Posted on 04/03/2004 3:32:33 AM PST by calcowgirl
|
|
The Union photo/Pico van Houtryve |
It spans nearly 500 miles, supplies the water that nourishes Californias economy and has provided vocations and vacations for generations, but the Sierra Nevada has no benefactor like the conservancies that care for Lake Tahoe or the states vast coastline.
That could change this year, however, if one of the two bills now winding through the Legislature is approved - or if the two morph into one. The bills, AB 2600, authored by a Democrat, and the Republican-drafted AB 1788, would create a Sierra Nevada Conservancy.
The conservancys nonregulatory board would coordinate the millions of dollars that flow into the mountain range each year from various sources for a variety of conservation uses. Essentially, it could serve as a clearinghouse for the money, which would go toward the most-needy areas instead of being scattered.
The Sierra is something that cries out for a conservancy, said John Laird, a Democrat assemblyman from the central coast who authored AB 2600.
Laird, chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on California Water Needs and Climate Change, said the 28-year-old California Coastal Conservancy has served the region - and the state - well. The Sierra, he said, could use the same help.
A Sierra Conservancy will give people in the Sierra a seat at the table, he said. I think the model of the Coastal Conservancy has worked very, very well.
Unlike the California Coastal Commission, which regulates land use and issues development permits, the nonregulatory Coastal Conservancy works as an intermediary among local governments, public agencies, nonprofit groups and private landowners to purchase, protect, restore and enhance coastal resources.
Republicans seek bigger role for locals
The Lake Tahoe Conservancy is in Republican Assemblyman Tim Leslies district. And while he has supported its efforts over the years, including raising thousands of dollars for environmental projects by supporting the Lake Tahoe license plate program, Leslies chief of staff, Jedd Medefind, said his boss is generally hesitant when it comes to creating such entities.
He had to decide to oppose it on principal or get involved to make things better, Medefind said about why Leslie brought AB 1788 forward.
Surprisingly, Leslies involvement was spurred by none other than the states top Republican, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. It may have rankled some of his fellow Republicans, but Schwarzeneggers environmental action plan pledges to create a Sierra Nevada Conservancy.
I think this is a case where the governor is showing his independent streak, Medefind said.
Given that the Legislature is controlled by Democrats, the Republicans are drawing up another version of the conservancy plan. While the two bills differ on the boundaries of the proposed conservancy, the biggest differences are the makeup of its governing board and exactly what kind of input local governments will have.
Lairds bill would have the conservancys seven-member board consult with local agencies on proposed projects. Leslies proposal has a 20-member board, including two county supervisors from each of the conservancys five subregions.
At this point, were working to convince the Schwarzenegger administration that a form of conservancy that cuts locals out of the decision process is unacceptable, Medefind said.
Conservancy control issues
The Sierra Fund, a Nevada City-based foundation that links donors with conservation projects, is a main proponent of a conservancy for the mountain range and is supporting Lairds bill. But Izzy Martin, the funds Sierra Nevada campaign director and former Nevada County supervisor, said that to increase the chances that the conservancy proposal passes, there is hope that the two bills will become one.
Still, how the issues of local control versus regional and state priorities play out will be key.
The last effort to create a conservancy for the Sierra was derailed two years ago. Although it sailed through the Assembly, it never made it to the Senate floor for a vote. What scuttled the bill were differences on the makeup of the governing board and whether individual counties and towns could opt in or out of the conservancy.
The more pertinent argument is that already, hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent in the region, and the Sierra doesnt have a say, Martin said. There is no defined, formal role for where the money is being spent.
Despite Assemblyman Leslies aversion to conservancies, Medefind agreed that one could help tackle some of the issues facing the Sierra, like forest and watershed health.
It conceivably could become an excellent forum to address serious issues, he said.
Staff from Leslie and Lairds offices have been in communication on the two bills, and its definitely conceivable that the bills could come together, Medefind said.
Because the conservancy idea is something Schwarzenneger is behind, Laird agreed that bipartisan support might be easier to come by this time around.
AB 2600 is expected to be heard in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee by April 19.
It's... FARMFRIEND!!!
Yes it does. Mass letter are always used as well as letter from organizations. The Grange needs to send one. We should get not only the State Grange but local Granges to all send them.
Founded in 1867, the Grange is the oldest general farm and public policy organization in the United States.
Sending a letter will do. Especially if you are an organization. Send the letter to what ever committee the Bill is in and send it to any Legislator who seems to be in oposition.
The bills get their first reading after it is introduced and assigned a number. It then goes to committee. It gets a second reading everytime it moves between committees. Once it is done with the committees it will get a third reading which means it will be up for a vote. This will be a critical time.
After it moves to the Senate, and it will keep the same number, the whole process starts again. If there is any good news in this, it is that the Senate is not considering a similar bill at the same time. If they were the bills could then be put directly in conference and speed the process up.
Once it moves to the Senate it will have to go through the committee process again. I would send a second letter to that committee when it gets there. If you want to articulate an argument, I would try to speak to the committee when it comes up for a hearing, the Senate committee would be best for this. Otherwise, the only thing they care about is whether you are for or against. This is where an organization is helpful. It will mean more if the California State Grange is opposed compared to Joe Sixpack. It is a matter of numbers and name recognition. Joe Sixpack only works if they come in volume. The more people who write, the more likely that critical mass will be reached.
As for a critical time to deal with bills, that is harder to say. A letter early on puts you on record and lets the legislators know there is opposition but then you really have to watch the amendments etc. Often they will gut a bill as well. That is where they take everything that was in the bill and remove it, replacing it with something totally different. All that is left of the original is the number. Writing the Resource committee would have been helpful. Writing legislators now and getting it on the radio would be good. The trick is to escalate the opposition as they move the bill along.
LOL! I use Carry_Okie. But otherwise the answer to your question is no.
Good One! There is no one better!
It looks like there is alot of money behind this...I feel bad for the people in the Sierras.
I checked the website of The American Land Rights Association and found nothing. Most of what they have is about federal issues like CARA and Heritage Areas. Have you tried google?
Yup, they've been in on this big-time, especailly in Nevada County. The Levitz family is in on it too.
It looks like there is alot of money behind this...I feel bad for the people in the Sierras.
The ones who have houses now will make out like bandits. It's the small holders of developable dirt who will really get screwed.
They tried once in Nevada County with a programme called NH2020. The people figured it out (with help) and dumped the Board of Supes. The speed with which this is moving is, in part, in response to that success. They don't want the public up there to realize that they have power and are at risk so they are trying to go over their heads by pushing up the scale to the State level.
Given the opportunity for an ego trip, I have little doubt that Arnold is more than willing to play along.
This should help eliminate any remaining doubt (from article above):
He said that "tact" is necessary in this situation, especially since
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger himself has fueled the bills.
I had a prediction at that time:
Marsh2, I can't believe they're pushing that Forest Lagacy again... It's like "dead man walking!" Poor CDF, they keep getting trapped by this endless activism and at least last time, they were danged glad for the help we gave 'em to get rid of it!!!
Re: Forest Legacy... what an abomination !
Posting link from Marsh2 here for future reference.
Forest Legacy Program
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.