San Jose Water Company

Opposition

None on File

Analysis Prepared by: Ryan Ojakian / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 564

Author: Cannella (R)

Introduced: 2/26/15

Vote: 21

SENATE TRANS. & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 11-0, 4/14/15

AYES: Beall, Cannella, Allen, Bates, Gaines, Galgiani, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza, Roth, Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/27/15

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen

SUBJECT: Vehicles: school zone fines

SOURCE: Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership

DIGEST: This bill imposes an additional $35 fine for specified violations occurring in school zones and directs revenue from the fine to the state’s Active Transportation Program (ATP).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph when approaching or passing a school building or school grounds. This speed limit applies while children are entering or exiting during school hours or the noon recess period; in cases of school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barriers, while the grounds are in use by children; and where the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign. This sign may be posted at any distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds.

2. Governs speed limits and imposes fines for speeding violations.

3. Authorizes a local authority, upon determining via an engineering and traffic survey that the speed limit of 25 mph in a particular school zone is too high to be reasonable or safe, to establish a prima facie speed limit of either 20 or 15 mph, as deemed appropriate by the survey.

4. Authorizes doubling of fines for speed limit violations in highway construction or maintenance zones, under certain circumstances.

5. Provides that the state Judicial Council annually adopts a uniform traffic penalty schedule for all non-parking infractions outlined in the Vehicle Code.

6. Establishes the base fine for speeding in a school zone as $35 for traveling 1 mph to 15 mph over the speed limit ($289 total fine with fees and court costs), $70 for traveling 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit ($418 total fine with fees and court costs), and $100 for traveling 26 mph or more over the speed limit ($541 total fine with fees and court costs).

This bill:

1. Imposes a $35 fine, in addition to the amount otherwise prescribed and in addition to any other penalty assessments of fees, for most major offenses committed by the driver of a vehicle under either of the following conditions:

• When passing a school building or school grounds when children are entering or exiting during school hours or the noon recess period; the building or grounds are contiguous to a highway; and the highway is posted with both a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations committed within that school zone.

• When passing school grounds that are in use by children; are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier; and the highway is posted with both a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations committed within that school zone.

2. Requires the additional fines authorized by this bill to be deposited in the State Transportation Fund for purposes of funding school zone safety projects within ATP.

Comments

Purpose. The author states that while Highway Safety Corridors, “Slow for the Cone Zones,” and doubled fines in construction zones all promote safe driving and protect individuals in sensitive areas, existing law does not afford schoolchildren the same level of protection. Many school zones lack infrastructure for children to safely commute to school, exacerbating the risk of pedestrian injury or fatality. The author states that this bill will help support infrastructure projects, traffic calming measures, and non-capital projects such as education. This bill will also help contribute to obesity prevention, which is especially prevalent in communities of color and low-income areas.

Active Transportation Program. ATP, established by the 2013-14 budget agreement, consolidates several existing federal and state transportation programs, including Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS), the Bicycle Transportation Account, and others, to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation. The Governor’s proposed budget allocates $120 million in state and federal monies to ATP. Of these funds, the California Transportation Commission distributes 40% to metropolitan planning organizations, 10% to rural and small urban areas, and 50% on a statewide competitive basis. For each of these portions, 25% must be targeted for disadvantaged communities.

The administration’s original ATP proposal aimed to streamline the application and review process by establishing a single program within which all eligible projects would compete. The 2013-14 budget agreement, however, established a minimum funding level of $24 million for SRTS, of which $7 million was targeted for non-infrastructure projects such as education. The budget agreement also included intent language to honor the SRTS agreement for fiscal years 2014-15 and 2015-16. While this bill does not specifically cite SRTS, it directs funds to “school zone safety projects” within ATP.

Double-fine zones. AB 1886 (Jackson, Chapter 590, Statutes of 2002) authorized several counties and cities to established double-fine zones near schools. AB 1886 required those revenues to fund school pedestrian and bicyclist safety programs. A May 2006 report to the Legislature by the California Highway Patrol found that sign installation was costly; very little money was generated from the additional fine and therefore no school pedestrian-bicyclist safety programs were created; and some police departments did not have adequate staff to patrol the schools. The report also noted that due to insufficient resources of participating schools and police departments, local agencies collected very little data. The report concluded that “the findings do not support continuation of the program,” and it ended in 2007.

Trying again. SB 1151 (Cannella, 2014), which was almost identical to this bill, passed the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on a 10-0 vote but was subsequently vetoed. The Governor’s veto message stated that “Increasing traffic fines as a method to pay for transportation fund activities is a regressive increase that affects poor people disproportionately. Making safety improvements in school zones is obviously important, but not by increasing traffic fines.” The author states that this bill will complement the Governor’s renewed commitment to address both the infrastructure and environmental needs of the state.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 4/27/15)

Safe Routes to School National Partnership (source)

Alliance for Community Research and Development

California Pan-Ethnic Health Network

California State Association of Counties

California Walks

Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Program

OPPOSITION: (Verified 4/27/15)

Safer Streets L.A.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The sponsor of this bill, Safe Routes to School National Partnership, states that the fine increase in this bill puts a greater burden on drivers to obey existing laws in school zones. The sponsor further states that increased fines apply in construction zones to protect highway workers; schoolchildren deserve the same safety considerations. Dedicating the increased fine revenues to school zone safety projects and programs will ensure that revenue generated through effective enforcement in school zones is invested back into safety improvements around schools throughout the state.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Writing in opposition to this bill, Safer Streets L.A. states that this bill, however well-intentioned, will not enhance safety for children in school zones and will increase confusion for motorists, subjecting them to increased penalties without proper warning. Safer Streets L.A. states that rather than increasing penalties, which has not been shown to result in a decrease in collisions, the Legislature should consider enhanced education and engineering countermeasures as a means to improve roadway safety for children traveling to and from school.

Prepared by: Erin Riches / T. & H. / (916) 651-4121

4/28/15 15:31:24

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

SB 564 (Cannella) - Vehicles: school zone fines

This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

SB 564 would establish an additional $35 fine for specified traffic violations that occur in a school zone posted with specified signage. The fine revenues would be deposited into the State Highway Account to fund school zone safety projects within the Active Transportation Plan (ATP).

Fiscal Impact:

• Minor one-time costs to the Administrative Office of the Courts to program the new Vehicle Code violation adding a $35 fine to specified offenses committed in a school zone (Trial Court Trust Fund).
  
  

• Minor costs to the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) related to the administration of additional funds deposited for use in the ATP (State Highway Account).
  
  

• Unknown revenue gains related to the imposition of additional fines (State Highway Account, for use on school safety projects in the ATP).

Background:

Existing law establishes a speed limit of 25 mph when approaching or passing a school building or school grounds. This speed limit applies where the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” sign and under the following circumstances: while children are entering or exiting during school hours or the noon recess period, or while the school grounds are in use by children and the grounds are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier. This sign may be posted at any distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds. If a local authority conducts a traffic survey and determines that the 25 mph speed limit in a particular school zone is too high to be reasonably safe, the prima facie speed limit may be reduced to either 20 or 15 mph, as deemed appropriate by the survey.

Proposed Law:

SB 564 would impose an additional $35 fine on drivers who commit specified Vehicle Code offenses when a highway is posted with both a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations that are committed within that school zone, and under either of the following conditions:

• When passing a school building or school grounds contiguous to a highway while children are entering or exiting during school hours or during the noon recess period.

• When passing school grounds that are not separated from a highway by a fence, gate, or barrier while the grounds are in use by children.

Revenues from the additional fines authorized by this bill would be deposited in the State Highway Account for funding school zone safety projects within the ATP.

Related Legislation:

SB 1151 (Cannella), which was vetoed by Governor Brown in 2014, is nearly identical to this bill. The veto message included the following statement:

Increasing traffic fines as the method to pay transportation fund activities is a regressive increase that affects poor people disproportionately. Making safety improvements in school zones is obviously important, but not by increasing traffic fines.

Staff Comments:

The 2013-14 budget agreement consolidated several existing federal and state transportation funding programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program, the Bicycle Transportation Account, and the Safe Routes to Schools Program, and created the ATP to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) adopted an initial fund estimate to allocate $368 million in state and federal funds over a three year cycle from 2013-14 through 2015-16. The CTC recently adopted a 2015 ATP fund estimate, which anticipates allocations of approximately $360 million in state and federal funds over the following three years (2016-17 through 2018-19).

Staff notes that the additional fines specified in the bill would only be imposed to the extent the roadway is posted with the standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and additional signage notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations committed within that school zone. The bill does not require local jurisdictions or Caltrans to install these additional notification signs. The magnitude of additional revenues from the imposition of the additional $35 fine is indeterminable and dependent upon the number of zones that are ultimately posted with increased penalty notification signage and the level of enforcement in those zones. Caltrans indicates that any staffing costs associated with administering additional revenues for school zone safety projects through the ATP would be minor.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING

Senator Jim Beall, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 564 Hearing Date: 4/14/2015

SUBJECT: Vehicles: school zone fines

DIGEST: This bill imposes an additional $35 fine for specified violations occurring in school zones and directs revenue from the fine to the state’s Active Transportation Program (ATP).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law establishes a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph when approaching or passing a school building or school grounds. This speed limit applies while children are entering or exiting during school hours or the noon recess period; in cases of school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barriers, while the grounds are in use by children; and where the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign. This sign may be posted at any distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds.

Existing law governs speed limits and imposes fines for speeding violations. Existing law authorizes a local authority, upon determining via an engineering and traffic survey that the speed limit of 25 mph in a particular school zone is too high to be reasonable or safe, to establish a prima facie speed limit of either 20 or 15 mph, as deemed appropriate by the survey. Existing law also authorizes doubling of fines for speed limit violations in highway construction or maintenance zones, under certain circumstances.

The state Judicial Council annually adopts a uniform traffic penalty schedule for all non-parking infractions outlined in the Vehicle Code. Existing law establishes the base fine for speeding in a school zone as $35 for traveling 1 mph to 15 mph over the speed limit ($289 total fine with fees and court costs), $70 for traveling 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit ($418 total fine with fees and court costs), and $100 for traveling 26 mph or more over the speed limit ($541 total fine with fees and court costs).

This bill:

1. Imposes a $35 fine, in addition to the amount otherwise prescribed and in addition to any other penalty assessments of fees, for most major offenses committed by the driver of a vehicle under either of the following conditions:

• When passing a school building or school grounds when children are entering or exiting during school hours or the noon recess period; the building or grounds are contiguous to a highway; and the highway is posted with both a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations committed within that school zone.

• When passing school grounds that are in use by children; are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier; and the highway is posted with both a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations committed within that school zone.

2. Requires the additional fines authorized by this bill to be deposited in the State Transportation Fund for purposes of funding school zone safety projects within ATP.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The author states that while Highway Safety Corridors, “Slow for the Cone Zones,” and doubled fines in construction zones all promote safe driving and protect individuals in sensitive areas, existing law does not afford school children the same level of protection. Many school zones lack infrastructure for children to safely commute to school, exacerbating the risk of pedestrian injury or fatality. The author states that this bill will help support infrastructure projects, traffic calming measures, and non-capital projects such as education. This bill will also help contribute to obesity prevention, which is especially prevalent in communities of color and low-income areas.

2. Active Transportation Program. ATP, established by the 2013-14 budget agreement, consolidates several existing federal and state transportation programs, including Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS), the Bicycle Transportation Account, and others, to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation. The Governor’s proposed budget allocates $120 million in state and federal monies to ATP. Of these funds, the California Transportation Commission distributes 40% to metropolitan planning organizations, 10% to rural and small urban areas, and 50% on a statewide competitive basis. For each of these portions, 25% must be targeted for disadvantaged communities.

The administration’s original ATP proposal aimed to streamline the application and review process by establishing a single program within which all eligible projects would compete. The 2013-14 budget agreement, however, established a minimum funding level of $24 million for SRTS, of which $7 million was targeted for non-infrastructure projects such as education. The legislation also included intent language to honor the SRTS agreement for fiscal years 2014-15 and 2015-16. While this bill does not specifically cite SRTS, it directs funds to “school zone safety projects” within ATP.

3. Double-fine zones. AB 1886 (Jackson), Chapter 590, Statutes of 2002, authorized several counties and cities to established double-fine zones near schools. AB 1886 required those revenues to fund school pedestrian and bicyclist safety programs. A May 2006 report to the Legislature by the California Highway Patrol found that sign installation was costly; very little money was generated from the additional fine and therefore no school pedestrian-bicyclist safety programs were created; and some police departments did not have adequate staff to patrol the schools. The report also noted that due to insufficient resources of participating schools and police departments, local agencies collected very little data. The report concluded that “the findings do not support continuation of the program,” and it ended in 2007.

4. Committee policy on double-fine zones. To ensure that double-fine zones help improve a real public safety issue, the Legislature established a process in statute authorizing Caltrans to designate highway segments as double-fine zones under certain circumstances, including if collision rates meet a certain threshold. This committee will not consider any bill establishing a double-fine zone that is not subject to the process outlined in statute. This bill adds onto the base fine, rather than doubling it, meaning it does not double the attendant fines and court fees. Because this bill does not double the base fine, it does not violate this committee’s double-fine zone policy.

5. Trying again. SB 1151 (Cannella), which was almost identical to this bill, passed this committee on a 10-0 vote in 2014 but was subsequently vetoed. The Governor’s veto message stated that “Increasing traffic fines as a method to pay for transportation fund activities is a regressive increase that affects poor people disproportionately. Making safety improvements in school zones is obviously important, but not by increasing traffic fines.” The author states that this bill will complement the Governor’s renewed commitment to address both the infrastructure and environmental needs of the state.

Related Legislation:

SB 632 (Cannella), which will also be heard by this committee today, would allow a city or county to establish a 15 mph prima facie speed limit near a school building or school grounds.

SB 698 (Cannella), which will be heard in this committee subsequent to Environmental Quality Committee, provides a continuous appropriation of cap-and-trade funds in an unspecified amount to fund school zone safety projects in ATP.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,

April 8, 2015.)

SUPPORT:

Safe Routes to School National Partnership (sponsor)

Alliance for Community Research and Development

California Pan-Ethnic Health Network

California State Association of Counties

OPPOSITION:

None received.

-- END --