Assembly Standing Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife

Okay. Well, good morning, everyone. Let's get started. We don't seem to have a quorum. Okay.

So we'll just operate as a subcommittee here until that time. We'll try to as soon as we get a quorum present, we will act upon bills that we've already heard. And now I think Senator Choi is here. Come on up. There's no one ahead of you.

We'll take you.

First.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Do you have witnesses?

Yes. I do.

Okay.

Witnesses, so you can come up here. Good morning, madam chair and the committee members. I would like to begin by accepting the committee amendments, and I'm very grateful for the committee's excellent work to reflect the full intent of this bill. I'm pleased to present the SB 1021, a bill that directs the California Fish and the Game Commission to adopt the regulations that provide the reasonable accommodations for children with the life threatening illnesses who wish to participate in hunting and fishing opportunities.

This is a thoughtful and a balanced proposal that combines compassion for those for these children and their families.

So with the California's legislative, long standing commitment to, responsible wildlife management and the con conservation. Many children facing life threatening illnesses spend countless hours undergoing treatment and are often unable to participate in the activities and experiences that most young people take for granted. Ten twenty one measure provides an opportunity for these children to experience the outdoor outdoors and to connect with the nature and to create lasting memories with their families during an incredibly difficult times in their lives.

Importantly, these opportunities would occur under existing permitting requirements, established establish the conservation standards, and supervision of licensed and qualified professionals, ensuring both the safety and the responsible stewardship of our natural resources. With me today, I have Tom Dunmery representing Field of Dreams as well as Papa Oakley representing Hunter of Lifetime.

Mister Tom Dermody, when you're ready, go ahead.

Good morning. Oh. Thank you for having me. It's the first time I ever done anything like this before. My name is Tom Dermody.

I'm the founder and CEO of the Field of Dreams, which is a 501 c 3 nonprofit based out of Calusa, California. Our mission statement is to provide outdoor opportunities for, especially children, children of our fallen, and, our our veteran community. I've been doing it for twenty years. It's one of those rewarding things I've ever done in my life. We're dealing with these children and the military.

It's a game changer. We get these kids out in the field for that one day, the two days for how long we have them. It's healing. It's therapeutical. The parents can take that weight off their shoulders and sit back and relax knowing that their children are well taken care of.

Our programs, they're very well structured. We wanna make a positive rewarding experience. We also wanna make it educational. We work closely with our local wardens in our area, state and federal, and so they've been a very blessed asset to our program. We've never turned a child or a veteran away due to their limitations.

We've always found a way. We follow the letters of the law. We have the utmost respect for our our our fishing game and and most importantly, our wildlife. Our wildlife is phenomenal in the state, and it needs to be managed. So we always base our hunts on the wildlife, what's best for them, mature animals, select harvest.

We've been blessed. We're not taken away from the public grounds. 99.9% of our hunts are all done on donated private ground that's been well managed for the farming and for the wildlife. We probably have 18,000 acres of hill ground to hunt and over 38,000 acres of private ground in the valley to hunt. And, it's amazing what the communities will do to come together and support these children, and it brings the whole the whole county together.

They look forward to it, and they dive in a 110%. I really hope that what we got here passes because we need something like this. There's other states that we have to currently send children out to because we don't have anything here that fits this criteria. And we're just if we could get this going, it would help a lot of children right here in our backyards. Thank you.

K. Go ahead.

Yeah. Thank you very much for for letting us be here today. I'm Rob Oakley with Hunt of a Lifetime. We're a nationwide organization. We we're most of the other states.

I'm I'm the California Oregon representative. Like Tom was saying, we we have a lot of opportunity in Oregon. They they set aside special opportunities for our program, and it opens up great opportunities for for these kids. So we take kids from all over the country out, and it's it's opportunity is not just a a a space and a and and something to do. Opportunity has to do with time with these kids.

They don't have a lot of time. A lot of times, we're dealing with short times in between treatments, so we're trying to fit kids into slots of time. And if we could open up some opportunities for that, it would be great in the state of California. State of California has great resources. They're they're managed very well.

In in Oregon, we have they they gave us this year, our organization, they are giving us two governor tags for elk and one governor tag for mule deer. And, we are taking kids out on those hunts. And last year, we did the same. And it it's just the the organization vets the kids very well. They have to fill out an application, and they have to have a doctor's signature in an Oregon.

Right now, what they have to do is after we vet them, we sent them to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and they vet them also before they get these tags because they're very special coveted tags. And it opens up opportunities and it just the the not every kid. There's a lot of Make A Wish organizations and and different things. But this organization is kind of outside of those bounds.

So when we get a a a young person that wants to go hunting or fishing, we we've taken we have 10 fishing trips this year, deep sea fishing, river fishing, whatever we can with these the kids with the that we can get them in on that they're capable of doing.

But it it just you you just see the life come out and we take them from a hospital situation. And most of the time, these families can't afford any sort of vacation or opportunity to take to go out. We pay for their airfare, whatever transportation, lodging, and food. Whatever they need, we take care of an organization. And it opens up a great opportunity for them, but I'm starting to cheer up because I'm thinking about some of the kids that I've taken out that aren't with us.

So yeah. Time. We're gonna just get some time for these kids. It'd be great.

Thank you. Well, thank you so much, and thank you for your dedication. With that, we will take, any #MeToo's from the audience of folks that want to come forward in support of the bill.

Rick Travis on behalf of CCA CAL, the state's largest offshore fishing group, in full support.

Nick Villa with the California Rifle and Pistol Association in full support as well. Thank you.

Amy Heiss as a youth advocate for CRPA in full support.

Hi there. Mark Henley with California Waterfowl in support.

Bill Gaines on behalf of the California chapter of the wild sheep foundation, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, California Deer Association, California Houndsman for Conservation, and the California Hocking Club all in support. Thank you.

Karen Heiss, part of CRPA. I'm in full support.

Lisa Spence, Solano County, CRPA member. I'm in full support.

Thank you so much. Do we have any witnesses in opposition?

Hello, Chair, Members. Nicholas Sackett on behalf of Social Compassion in legislation and our thousands of supporters in throughout California. Unfortunately, we remain opposed to the bill. Ultimately, we believe that the time, effort, and resources by the commission and the department are a zero sum game. And while we certainly agree that getting kids out into nature is therapeutic and a and a good thing, we would like to see that time and effort by the commission and department focused on nonlethal activities in, to get out into nature.

So with that respectfully, I ask for a no vote.

Okay. Thank you so much. Any other witnesses and or members of the audience who want to express opposition? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the committee. Vice chair Gonzales.

I wanna thank the author for your for your leadership of this. And and and gentlemen, as a veteran and as a dad to a disabled son, we've been on a trip called Fish for Life, and it's out of Saint Dana Point, San Clemente area. And let me tell you something, it is I'm gonna get choked up, but I'm gonna try not to. It is life changing for the parents or the advocates or the volunteers, let alone life changing for for the the participants.

So thank you for doing this.

And I would also ask the the author to to consider me as a coauthor in this. Thank you.

Any other members of the committee? Okay. Well, thank you so much for for bringing the bill and the good work that you're doing. Senator Choi, would you like to close?

Thank you, madam. This bill has bipartisan co authors and including co chairs of the outdoor sporting caucus in both the Senate and the assembly, which I am very appreciative of. And then I'll be happy to add assemblyman Jeff Gonzalez to the coauthor list. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much, Senator Choi. We do have a quorum, so we're gonna take roll. We don't? Who to who left? Bennett?

Okay. When we have a quorum, we will take a vote on the matter, and we'll go from there.

Okay. Thank you very much.

So much for your time today. I see Senator Caballero. Come on down.

So much for your time today. I see Senator Caballero. Come on down.

Good morning. Good morning, Senator Caballero.

Get that coffee going. I, I it was a little late last night here in the capital.

That's why I heard it.

That's why I heard it.

I wonder what you guys were doing.

Yeah. Nothing important. Anyway, whenever you're ready. Welcome.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Members, for the opportunity to present SB997, which addresses is addresses a narrow but important enforcement gap for the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency. The sustainable groundwater management act or SGMA established a framework for long term groundwater sustainability and authorized GSAs to be formed either through joint powers, agreements, or special legislation.

All groundwater sustainability agencies have a minimum enforcement authority granted to them under SGMA, which includes the ability to impose fees that are only enforceable through a civil action. GSA's form through JPAs have additional enforcement authority, such as the authority to impose liens to collect money owed, which is derived from the GSA member agencies like Irrigation District.

The North Fork Kings GSA was created via special legislation rather than through the GGJPA, which limits the GSA's enforcement authority to civil litigation as the only viable enforcement tool.

SB9977 simply grants lean authority to the North Fork Kings GSA, which ensures that the GSA can efficiently implement its groundwater sustainability plan and ensure compliance with it. With me to testify today in support of the bill is Alexis Salvera, the deputy general manager for Norfolk Fork Kings GSA. And just to to preclude questions, we had the discussion with some of the other GSAs that are similarly situated, and they had different issues they were concerned about.

And so this is really very limited to it's a district bill limited to this one and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Good morning, Madam Chair Members.

Understood. Perfect.

Thank you very much for your patience. Madam Secretary, please take a call.

[Roll call]

Excellent. So we have a quorum. Please proceed. Thank you for your patience.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. My name is Alexis Silveira, and I serve as the deputy general manager of North Fort King's Groundwater Sustainability Agency. North Fort King's GSA is located within the King's Sub Basin and maintains an approved groundwater sustainability plan. As we continue reducing overdraft and addressing subsidence, it has become clear that we will likely be the first GSA within the King Subbasin to implement groundwater allocations. To successfully administer an allocation program, GSAs need effective enforcement tools.

However, because North Fort King's GSA was established through special legislation rather than a joint powers authority, we do not currently have the same authority available to many other GSAs in California to enforce fees and penalties through liens. SB997 would provide North Fort King's GSA with authorities comparable to those already available to other GSAs formed as JPAs, helping ensure we can effectively implement SGMA and achieve our sustainability goals. We appreciate the committee's consideration of this measure and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much. Any member, I'm no other witnesses. I'm assuming okay. Great. Any other members of the audience that would like to come forward to express support or lean authority in the North Fork?

Good morning, Chair Members. Danny Merkley with the Guoco Group on behalf of Kings River Interest in support.

Good morning. Eric Will on behalf of Rural County Representatives of California in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Charles Delgado on behalf of California State Association of Counties in support.

Morning, Chair Members. Richard Filgus with California Farm Bureau in support. Thank you.

Excellent. Do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none, any members of the audience want to express any opinion on it? Okay. We'll bring it back to the committee.

Any quest oh, we have a motion and a second from mister Hart and vice chair Gonzales. And did you have a question or a comment as soon as we were back?

This is really important bill for them and good bill, and I really appreciate the this bill moving forward.

Thank you. Anyone else? Go forth and enforce is what I say. Would you like to close?

I'll I'll utilize that as my closing. Just because they ask for an aye vote.

Great. We've got a motion and a second and a quorum. The trifecta. Let's take a vote.

Okay. Item number two, SB997. Motion is do passed to judiciary committee. [Roll call]

Okay. We'll have that on call, and we'll get it out. I have confidence. Thank you. I think I saw Senator Ochoa Bogh, but she popped out.

Yeah. Do we have a motion on assembly member I mean, excuse me, Senator Choi's bill?

Second.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Let's go ahead and take a vote.

K. Okay.

Okay. Item number three, SB 1021. Motion is do passed as amended to appropriations. Pappen?

Aye.

[Roll call]

Okay. That bill remains on call until the year the vote. Well, thank you so much, Assemblymember Rogers. And we have a second from vice chair Gonzales. Let's go ahead and take a vote on the consent calendar.

So items on the consent calendar, item number one, SB832. Motion is do passed to appropriations. Item number five, SB1062. Motion is do passed to appropriations. And item number seven, SB1139.

[Roll call]

Okay. We'll leave that on call until we are ready to add on. Good morning, Senator. Welcome. We've got a Senator Ochoa Bogh with item number 5, SB1062.

The Western Joshua Tree. Have a seat, you guys, wherever you wanna be.

Okay.

That's fine by me. And you have two witnesses?

We have two witnesses. Perfect.

So why don't we have the two witnesses right here? I'll sit over here. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning, and, Madam Chair and Members. I would like to start by accepting the committee amendments to this bill. I'm proud to present SB1061, which is a narrow a narrow bill that clarifies how the Western Joshua Tree Act treats relocation and creates a simple permit pathway for homeowners to relocate up to 10 trees on a property under certain conditions.

The act current the act's current definition of take is built for wildlife that can be hunted or pursued, not for a a rooted plant. So even a short distance move of a tree on the same parcel can trigger a full take permit process.

In practice, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife already often conditions permits on moving trees instead of cutting them down. So the real world outcome is relocation, not destruction. SB1061 recognizes the reality by clarifying that relocation that relocation does not result in a net loss of trees, is not a traditional take, and creates a streamlined relocation permit instead of route rounding homeowners through a full take permit framework.

The implementation of the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act has been extremely burdensome for residents of the High Desert. The act has effectively stripped these folks of their right to make reasonable use of their properties by imposing high fees, complex mitigation requirements, and lengthy permitting processes to man to manage a species that was evaluated by both the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service and the State Department of Fish and Wildlife and determined to be widespread and abundant based on the best available science.

I authored this bill because I believe we owe it to the communities of the High Desert to right this injustice and allow them to have control over their property just as every other Californian resident has. With me today, I have, Rita DaSilva from Yucca Valley and Apple Valley, mayor pro tem Carrie Leon, to share their stories at as High Desert residents that are living under the hardship of the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act.

Before you, we have some folders that we have prepared for your convenience and for your information with both the executive summary from the California Fish and Wildlife Commission with the findings as well as the copy of the Department of Interior of Fish and Wildlife with the study findings ensuring that the Joshua tree is not endangered in our desert communities. So with that in mind, I yield to my witnesses.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Members. My name is Ruida Da Silva, and I live in Yucca Valley. My family has lived and owned property in the area since this nineteen seventies. My parents moved to Yucca Valley with four children and $2,500 in their pocket.

They worked and saved every penny so that they could give their children a better future and bought land for their children and grandchildren. What they thought would help us succeed is now a burden. I'm here to support SB 1061 because the current implementation of the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act is creating a real unintended hardships. Understand the goal of protecting the Western Joshua trees. Our communities love these iconic species, and we have been good stewards of our beautiful desert environment for years.

But in practice, the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act's permitting process had made has made my property unusable. I currently have a large fallen Joshua tree on my property that is a fire hazard. I can I'm expected to get a hazard management permit just to remove safety risks while my insurance and local authorities will will eventually hold me responsible. I also have Joshua Tree's uplifting my home's foundation.

I've spent years trying to preserve both the trees and my home, but I'm being forced into a situation where I may need to navigate this burdensome permitting process.

Beyond my home, I own multiple parcels. But because of the cost and complexity of the Western Joshua Conservation Act, the land is now effectively valueless despite decades of paying property taxes. Furthermore, I've been encouraging the growth of these trees and new seedlings, which are now a burden to me and the neighboring houses. By creating a fee free relocation permit for up to 10 trees, SB 1061 provides a path to balance environmental goals with the practical realities of owning property in the High Desert.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote so that the residents like me can responsibly care for our property, protect public safety, and continue contributing to our communities.

Thank you.

Madam Chair and Members, good morning. My name is Carrie Leon, and I'm the mayor pro tem for the town of Apple Valley. And I respectfully urge you to support Senate Bill 1061. Western Joshua trees are a distinctive part of our landscape, and our residents share the desire to have these trees in our communities for generations to come. Implementation of the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act has created significant hardship for homeowners that are trying to manage the trees on their land.

Senate Bill 1061 provides a common sense approach by allowing property owners to relocate up to 10 Western Joshua trees to a commonly owned parcel within a defined radius of the tree's original location. This flexibility reduces unnecessary obstacles for housing, basic property improvements, and critical infrastructure on land that is already privately owned. In communities like the High Desert, Joshua trees are often found throughout large areas of land that can be developed.

Current regulation for, projects can face increased cost delays and uncertainty even when property owners are willing to relocate and preserve these trees. As California works to address a housing shortest shortage and invest in critical infrastructure, we need policies that balance environmental stewardship with real world community needs.

I have spoken with several residential property owners who adopted and preserved Joshua trees on their land only to later discover they cannot build an accessory dwelling unit because a tree was located within the proposed building area. Even when willing to relocate and protect the tree, current rules limit their ability to use their property for needed family housing. Senate bill 1061 offers a practical alternative that allows reasonable land use decisions instead of treating every permitting case as if it were untouched, sensitive, and habit.

This is especially important for our homeowners who need to maintain access to life, sustaining infrastructure, and make basic improvements to their property. Residents may need to connect or reconnect to electricity, water, or sewer service, and Western Joshua trees may be in the only feasible alignment for a utility trench.

Living in a rural area, we have seen situations where a homeowner septic system fails and must be replaced. When Western Josh for trees are located within the replacement area or along with the path to connect to the sewer or power, these homeowners should not be prevented from restoring safe functional service to their homes if they are prepared to relocate the trees. Senate bill 1061 recognizes that property owners need clear, reasonable options.

It allows families to meet their housing needs, maintain access to essential infrastructure, and make basic improvements to their property without the financial burden and technical complexity of the existing permitting process. For these reasons, I respectfully urge your aye vote on Senate Bill 1061, and thank you for your consideration.

Move the bill. Second.

Okay. We've got a motion in a second. Thank you so much. Any witnesses in opposition? I mean, in I mean, any members of the audience in support of this bill.

I'm getting ahead of myself.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Members. Ben Turner from Axiom Advisors representing the High Desert Water District and the California Building Industry Industry Association in support.

Good morning. Horacio Gonzalez on behalf of the Community Water Systems Alliance, strong support.

Good morning. Tiffany Phan on behalf of the Town of Apple Valley in support. Thank you.

Good morning again, Chair and Members. Richard Filgus with the California Farm Bureau in support. Thank you.

Chad Mayes here for the town of Yampa Valley and this, the County of San Bernardino in support.

David Bullock, SFP Alliance in support. Thank you.

Okay. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none, any members of the audience wish to chime in and against? Okay. Without further ado, we'll bring it back to the committee.

Questions, comments? We've got a motion and a second. Oh my gosh. It's going so fast. I don't know what to do with myself.

Thank you, Senator, for bringing this bill and both of your witness witnesses so eloquently stated that this is about finding a balance. And so, you've done so and, and it's taken a lot of effort in this bill, so I thank you for that. And, here's to having a balance between preservation and actual living conditions. So without further ado, let's take a vote. Would you like to close?

Absolutely. Thank you so much for the opportunity to meet here today. As mentioned earlier, I inherited the, desert communities in 2024. And with that, I've been holding town hall meetings throughout the area, meeting with my local electeds, my residents, and, my water agencies. And the number one issue of concern was the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act and the impact that it had on local infrastructure as well as in in the residents' personal use of their property.

In order to learn more about the conservation act, we did our our our homework and learned that, you know, both the commission on fish and wildlife for California as well as the Department of Interior stated that, based on their findings that the Western Joshua tree was not according to the department and, commission in for California. It stated that it recognized the threats faced by the species and the evidence presented in favor of the petition action.

The scientific evidence that is currently possessed by the department does not demonstrate that populations of the species are negatively trending in a way that would lead the department to believe that the species is likely to be in dangers in serious danger or becoming extinct throughout all or significant portion of its range of its foreseeable future. And then on the federal register for the Department of Interior at the federal level in '23, so this was in '22.

And in '23, it stated here that after a thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that the listing Joshua tree as an endangered or threatened species is not warranted.

And yet, we placed the conservation act for the Joshua tree in a budget trailer bill without the opportunity to truly be fully vetted. And now it has an incredible impact on personal and infrastructure for the communities in the desert, in my opinion, being one of the greatest injustices that we've done to the people of the desert, and my heart breaks for those community members.

So now is an opportunity for us to make it right by the by the folks that live in those communities and have to, govern within these within this scope. And, so here therefore, we are here asking for your support. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote, ma'am.

Thank you so much. Alright. We'll go ahead and take a vote.

Item number four, SB1061. Motion is do passed as amended to appropriations. Papan.

Pappen, aye. Jeff Gonzales. Jeff Gonzales, aye. Alanis, Alvarez, Avila Farias, Baines, Bennett. Bennett, Aye, Burner?

[Roll call]

Burner, Aye, Colosa? Colosa, Aye, heart, heart, Aye, Rodriguez, Rodriguez, Aye, Rogers.

Aye.

Aye.

Rogers, Aye.

Thank you.

So that fill is out, and your other one's on consent.

Thank you so much, madam chair.

Senator. Have a good day. Senator Gonzalez, I see you.

Thank you.

Come on down. Good morning.

Good morning.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Move the bill.

Second. Oh,

Thank you, Madam Chair and Members. So I'll still present a bit, if you don't mind, just so we know what we're talking about here. I'm here to present Senate Bill 1268, which would codify the Outdoors for All Initiative.

Think of, you know, your state parks initiatives, of course, ensuring that we're engaging free park pass programs, culturally competent programs built by this initiative are making a real difference for the communities that I represent.

I have Southeast Los Angeles, and it's some of the lowest park access, not just in LA County, but in the state of California. And so SB 1268 will codify the Outdoors for All strategy. So testifying in support, I do have Pedro Hernández from GreenLatinos that's going to talk about this initiative.

Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Pedro Hernández here flying in from beautiful Fresno, California to talk about this wonderful bill. And, you know, the Outdoors for All Initiative has been one of the most successful programs of the last several years regarding the overall park equity and conservation field in general.

What it has done for California is actually shift the foundational coordination of the the state Natural Resource Agency to coordinate the 27 departments at CNRA to leverage their staff time, funding, and data all towards advancing outdoor equity in every community in California across the different levels of environmental protection as well too.

So part of part of the actual concrete results from implementing Outdoors for All has been streaming, the streamline of Prop 4 applications to make sure that, you know, these funds that voters approved are more accessible to different organizations that have limited capacity for applying for funds or, you know, historically have not received funds. Where there's been development of metrics that are now publicly available so we can actually track progress and assess the gravity of the issue.

Most recently on Earth Day, State Parks announced the State Parks Forward initiative, which is a really ambitious commitment to expand the state parks network by 30,000 acres and made a historic commitment by creating three new state parks in the San Joaquin Valley alone with more promise for the rest of the state of California.

And then also, you know, I can say we're working very closely with, Deputy Secretary For Access Gloria Sandoval for seven regional workshops to actually update the Outdoors for All strategy starting in late July as well too.

So, you know, I think that's a testament to the real deep and meaningful community relationships that have been built through this initiative, but also, you know, incorporating community input to make sure that we can actually overcome these barriers and reach a truly Outdoors for All California.

So, with that, I'd like to respectfully request your support. We've reached this point with zero no votes, and I would love to have some good news to tell my mom when I call her later this afternoon. Thank you.

You did so great. Couldn't have said it better.

Any other members of the audience wish to express support?

Hi. Good morning. Michael Chen on behalf of Audubon California, co-sponsor of the bill, and also here on behalf of Forest Watch, also a co-sponsor of the bill. Thank you so much.

Good morning. Alfredo Arredondo on behalf of TreePeople in support. And looking out for your mom too.

Nice to see you, Madam Chair and Members. Doug Houston representing the California Park and Recreation Society in support.

Good morning. Mark Isidro on behalf of the County of Los Angeles in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Mike Sharif with Fanslau Government Affairs on behalf of River Partners in support.

Good morning. Jake Schultz on behalf of the California Association of Local Conservation Corps, California State Parks Foundation, Save the Redwoods League, Sempervirens Fund, and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Chloe Hsieh on behalf of California Environmental Voters in strong support.

Good morning. André Sanchez on behalf of CalWild, Latino Outdoors, and Friends of the River in support.

Good morning. Natalie Brown on behalf of the Environmental Protection Information Center, Sonoma Land Trust, and California Native Plant Society in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Bryan Pride in support with California Conservation Equity Partnership, Prevention Institute, Sierra Club California, and Azul. Thank you.

Good morning. Serena Scott on behalf of the League of California Cities in support. Thank you.

Claire Sullivan on behalf of the California Association of Recreation and Parks Districts in support. Thank you.

Well, I'm gonna ask, but I doubt it will happen. Any witnesses in opposition? There you have it. Okay. No members of the audience. We'll bring it back to the committee. Questions, comments? Assembly Member Caloza.

Thank you so much, Chair. Just wanted to thank the Senator and the sponsor for this bill. I represent Los Angeles with it's a dense urban area. We don't have a lot of access to outdoor space. I also represent predominantly immigrant, Latino, Armenian, Filipino, and so I know they would benefit from this. And would love to be added as a co-author if you'll have me. Thank you.

Did you wish to chime in, Assembly Member Bennett?

It's just gonna crack wise. I was on the fence, but when I hear mama's waiting, I'm clearly there now.

Exactly. Exactly. Well, I just wanna thank you for bringing the bill. I think as we enhance our housing supply and it becomes more and more dense, the need to be outdoors and make it available for everyone seems to go up exponentially. So I applaud you for doing the work, and I'm delighted to see the bill. Please report back to your mom that even the Chair was delighted. Would you like to close, Senator Gonzalez?

Thank you so much. And on behalf of Pedro's mom, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Excellent. That is a fantastic closing. Without further ado, we'll take a vote.

Item number eight, SB 1268. Motion is do pass to Natural Resources. [Roll Call]

Okay. That bill's out, and we'll leave it open for add ons. Senator Durazo, welcome. Good morning. Water supply assessments.

When you're ready.

Thank you, madam chair and members. I will start by accepting the committee amendments noted on pages seven and eight of the analysis and thank the committee staff very much for their, for their work on this bill. Since 2001, California's Show Me the Water laws have helped local governments determine whether large scale developments have early reliable information about whether sufficient water supplies exist to, to serve new projects now and over a twenty-year horizon.

These water supply assessments give communities, developers, and water agencies the information needed to align growth with available water resources. We didn't always have such certainty.

Before these laws were enacted, some communities approved growth based on projected water supplies that never materialized, otherwise known as "paper water." That legacy is with us today where we have communities, particularly poor and low-income communities, that run out of water during droughts, relying on bottled water to meet their basic needs. Water supply assessments have helped ensure that the necessary stakeholders have the information they need upfront to prevent this from happening again. These assessments were originally triggered when a large development project undergoes CEQA review.

Recent—recently, the legislature granted CEQA exemptions that inadvertently wiped out the requirement to analyze water supplies for some large-scale developments.

SB 1085 simply restores the requirement for water supply assessment for these large projects, ensuring local decision makers have this critical information, regardless of whether CEQA applies. This process is not drawn out and does not slow down the development of much needed housing projects. In fact, I have made multiple sets of amendments to address concerns I heard from housing groups, including amendments that sped up the time for frame—time frame—for certain housing development projects and amendments that minimize the risk of litigation.

Today's committee amendments further ensure that we're minimizing litigation risk for housing developments, and I'm hopeful that the committee amendments listed on pages seven and eight will resolve any remaining concerns. With increasing variability in water conditions, including declining snowpack and potential drought scenarios, making sure California's growth is supported with reliable water is more important than ever.

When all is said and done, water should not be an afterthought when we approve large developments. With me today, I have Clifford Chan, General Manager at East Bay Municipal Utility District. Thank you.

Second.

Second by—motion by Vice Chair Gonzales, a second by Assemblymember Boerner, who was here before Assemblymember Alanis.

Busy. Busy.

Please. Please. Let's hear from the witness.

Thank you, Senator. Good morning, madam chair and committee members. As the Senator mentioned, my name is Clifford Chan, and I'm the General Manager for the East Bay Municipal Utility District. East Bay MUD is pleased to be here today as a sponsor of SB 1085. We're grateful to Senator Durazo for authoring this important statewide measure on water supply assessments.

East Bay MUD sponsored legislation dealing with water supply planning, including the 1983 bill, which put into place the requirement for urban water management plans, which are long-term plans for water supply. There are multiple efforts in the 1990s to link water supply planning and land use planning, including SB 901 authored by Senator Acosta in 1995, which was the origin of the Water Supply Assessment Statute. This was at a time when paper water was common.

In 2001, there were two important bills that further the link between local government land use planning and water supply planning, known as the "Show Me the Water" bills. East Bay MUD sponsored those two bills, SB 610 authored by Senator Acosta, and SB 221 authored by Senator Kuehl.

One of those bills is why we're here today, SB 610 and the water supply assessment process. The Water Supply Assessment, or WSA, focuses on identifying the water supply needs for large scale developments. Once the assessment is completed, it goes to the city or county to inform land use planning decisions on the project.

Early coordination with project developers through the WSA process ensures that the water supplier can highlight the infrastructure improvements and related costs that may be necessary, any conservation measures in place, and whether recycled water is available to serve certain projects.

Without the WSA, those discussions happen later in the development process. SB 1085 allows the WSA process to continue, even if the large-scale development isn't subject to CEQA. Recent CEQA exemptions have called into question whether a WSA is still required because the trigger for a WSA is when a city or county determines that a large-scale development is subject to CEQA. The legislature, at the time of the—this—original policy was discussed in 2001, did not contemplate CEQA exemptions for 500 dwelling unit projects.

SB 1085 modernizes the Water Supply Assessment Statute and recognizes its importance, especially considering the impacts of climate change and future droughts on water supply. We respectfully request your aye vote on SB 1085. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any members of the audience wishing to come forward in support of the bill?

Thank you. Julie Malinowski-Ball, on behalf of the Contra Costa Water District, in strong support.

Good morning. Kylie Wright, with the Association of California Water Agencies, in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Chloe Shea, on behalf of California Environmental Voters, in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Alfredo de Redondo, on behalf of Irvine Ranch Water District, in support.

Good morning. Lily Hernandez, with the California Special Districts, in support.

Good morning. Lauren de Valencia, representing the American Planning Association, in support.

Good morning. Niko Molina, on behalf of the Rancho California Water District, in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Mariela Ruacho, with Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability, in support.

Good morning. Marissa Rodriguez, with the Planning and Conservation League, in support.

Dennis O'Connor, with the Mono Lake Committee, in strong support.

Good morning, Kyle Jones, on behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Water Collaborative Action Program and Community Alliance with Family Farmers, also here to express support for Sierra Club California. Thank you.

Good morning. Brian Sanders, with the City of Sacramento, in support.

Good morning, Andrea Abergel, with the California Municipal Utilities Association, in support.

Good morning. Jack Werson from Nossaman, on behalf of the Alebenheim Municipal Water District and the Santa Clara Valley Water District, in support.

Good morning. Natalie Brown, on behalf of Defenders of Wildlife, in support. Thank you.

Good morning. Charles Delgado, on behalf of California State Association of Counties, in support.

Okay. Do we have any witnesses in opposition?

Good morning, Senator. Good morning, chair and members. I'm Ben Turner from Acxiom Advisors, with California Building Industry Association. We anticipate removing our opposition given the amendments, and we really appreciate the senator's work and the committee's work in developing that compromise.

Thank you so much. We'll bring it back. Any members of the audience in opposition? And thanks. Okay, we'll bring it back to the committee. I've gotta go present a bill, but I, I do wanna say something about water assessments. And they're short of full CEQA, and I do think that they do allow folks to be prepared. And that's all we're asking at this point. It's really up to localities to determine what they can tolerate, but let's at least get the information in front of them.

So, I thank you, Senator, for bringing the bill. Anyone else? Alrighty. We, we had a motion in a second, did we not?

Okay. Great. Let's go ahead and take a vote. Do you wanna close?

Ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

[Roll Call]

That bill is out. Do you wanna? We'll go back and get some of these votes out of the way.

Aye. Alvarez. Aye. Alvarez, Aye. Avila Farias.

Banes. That's been out.

Yeah. That bill's been out.

Item number 6 SB1085, Alvarez.

Aye.

Alvarez, Aye, Avila Farias, Banes. Okay. So that's out. Yeah. That one's out.

That bill is also out.

Okay. Consent. And then, item number eight, SB 1268, Alanis.

Aye.

Alanis, Aye. Alvarez. Okay. Alvarez, Aye. Avila Farias, Banes.

That's out.

That bill is out.

Mister Alvarez, you you wanna go back? Okay. So on the consent calendar, Alvarez

Alvarez, Aye. And I think that's everyone. And then on item number two, SB997, Alvarez Aye. Alvarez, Aye. I think that's all we that's all we needed him for.

Aye.

K. We'll remain open for a few minutes, waiting for the rest of members to place their vote. Thank you all for being here.

Item number four, SB 1061, Avila Farias. Aye. Avila Farias, Aye. That is 11 to one.

Aye

sorry?

So for which one? I have 10 oh, sorry. 11 yeah. 11 to 0. I'm sorry.

Item number 4 SB1061, 11To 0. Item number 6SB1085, Avila Farias. Avila Farias, Aye, 11To0. And item number 8 SB1268, Avila Farias. Avila Farias, Aye, and that is 110.

It's my honor to adjourn the Water Parks and Wildlife.