Posted on 06/20/2004 10:15:39 PM PDT by farmfriend
AB 2600 (Laird)
SUMMARY : Creates within the Resources Agency the Sierra Nevada Conservancy (Conservancy) to acquire and manage land for various specified public objectives, and to make grants for those purposes, in the Sierra Nevada-Cascade Mountain Region.
AB 1788 (Leslie)
SUMMARY : Creates within the Resources Agency the Sierra Nevada Conservancy (Conservancy) to acquire and manage land for various specified public objectives, and to make grants for those purposes, in the Sierra Nevada Region.
AB 2631 (Wolk)
SUMMARY : Establishes an interagency council (more government bureaucracy) to consider ways to coordinate state efforts to eradicate and control invasive species.
Analysis from the Assembly on AB 2600:
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis:
1.Moderate ongoing costs, about $300,000 annually starting in fiscal year (FY) 2005-06, to the Resources Agency to provide staff and other resources to the Conservancy, payable from the General Fund (GF), Environmental License Plate Fund, Proposition 50 bond proceeds, or some combination thereof.
2.Substantial cost pressures, in the range of $5 million to $10 million annually starting in FY 2005-06, to fund the acquisition of public lands with the Conservancy's jurisdiction, payable from the GF, Proposition 50 bond proceeds, or a future resources bond measure.
They will fund through General Fund support, statewide propositions and other sources.
This scary document outlines the enormous amount of money the conservancy will request, and some ideas about how to get it.
COMMENTS : Pursuant to enactments going back to 1933, with the creation of the Wildlife Conservation Board, the Legislature has recognized the utility of multi-agency entities for land conservation. Since 1973, the Legislature has created eight conservancies in specified areas of the state having similar or related resource conservation objectives. According to the Legislative Analyst's report California's Land Conservation Efforts: The Role of State Conservancies, "Generally, state conservancies are most effective where specific land resources of extraordinary, unique value to the entire state are found to be inadequately protected..." [page 13; emphasis in original].
The Sierra Nevada is a large, distinct region of the state, in terms of its geology, plant communities, wildlife, and climate zones. Its rich natural resources and wide range of recreational opportunities qualifies it as a specific geographic area of exceptional statewide, and arguably global, importance and therefore is, by the Legislative Analyst's criteria, appropriate for protection by a multi-agency conservancy.
According to the Sierra Nevada Conservancy Working Group's July 2002 report, "Sierra Nevada Resource Investment Needs Assessment," the Sierra Nevada supplies 60% of California's water, but 23 of its 24 watersheds are impaired; population is projected to triple between 1990 and 2040 and the accompanying residential development increasingly threatens farms and other working landscapes; annual recreational visit-days are now about 50 million, a 75% increase in the past 15 years; and the region's overall economy is changing rapidly from resource extraction and development to business activities that serve or employ increasing numbers of recreational visitors and retirees and other migrants from areas outside the region.
According to Governor Schwarzenegger's Action Plan for California's Environment" ( www.joinarnold.com/en/agenda ), "The Sierra Nevada Mountain Range [sic] is one of the state's crown jewels. Yet, unlike many of California's other natural treasures, it has no conservancy. As Governor I will propose establishment of a Sierra Nevada Mountains [sic] Conservancy." ,P>
AB 1788 (Leslie) also proposes to create a Sierra Nevada Conservancy. AB 2600 differs from AB 1788 in the following principal respects:
a) AB 2600 defines the western boundary of the Sierra Nevada Region as extending down to about the 500-foot elevation contour, which include small portions of the extreme eastern side of the Central Valley. This western boundary encompasses major lakes and reservoirs and long reaches of the Sierra rivers as they descend through the mountains to the valley floor. The region defined in AB 1788 includes large portions of the eastern portions of the Central Valley and, in Tehama, Fresno, and Kern Counties, it extends across the valley into the Coast Range. The core region defined in AB 1788, where presumably the Conservancy's activities will be concentrated, is significantly smaller than the region defined in AB 2600. In particular, because AB 1788 uses the 1,500-foot elevation contour as the western boundary of the core region, long reaches of the deep canyons of the principal rivers of the Sierra and many lakes and reservoirs situated below that elevation are excluded from the core region;
b) On the governing board proposed in AB 2600, two members are state officials and five are appointees from the general public. On the governing board proposed in AB 1788, 13 of the 20 voting members are supervisors from Sierra counties or residents of the core region. The difference in composition can in part be attributed to whether the Conservancy is perceived as having regional or statewide significance;
c) AB 2600 requires its Conservancy board to act by a simple majority of the total appointed membership, that is, by four of the seven voting members. AB 1788 requires that the Conservancy's executive director be approved by at least 2/3 of the governing board, that is, by 14 of the 20 voting members;
d) AB 2600 requires the Conservancy to cooperate and consult with affected local governments and to base its project priorities on local general plans and recreation plans. AB 1788 instead prohibits the Conservancy from acquiring any property interest or making a grant for that purpose unless it documents the proposed use, management, and financing of management costs of the acquired property. Somewhat inconsistently, AB 1788 makes Conservancy projects and grants subject to all general and specific plans of local governments, which would not necessarily anticipate the management needs of the property to be acquired;
e) AB 2600 has no specific provisions regarding water management and water rights. AB 1788 has detailed provisions, based on the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy's statute, governing water management and water rights;
f) AB 1788 authorizes the Resources Secretary to resolve any dispute over jurisdiction between the Conservancy and other conservancies. AB 2600 has no comparable provision; and,
g) AB 2600 will become operative on January 1, 2005. AB 1788 does not become operative until the Legislature appropriates funds to carry out the bill or until a bond act is approved that includes an allocation of funds for the purposes of the bill.
Analysis from the legislature itself on AB 2631:
FISCAL EFFECT : Establishes a new state agency with a number of duties and responsibilities to be carried out all over the state. This bill does not identify any source of funding, except what the Legislature may appropriate in the future. There will be a considerable cost to the state of carrying out all the activities and responsibilities addressed in this bill. Presumably, existing programs would be folded into the Council's program, so the funding for those programs could be transferred to the Council, but the scope of the Council's responsibilities as set forth in this bill exceeds the scope of the collective efforts of all the existing agencies and programs.
COMMENTS : This bill apparently arose out of a workshop convened by the Nature Conservancy in January 2003. Participating in the workshop were state and federal officials, universities, industry associations, and non-governmental organizations. The workshop participants came to consensus that there needs to be more efficient coordination of existing activities, as well as a statewide strategy for addressing terrestrial, aquatic, and marine invasive species.
There is a vast number of plant, animal, bird, fish, insect, microbial, and other species that have been either deliberately or unintentionally introduced into California. Most of these non-native species are benign and have brought great benefits to the inhabitants of the state. Most ornamental plants, for instance, are introduced, as well as pets, livestock, game fish, some wildlife, crops, grape vines, fruit trees, forage grasses, etc. Some non-native species, on the other hand, are highly detrimental to the environment, including yellow star-thistle, Zebra mussels, Chinese mitten crabs, pine bark beetles, West Nile Virus, Exotic Newcastle disease, Caulerpa taxifolia, Giant Reed (Arundo donax), tamarisk (saltcedar), Mediterranean fruitfly, and others. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report estimates that a new non-native species is introduced into San Francisco Bay from the ballast water of cargo ships every 14 weeks.
The author acknowledges that California has several strong pest prevention and eradication programs. As well, California has a number of committees, interagency panels, and ad hoc working groups that address individual invasive species and threats. The federal government, as well, has many programs to control the interstate or international transportation of invasive species. Although many of these programs have been highly successful, the thesis of this bill is that more could be accomplished if all the efforts of all these groups were coordinated and a statewide strategy adopted. The author argues that the various agencies and other interested groups need to consolidate their joint authorities and coordinate their efforts and their funds.
This bill, however, goes much farther. It authorizes the Council to identify, list, and classify all non-native species in the state. The Council would then be authorized to establish programs to control and eradicate detrimental species. Finally, the Council would be authorized to restore native species that have been crowded out.
As originally introduced, this bill created a vast regulatory, permitting, and enforcement program. This bill has been substantially reduced in scope, but still creates a major new state program. Interested groups have participated in working groups that have re-written much of this bill, but many still have significant concerns.
A major concern is the funding for the program proposed in this bill. Although the funding for all the existing programs would presumably be rolled into funding for the Council, the Council is charged with many powers and duties that go well beyond the powers and duties of the existing agencies and departments. Additional funding would be needed, and probably could not entirely be supported by permit fees. The additional funding would need to come from the General Fund.
Although the underlying idea of better coordinating state (and federal) efforts to fight invasive species and developing a statewide strategy is a good one, this bill goes far beyond that goal. To carry out all the requirements of this bill would require a large bureaucratic structure with a full-time professional staff.
An Analysis of Arnold Schwarzenegger's Environmental Policy
A Sierra umbrella? - Conservancy proposed to protect mountain range
CA freepers, RED ALERT RED ALERT!!!
CA freepers, RED ALERT Thread 2
CA: Sierra Conservancy bills seek funding for range
Socialist who are pushing this legislation.
Newsletter for the California Association of Business, Property and Resource Owners (CABPRO)
Volume 10, Number 3 - April, 2004
Page 5
Sierra Nevada ConservancyState legislation has been introduced to again attempt to create a Sierra Nevada Conservancy. Two bills are now pending in the State Assembly, with a hearing on both set for April 19 in Sacramento with the Assembly Natural Resources Committee. Assemblyman Tim Leslie (R-Tahoe City) introduced AB 1788 on January 5.
Assemblyman John Laird (DSanta Cruz) introduced AB 2600 on February 20. Both bills establish a new state agency known as the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, covering numerous counties but excluding the Lake Tahoe region (it already has a conservancy). The Conservancy would have powers to acquire private land or interests.
In AB 1788, the Conservancy’s operations would be funded either as part of the State Budget or as bond acts allocate monies. In AB 2600, $30 million from Prop 50 would be its funding source. Another notable difference between the two bills is that AB 1788 requires "a resolution in support of that acquisition and the land management plan applicable to the acquisition has been approved by the county or city that exercises general planning authority and jurisdiction over that parcel." (Section 33351 (c)) CABPRO asked for that when the first Sierra Nevada Conservancy bill was working its way through Sacramento in 2002! However, AB 2600 does not seek support from the local jurisdiction. There are other differences as well. These differences will be presented in the next issue of our newsletter.
Partly as a result of increasing acquisitions for open space and other preservation purposes, Field Director Pat Davison has written a discussion draft supporting property tax reimbursement back to the counties when these private parcels or development rights are taken off the tax rolls. The concept entails adding an additional amount onto the purchase price that represents a one-time lump sum to be given to the affected county.
Although the federal government has a program in place to "pay" counties an amount per acre of federal lands (i.e. PILT = Payment In Lieu of Taxes), the state has no such program. So when expansion of Donner State Park or South Yuba State Park occurs, the state pays the property owner for the land but there is no payment or consideration given to the county that had previously received property tax income from the land.
Some opposition to that concept has arisen, based on the potential that the neighboring property tax value increases because the adjacent property now abuts open space.
No quantification of that potential increase has been done in Nevada County. Also, the suggestion that increased tourism, and more tax revenue, will result from more open space has not been quantified at the local level either.
Your CABPRO Board will be discussing our position on both Conservancy bills and the "property tax reimbursement" concept at future meetings.
Contact the office if you want a copy of the "property tax reimbursement" discussion draft, or download it from our website.
Supes say no Nature Conservancy
Apr 19, 2004
By Ami Ridling, Staff Writer
Plumas County news on-line
Does the Sierra Nevada region need a state-mandated conservancy to direct the management of, and hold the power to conserve, public lands? The Plumas County Board of Supervisors does not think so, and they will do everything in their power to stop a conservancy from forming.Two controversial bills, AB1788, authored by Republican Assemblyman Tim Leslie, and AB 2600, authored by Democrat Assemblyman John Laird, are currently making their way through the legislature. If one or both are passed, the Sierra Nevada Conservancy will be born.
At their April 13 meeting, the supervisors voted in favor of writing a letter opposing the two bills to the state.
"These (conservancy) groups are our enemy," said Supervisor Bill Dennison. He said the bills would impose on private property owners' rights.
Supervisor Robert Meacher suggested that Dennison, who will write and send the letter of opposition, be careful with the words he uses in his message. He said that "tact" is necessary in this situation, especially since Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger himself has fueled the bills.
AB 1788 and AB 2600 are similar. The main differences in the two bills are that AB 2600 would not allow for local representation on the Sierra Nevada Conservancy governing board. AB1788, however, calls for two supervisors from each of the five Sierra Nevada subregions, to sit on the governing board.
For more on this story, along with other local stories and features, please see this week's printed newspaper. To subscribe, use the form on this Web site or call 530-283-0800.
Los Angeles Times
June 5, 2004
EDITORIAL: A Jewel Worth Protecting
When Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned for governor last fall, he called the Sierra Nevada "one of the state's crown jewels" and said that if he was elected he would support establishment of a Sierra Nevada conservancy. The Sierra deserves all superlatives, but it is an asset under stress. The governor should fulfill his promise this year.The Assembly has passed AB 2600 by Assemblyman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) to create a Sierra conservancy within the state Resources Agency. It would be similar to eight other such groups established by the Legislature since 1973, including the Santa Monica Mountains, the Coastal and the Lake Tahoe conservancies. These organizations identify and work to conserve wildlife habitat, watersheds, historic and cultural areas and open space. They may use state bond funds or grants from nonprofit foundations to purchase prime private lands threatened by development.
(snip)
The natural resources that make the region so attractive to both new residents and new businesses need protection. Too many areas, including the Mammoth Lakes region, could succumb to the syndrome of "loving it to death," awaking too late to the need for regional planning and protection of resources.
Both the Laird and Leslie bills passed and went to the Senate, which should work out an acceptable compromise on the issue of local participation. Then the governor could sign the legislation in a ceremony beside a sparkling creek and meadow abutting lofty spires of Sierra granite. Everyone could proclaim victory.
Government land by state
All values are in thousands (000's) of acres except %'s.
California - Total area of the state 99,822.70
Total Area Owned by State and Federal Gov'ts 52,085.90
% of State's Total Area 52.1%
Owned by Federal Gov't. 49,842.30
% of State's Tot. Area 49.9%
Owned by State 2,243.60
% of State's Tot. Area 2.2%
The following information was taken from a new publication entitled "Managing Federal Forests in the 21st Century" and published by American Forest & Paper Association, Washington DC 20036. The following facts can be and should be shared with co-workers, your family and your neighbors. It's high time for us in the timber industry to educate people about the importance of our forests and how public policy is threatening our very livelihood.
How much land is forested in the U.S.?
About a third. The total U.S. land area is more than 2 billion acres. Forested acres in the U.S. total 747 million acres. 192 million of them are in the National Forest System.Who owns America's forests?
Federal, state and local government agencies own 37%. The forest product industry owns 9%. The remaining 54% of America's forests are owned by private citizens.Are all National Forest System lands available for timber harvesting?
No. 75% of our national forest system is intentionally set aside for non-commercial uses and is not managed for timber or other resource production.Is tree growth outpacing timber harvesting in the U.S.?
Yes. In 1996, the last year for which complete figures are available, net forest growth exceeded harvest in every region of the U.S.
What is the greatest threat to federal forests?
Disease, insect infestations and catatsrophic wildfire exacerbated by conflicting policies and mandates and frivolous lawsuits brought by several national environmental groups paralyzing federal land managers.
Who should be concerned about the forest health crisis on public lands?
Every American. It is not just people who live in and around national forests who are at risk. Recreational opportunities for all of us are threatened, wildlife habitat is threatened and whether they realize it or not, every American depends on the forests for clean drinking water and clean air.
My letter to the editor of the Sacramento Bee.
I read the article on the next round of the poisoning of Lake Davis (Lake Davis on hook again, May 31, 2004) dreading what it portends for the rest of the state. This will soon be the standard.
AB 2631 is an invasive species bill that has passed the Assembly and is now in the Senate. The intent is to go after mitten crabs and star thistle. The implications are much worse.
Are we going to go after barred owls that are displacing the spotted owl? How about the wild horses roaming the arid areas? Are we going to change our policy on coho salmon? Archeology shows these fish are not native to CA. What about all those eucalyptus trees? Shall we cut them all?
And the budget! How is the creation of a whole new bureaucracy going to effect that?
And to those who think that the ESA took their property rights away, wait until you can’t build that dream house or plow that field or graze those cattle because they want to promote some native grass, endangered or not.
Here is a short list of the issues with the sierra conservancy.
1. It puts all private property under control of an unelected body.
2.More than 90% of the land in some counties is owned by the state or federal government. More government control will restrict economic use of private property and likely bankrupt small counties.
3. The board members are appointed, and do not answer to the public and cannot be voted out of office if they harm individual property owners.
4. The conservancy effective merges 20 counties which is unconstitutional-- only the legislature and a vote by citizens can alter county lines.
5. Merging counties and putting control over private land under an unelected board is not only unconsitutional, it mimics the failed system of the soviet union-- this comment was made by an aide to Assemblyman Leslie.
6. The board would be able to redraw parcel boundaries and change property lines taking away constitutional protections for the landowner and changing our system of government from a constitutional government to one by fiat.
7. The conservancy can buy and sell property like a real estate agent. They can buy property and give it to other conservancies, whether or not the public agrees with the policies of that conservancy or their politics-- the public has no say.
8. The conservancy will control economic use of private property through their "working lands" program.
9. The land owner only has 45 days to respond to the conservancy, if the conservancy has indicate that their property is desired for the conservancy.
10. The conservancy will set up a duplicate water quality management program wasting tax money and making the government unnavigatable by the average citizen. If you have a problem or complaint, which bureacracy do you go to? Why is another bureacracy necessary?
11. The conservancy will require $30 million out of the genreral fund just to get started. This from a state that was insovlent a few months ago and requiered a $15 billion bond from a governor who promised "no new taxes".
12. The conservancy will have its own bank account and own portfolio, making it immune from budgeting and cost reduction strategies guaranteed by our constituion.
13. The government should not be able to use taxpayer money to fund a group that will take public lands away from the public by locking them up "for future generations". This again is a techinique of the failed soviet union to give powers to cronies. In fact the whole conservancy idea reeks of cronism.
Massive protests. What are the odds that is going to happen?
And it'll be with a foreign object... Another Rafting Republican Governor's PEN!!!
I don't think there is anyone on the California Topic who doesn't grasp what is going on thanks to you and Sierra Wasp.
The problem is that many of these same folks wouldn't listen when the I-TOLD-YOU-SOS were being handed out last summer/fall. Yes, Schwarzenegger's present actions were predictable and were predicted last August if anyone had just bothered to inquire.
Farmfriend I know you didn't blindly champion Schwarzenegger during the recall but many of your fellow Freepers did. They were either start struck, or blindly loyal to the Republican Party or so desperate to get rid of Davis and/or the little, chubby, anchor baby that they stampeded. Now we are all going to pay the price. Some more than others.
This thread has gotten a lot more attention than we realize.
If they stick my neck of the woods in this, then I will help organize a protest. If the Sierra folks don't care enough to protest, fine. But the folks in the State of Jefferson do not like this kind of heavy handed action, and we will protest!
If there is anyone you know that lives in the affected area, you can help tell the truth about this thing.
If you don't feel like calling, give me the numbers, I'll call.
It sure startles people when a complete stranger calls them up to talk about this problem. But I'm just doing what I can to help.
Note that Leslie DIDN'T VOTE!!!
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2600|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2600
Author: Leslie (R) and Laird (D)
Amended: 8/18/04 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WILD. COMMITTEE : 6-3, 6/29/04
AYES: Kuehl, Alpert, Bowen, Ortiz, Sher, Torlakson
NOES: Oller, Denham, Hollingsworth
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-5, 8/12/04
AYES: Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette, Murray, Speier
NOES: Battin, Aanestad, Ashburn, Johnson, Poochigian
NO VOTE RECORDED: Machado
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 52-20, 5/26/04 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Sierra Nevada Conservancy
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill creates the Sierra Nevada Conservancy
within the Resources Agency to make grants for the purposes
of acquiring and managing land for various specified public
objectives.
ANALYSIS : Existing law does all of the following:
1.Pursuant to various enactments since 1973, the
Legislature has created eight conservancies to coordinate
the efforts of multiple public agencies in various
specified regions of the state that have similar or
related resource conservation objectives. Each
conservancy's board has representatives from particular
state, local, and federal agencies appropriate to the
characteristics and needs of the region. Conservancies
are typically authorized to make grants to other public
agencies and nonprofit organizations to acquire, restore,
and manage land in coordination with the conservancy's
own land conservation projects. In addition to their
core land resource conservation function, conservancies
also serve other statewide needs, such as providing
recreational opportunities near major metropolitan areas,
protecting agricultural lands and scenic open space
surrounding urban areas, and facilitating access to
public lands.
2.The specific regions of the state that have conservancies
are: the California side of the Lake Tahoe Basin, coastal
areas and the San Francisco bay shoreline, the Santa
Monica Mountains in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, the
Coachella Valley and the mountain ranges enclosing it,
the San Joaquin River between Friant Dam and Highway 99,
the San Gabriel River, lower Los Angeles River, and San
Gabriel Mountains, the Baldwin Hills in Los Angeles
County, and the San Diego River. There is no conservancy
for the entire Sierra Nevada, although the territory of
the California Tahoe Conservancy includes one of the
Sierra's most significant features and the territory of
the San Joaquin River Conservancy includes a small
portion of Sierra foothills.
3.The Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and
Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000, which the voters
approved as Proposition 12 at the March 7, 2000, Primary
Election, created the Sierra Nevada-Cascade Program and
allocated $6,250,000 to the Resources Agency for local
assistance grants to "plan, create, and conserve the
Sierra-Cascade natural ecosystem". The Water Security,
Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of
2002, which the voters approved as Proposition 50 at the
November 5, 2002, General Election, allocates $30,000,000
for appropriation to the Resources Secretary for grants
to local public agencies, water districts, and nonprofit
organizations to protect water quality in lakes,
reservoirs, rivers, streams, and wetlands in the Sierra
Nevada-Cascade Mountain Region.
This bill does all of the following:
1.Creates the Sierra Nevada Conservancy (Conservancy) in
the Resources Agency to undertake projects and make
grants and loans to other public agencies, nonprofit
organizations, and tribal organizations in the Sierra
Nevada Region for various public purposes, including
increasing tourism and recreation; cultural,
archaeological, and historical resource protection;
reducing risks from natural disasters; water quality
protection; and local economic assistance.
2.Designates the territory of the Conservancy as the area
lying within the Counties of Alpine, Amador, Butte,
Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Madera,
Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta,
Sierra, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Yuba, described as
the area bounded as follows:
On the east by the eastern boundary of the State of
California; the crest of the White/Inyo ranges; and State
Routes 395 and 14 south of Olancha; on the south by the
State Route 58, Tehachapi Creek, and Caliente Creek; on
the west by the line of 1,250 feet above sea level from
Caliente Creek to the Kern/Tulare County line; the lower
level of the western slope's blue oak woodland, from the
Kern/Tulare County line to Big Bend above Red Bluff; the
Sacramento River from Big Bend north to Cow Creek below
Redding; Cow Creek, Little Cow Creek, Dry Creek, and Dry
Creek Road between the Sacramento River and Lake Shasta;
the Pit River Arm of Lake Shasta; the northerly boundary
of the Pit River watershed; the southerly and easterly
boundaries of Siskiyou County; and within Modoc County,
the easterly boundary of the Klamath River watershed; and
on the north by the northern boundary of the State of
California; excluding both of the following:
A. The Lake Tahoe Region.
B. The San Joaquin River Parkway.
3.Defines "subregions" to mean the six subregions in which
the Sierra Nevada Region is located, described as
follows:
A. The north Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties
of Lassen, Modoc, and Shasta.
B. The north central Sierra subregion, comprising the
Counties of Butte, Plumas, Sierra, and Tehama.
C. The central Sierra subregion, comprising the
Counties of El Dorado, Nevada, Placer, and Yuba.
D. The south central Sierra subregion, comprising the
Counties of Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tuolumne.
E. The east Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties
of Alpine, Inyo, and Mono.
F. The south Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties
of Fresno, Kern, Madera, and Tulare.
4.Creates a 13-member governing board consisting of the
following:
A. The Secretary of the Resources Agency.
B. The Director of Finance.
C. Three public member appointed by the Governor.
D. One public members appointed by the Speaker.
E. One public members appointed by the Senate
Committee on Rules.
F. One member for each of the six subregions who shall
be a member of the board of supervisors of a county
located within that subregion, and whose supervisorial
district shall be at least partially contained within
the Sierra Nevada Region according to a specified
procedure.
5.Grants the Conservancy legal authority customarily
granted to conservancies generally, except that the
Conservancy is prohibited from acquiring real property in
fee simple. Instead, the Conservancy may make grants and
loans to public agencies, nonprofit organizations and
tribal organizations for purposes of acquiring an
interest in real property.
6.Creates the Sierra Nevada Conservancy Fund in the State
Treasury and specifies that moneys in the fund would be
available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the
purposes of the conservancy.
Comments
Pursuant to enactments going back to 1933, with the
creation of the Wildlife Conservation Board, the
Legislature has recognized the utility of multi-agency
entities for land conservation. Since 1973, the
Legislature has created eight conservancies in specified
areas of the state having similar or related resource
conservation objectives. According to the Legislative
Analyst's report California's Land Conservation Efforts:
The Role of State Conservancies, "Generally, state
conservancies are most effective where specific land
resources of extraordinary, unique value to the entire
state are found to be inadequately protected..." [page 13;
emphasis in original].
The Sierra Nevada is a large, distinct region of the state,
in terms of its geology, plant communities, wildlife, and
climate zones. Its rich natural resources and wide range
of recreational opportunities qualifies it as a specific
geographic area of exceptional statewide, and arguably
global, importance and therefore is, by the Legislative
Analyst's criteria, appropriate for protection by a
multi-agency conservancy.
According to the Sierra Nevada Conservancy Working Group's
July 2002 report, Sierra Nevada Resource Investment Needs
Assessment, the Sierra Nevada supplies 60 percent of
California's water, but 23 of its 24 watersheds are
impaired; population is projected to triple between 1990
and 2040 and the accompanying residential development
increasingly threatens farms and other working landscapes;
annual recreational visit-days are now about 50 million, a
75 percent increase in the past 15 years; and the region's
overall economy is changing rapidly from resource
extraction and development to business activities that
serve or employ increasing numbers of recreational visitors
and retirees and other migrants from areas outside the
region.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, cost to
the General Fund of $1,255,000 in 2005-06 and $7,600,000 in
2006-07.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/18/04) (Prior version)
The Sierra Fund (Sponsor)
Office of Attorney General
City of Nevada City
East Bay Municipal Utility District (with amendments)
ADRO Environmental, Inc.
Amador Land Trust
Amador Olive Oil
American Land Conservancy
American Rivers
Andrea Lawrence Institute for Mountains and Rivers
Bay Institute
Blue Belly Farm
Blue Mountain Community Renewal Council
Brunswick Veterinary Clinic
California Native Plant Society (Redbud Chapter)
California Oaks Foundation
California Trout
California Wilderness Coalition
CA-Nev Conf. of Operating Engineers
CASA of Mariposa County
Center of Sierra Nevada Conservation
Chatten-Brown & Associates
Coldwell Banker Grass Roots Realty
Creekside Financial
DayStar Solar (Grass Valley)
Darla Guenzler: Board member, Sierra-Cascade Land Trust
Diamond Valley Company, Publishers (Markleeville)
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Eastern Sierra Advocates Network
Eastern Sierra Land Trust
Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch
El Dorado County (unless amended)
Environment California
Environmental Priorities Network
Extasia, Inc. (Nevada City)
Foothill Conservancy
Friends of Deer Creek (Nevada City)
Friends of Hope Valley
Friends of the River
Lassen Forest Preservation Group
Lassen Land and Trails Trust
Los Angeles Water Conservation Council
Mammoth Mountain Ski Area
Mariposans for Environmentally Responsible Growth
Mono County
Mono Lake Committee
Mono Market (Lee Vining)
Mountain Alliance (Arnold, CA)
Mountain Area Preservation Foundation
Mountain Lion Foundation
Mountain Meadows Conservancy
Natural Heritage Institute
Nevada County: Supervisor Van Zant
North Fork Community Development Council (North Fork)
Placer County: Supervisor Rex Bloomfield
Placer Land Trust
Planning and Conservation League
Real Estate Construction Investments
Renegade Productions (Tahoe City)
Restore Hetch Hetchy
River Ridge Ranch
Rural Quality Coalition of Nevada County
Sacramento Valley Environmental Water Caucus
Save Round Valley Alliance
SEIU
Sequoia Riverlands Trust
SF Parking
Sierra Foothills Audubon Society
Sierra Foothills Thoroughbreds
Sierra Nevada Alliance
Sierra Watch
Snowlands Network
Sonora Mayor Marlee Powell
Sorensen's Resort
South Yuba Citizens League
Sutter Creek Partners
The Earth Store
Truckee Donner Land Trust
Trust for Public Land (If amended)
Tuolumne River Trust
Warren Marr Photography
Wilderness Society
Wolf Creek Wilderness
Wright, David; Associates AIA
Yuba Docs Medical Group (Nevada City)
Zirbel, Dennis; Architect (Truckee)
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/18/04) (Prior version)
Amador County Farm Bureau
Butte County Farm Bureau
California Association of Business, Property, and Resource
Owners
California Farm Bureau
California Forestry Association (unless amended)
California State Horsemen's Association
CABPRO (Nevada County)
El Dorado Business Alliance
El Dorado County (unless amended)
El Dorado County Farm Bureau
Fresno Farm Bureau
Friends of El Dorado COunty
Kern County Farm Bureau
Lassen County Farm Bureau
Nevada County
Off Road Business Association
Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
Shasta County Board of Supervisors
Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County
Tahoe Sierra Board of Realtors
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Berg, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan, Chavez, Chu,
Cohn, Corbett, Correa, Daucher, Diaz, Dutra, Dymally,
Firebaugh, Frommer, Goldberg, Hancock, Harman, Jerome
Horton, Shirley Horton, Jackson, Kehoe, Koretz, Laird,
Leno, Levine, Lieber, Liu, Longville, Lowenthal,
Maldonado, Montanez, Mullin, Nakano, Nation, Negrete
McLeod, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley, Reyes, Richman,
Ridley-Thomas, Salinas, Samuelian, Simitian, Steinberg,
Vargas, Wesson, Wiggins, Wolk, Yee, Nunez
NOES: Aghazarian, Benoit, Bogh, Cogdill, Cox, Dutton,
Garcia, Haynes, Houston, Keene, Matthews, Maze, McCarthy,
Mountjoy, Nakanishi, Pacheco, Plescia, Spitzer,
Strickland, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates, Bermudez, Campbell, La Malfa, La
Suer, Leslie, Maddox, Runner
CP:nl 8/18/04 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
BILL NUMBER: AB 2600 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 18, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 20, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 13, 2004
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Members
Leslie and Laird
FEBRUARY 20, 2004
An act to add Division 23.3 (commencing with Section 33300) to the
Public Resources Code, relating to the Sierra Nevada Conservancy.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2600, as amended, Laird Leslie .
Sierra Nevada Conservancy.
Existing law authorizes various conservancies to acquire, manage,
direct the management of, and conserve public lands in the state.
This bill would establish the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, to
undertake various activities related to the Sierra Nevada Region, as
defined, and would prescribe the management, powers, and duties of
the conservancy. The bill would create the Sierra Nevada Conservancy
Fund in the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund would be available,
upon appropriation, for the purposes of the conservancy.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Division 23.3 (commencing with Section
SECTION 1. Division 23.3 (commencing with Section 33300) is added
to the Public Resources Code, to read:
DIVISION 23.3. SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS
33300. This division shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Laird-Leslie Sierra Nevada Conservancy Act.
33301. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The Sierra Nevada Region is a globally significant area,
including many national and state parks, the highest peaks in the 48
contiguous states, and large, pristine areas that are open for public
use.
(b) The Sierra Nevada Region is an important part of the state's
economy, providing substantial agricultural products, timber
resources, ranching, mining, tourism, and recreation.
(c) The Sierra Nevada Region provides 65 percent of California's
developed water supply and nearly all of the water supply for western
Nevada. As California's principal watershed, the region is the
critical source of water for urban and rural parts of northern and
southern California.
(d) In cooperation with local governments, private business,
nonprofit organizations, and the public, a Sierra Nevada Conservancy
can help do all of the following:
(1) Provide increased opportunities for tourism and recreation.
(2) Protect, conserve, and restore the region's physical,
cultural, archaeological, historical, and living resources.
(3) Aid in the preservation of working landscapes.
(4) Reduce the risk of natural disasters, such as wildfires.
(5) Protect and improve water and air quality.
(6) Assist the regional economy through the operation of the
conservancy's program.
(7) Identify the highest priority projects and initiatives for
which funding is needed.
(8) Undertake efforts to enhance public use and enjoyment of lands
owned by the public.
(9) Support efforts that advance both environmental preservation
and the economic well-being of Sierra residents in a complementary
manner.
33302. For the purposes of this division, the following terms
have the following meanings:
(a) "Board" means the Governing Board of the Sierra Nevada
Conservancy.
(b) "Conservancy" means the Sierra Nevada Conservancy.
(c) "Fund" means the Sierra Nevada Conservancy Fund created
pursuant to Section 33355.
(d) "Local public agency" means a city, county, district, or joint
powers authority.
(e) "Nonprofit organization" means a private, nonprofit
organization that qualifies for exempt status under Section 501(c)(3)
of Title 26 of the United States Code, and that has among its
principal charitable purposes preservation of land for scientific,
educational, recreational, scenic, or open-space opportunities; or,
protection of the natural environment, preservation or enhancement of
wildlife; or, preservation of cultural and historical resources; or,
efforts to provide for the enjoyment of public lands.
(f) "Region" or "Sierra Nevada Region" means the area lying within
the Counties of Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno,
Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer,
Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Yuba, described
as the area bounded as follows:
On the east by the eastern boundary of the State of California;
the crest of the White/Inyo ranges; and State Routes 395 and 14 south
of Olancha; on the south by State Route 58, Tehachapi Creek, and
Caliente Creek; on the west by the line of 1,250 feet above sea level
from Caliente Creek to the Kern/Tulare County line; the lower level
of the western slope's blue oak woodland, from the Kern/Tulare County
line to Big Bend above Red Bluff; the Sacramento River from Big Bend
north to Cow Creek below Redding; Cow Creek, Little Cow Creek, Dry
Creek, and Dry Creek Road, between the Sacramento River and Lake
Shasta; the Pit River Arm of Lake Shasta; the northerly boundary of
the Pit River watershed; the southerly and easterly boundaries of
Siskiyou County; and within Modoc County, the easterly boundary of
the Klamath River watershed; and on the north by the northern
boundary of the State of California; excluding both of the following:
(1) The Lake Tahoe Region, as described in Section 66905.5 of the
Government Code, where it is defined as "region."
(2) The San Joaquin River Parkway, as described in Section 32510.
(g) "Subregions" means the six subregions in which the Sierra
Nevada Region is located, described as follows:
(1) The north Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of Lassen,
Modoc, and Shasta.
(2) The north central Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of
Butte, Plumas, Sierra, and Tehama.
(3) The central Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of El
Dorado, Nevada, Placer, and Yuba.
(4) The south central Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of
Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tuolumne.
(5) The east Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of Alpine,
Inyo, and Mono.
(6) The south Sierra subregion, comprising the Counties of Fresno,
Kern, Madera, and Tulare.
(h) "Tribal organization" means an Indian tribe, band, nation, or
other organized group or community, or a tribal agency authorized by
a tribe, which is recognized as eligible for special programs and
services provided by the United States to Indians because of their
status as Indians and is identified on pages 52829 to 52835,
inclusive, of Number 250 of Volume 53 (December 29, 1988) of the
Federal Register, as that list may be updated or amended from time to
time.
CHAPTER 2. SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY
33320. There is in the Resources Agency the Sierra Nevada
Conservancy, which is created as a state agency to do all of the
following, working in collaboration and cooperation with local
governments and interested parties:
(a) Provide increased opportunities for tourism and recreation.
(b) Protect, conserve, and restore the region's physical,
cultural, archaeological, historical, and living resources.
(c) Aid in the preservation of working landscapes.
(d) Reduce the risk of natural disasters, such as wildfires.
(e) Protect and improve water and air quality.
(f) Assist the regional economy through the operation of the
conservancy's program.
(g) Identify the highest priority projects and initiatives for
which funding is needed.
(h) Undertake efforts to enhance public use and enjoyment of lands
owned by the public.
(i) Support efforts that advance both environmental preservation
and the economic well-being of Sierra residents in a complementary
manner.
33321. (a) The board shall consist of 13 voting members and three
nonvoting liaison advisers, appointed or designated as follows:
(1) The 13 voting members of the board shall consist of all of the
following:
(A) The Secretary of the Resources Agency, or his or her designee.
(B) The Director of Finance, or his or her designee.
(C) Three public members appointed by the Governor, who are not
elected officials, to represent statewide interests.
(D) One public member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly,
who is not an elected official, to represent statewide interests.
(E) One public member appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules,
who is not an elected official, to represent statewide interests.
(F) One member for each of the six subregions who shall be a
member of the board of supervisors of a county located within that
subregion, and whose supervisorial district shall be at least
partially contained within the Sierra Nevada Region. Each member
shall be selected by the counties within that subregion, according to
the following procedure:
(i) Each county board of supervisors within a subregion shall
select a member of their board to determine, with the selected
members of the other counties in the subregion, which member of a
board of supervisors within the subregion shall be appointed as a
member of the conservancy board. An alternate may be appointed. The
appointed member and any alternate shall have at least part of his
or her supervisorial district within the subregion.
(ii) The initial appointment of a member for each subregion shall
be made no later than 60 days after the effective date of this
division. A subsequent appointment to a regular term on the board
shall be made before the date specified in Section 33322 for the
commencement of that term. A vacancy occurring before the end of a
term shall be filled for the remainder of the term within 60 days
of the vacancy.
(iii) If the boards of supervisors of the subregion do not appoint
a member to the board within the time frame specified in clause
(ii), the Governor shall appoint one of the supervisors selected in
clause (i) to serve as the board member for the subregion.
(2) The three nonvoting liaison advisers who are serving in an
advisory, nonvoting capacity shall consist of all of the following:
(A) One representative of the National Park Service, designated by
the United States Secretary of the Interior.
(B) One representative of the United States Forest Service,
designated by the United States Secretary of Agriculture.
(C) One representative of the United States Bureau of Land
Management, designated by the United States Secretary of the Interior.
(b) Appointing powers shall seek to include individuals from a
breadth of backgrounds.
33322. Members and alternates, if any, shall serve terms
specified as follows:
(a) The members appointed pursuant to subparagraphs (C) to (E),
inclusive, of subdivision (a) of Section 33321 shall serve at the
pleasure of the appointing power.
(b) The members and alternates, if any, appointed under
subparagraph (F) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 33321
shall serve, as follows:
(1) Members and alternates in the north Sierra subregion, the
central Sierra subregion, and the east Sierra subregion shall have
terms beginning on January 1 in an odd-numbered year and ending on
December 31 of the following even-numbered year. All terms shall be
for two years.
(2) Members and alternates in the north central Sierra subregion,
the south central Sierra subregion, and the south Sierra subregion
shall have terms beginning on January 1 in an even-numbered year and
ending on December 31 in the following odd-numbered year. Members
and alternates who are initially appointed to the board shall serve
for a one year term for the first year. Subsequent terms shall be
for two years.
(c) No member of the board, whose appointment to the board was
contingent upon meeting a condition of eligibility under this
division, shall serve beyond the time when the member ceases
to meet that condition.
33323. (a) The voting members appointed or designated under
paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 33321 who are not state
employees shall be compensated for attending meetings of the
conservancy at the rate of one hundred dollars ($100) per scheduled
meeting day.
(b) All members of the board shall be reimbursed for their actual
and necessary expenses, including travel expenses, incurred in
attending meetings of the conservancy and carrying out the duties of
their office.
33324. Annually, the voting members of the board shall elect from
among the voting members a chairperson and vice-chairperson, and
other officers as necessary. If the office of the chairperson or
vice-chairperson becomes vacant, a new chairperson or
vice-chairperson shall be elected by the voting members of the board
to serve for the remainder of the term.
33325. (a) Seven members of the voting members shall constitute a
quorum for the transaction of the business of the conservancy. The
board shall not transact the business of the conservancy if a quorum
is not present at the time a vote is taken. A decision of the board
requires an affirmative vote of seven of the voting members, and the
vote is binding with respect to all matters acted on by the
conservancy.
(b) The board shall adopt rules, regulations, and procedures for
the conduct of business by the conservancy.
(c) The voting members of the board appointed or designated
pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 33321 and the
nonvoting advisers selected pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision
(a) of Section 33321, shall have the right to attend all meetings of
the board, including closed sessions.
33326. The board may establish advisory boards or committees,
hold community meetings, and engage in public outreach using advanced
forms of technology, in order to facilitate the decisionmaking
process. Members of advisory boards or committees may be reimbursed
for the actual and necessary expenses, including travel expenses,
that they incur in attending regular meetings of the advisory board
or committee of which they are a member.
33327. The board shall establish and maintain a headquarters
office within the region. The conservancy may rent or own real and
personal property and equipment pursuant to applicable statutes and
regulations.
33328. The board shall determine the qualifications of, and shall
appoint, an executive officer of the conservancy, who shall be
exempt from civil service. The board shall employ other staff as
necessary to execute the powers and functions provided for under this
division.
33329. The board may enter into contracts with private entities
and public agencies to procure consulting and other services
necessary to achieve the purposes of this division.
33330. The conservancy's expenses for support and administration
may be paid from the conservancy's operating budget and any other
funding sources available to the conservancy.
33331. The board shall conduct business in accordance with the
requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9
(commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3
of Title 2 of the Government Code).
33332. The board shall hold its regular meetings within, or near,
the region.
33333. On or after January 1, 2006, the board shall post agendas
for each board meeting on the Internet.
CHAPTER 3. POWERS, DUTIES, AND LIMITATIONS
33340. The conservancy's jurisdiction is limited to the Sierra
Nevada Region.
33341. The conservancy shall carry out projects and activities to
further the purposes of this division throughout the region. The
board shall make every effort to ensure that, over time, conservancy
funding and other efforts are spread equitably across each of the
various subregions and among the stated goal areas, with adequate
allowance for the variability of costs associated with individual
regions and types of projects.
33342. In carrying out this division, the conservancy shall
cooperate with and consult with the city or county where a grant is
proposed or an interest in real property is proposed to be acquired;
and shall, as necessary or appropriate, coordinate its efforts with
other state agencies, in cooperation with the Secretary of the
Resources Agency. The conservancy shall, as necessary and
appropriate, cooperate and consult with a public water system that
owns or operates facilities, including lands appurtenant thereto,
where a grant is proposed or an interest in land is proposed to be
acquired.
33343. (a) The conservancy may make grants or loans to public
agencies, nonprofit organizations, and tribal organizations in order
to carry out the purposes of this division, including grants or loans
provided to acquire an interest in real property, including a fee
interest in that property. Grant or loan funds shall be disbursed to
a recipient entity only after the entity has entered into an
agreement with the conservancy, on the terms and conditions specified
by the conservancy. After approving a grant, the conservancy may
assist the grantee in carrying out the purposes of the grant.
(b) When awarding grants or making loans pursuant to this
division, the conservancy may require repayment of those funds on the
terms and conditions it deems appropriate. Proceeds from the
repayment or reimbursement of amounts granted or loaned by the
conservancy shall be deposited in the fund.
(c) An entity applying for a grant from the conservancy to acquire
an interest in real property shall specify all of the following in
the grant application:
(1) The intended use of the property.
(2) The manner in which the land will be managed.
(3) How the cost of ongoing management will be funded.
33344. In the case of a grant of funds to a nonprofit
organization or tribal organization to acquire an interest in real
property, including, but not limited to, a fee interest, the
agreement between the conservancy and the recipient nonprofit
organization shall require all of the following:
(a) The purchase price of an interest in real property acquired by
the nonprofit organization shall not exceed fair market value as
established by an appraisal approved by the conservancy.
(b) The terms under which the interest in real property is
acquired shall be subject to the conservancy's approval.
(c) An interest in real property to be acquired under the grant
shall not be used as security for a debt unless the conservancy
approves the transaction.
(d) The transfer of an interest in the real property shall be
subject to approval of the conservancy, and a new agreement
sufficient to protect the public interest shall be entered into
between the conservancy and the transferee.
(e) A deed or instrument by which the nonprofit organization
acquires an interest in real property under the grant shall include a
power of termination on the part of the state, subject to the
requirements of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 885.010) of Title
5 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code. The deed or instrument
shall provide that the state may exercise the power of termination by
notice in the event of the nonprofit organization's violation of the
purpose of the grant through breach of a material term or condition
thereof, and that, upon recordation of the notice, full title to the
interest in real property identified in the notice shall immediately
vest in the state, or in another public agency or a nonprofit
organization designated by the conservancy to which the state conveys
or has conveyed its interest.
(f) A deed or instrument by which the nonprofit organization
acquires an interest in real property under the grant shall provide
that the conveyance is subject to a remainder interest vested in the
state. If the existence of the nonprofit organization is terminated
for any reason, the conservancy may require that the remainder shall
become a present interest and that full title to the real property
shall vest in the state, or in another public agency or a nonprofit
organization designated by the conservancy to which the state conveys
or has conveyed its interest.
33345. The conservancy shall adopt guidelines setting priorities
and criteria for projects and programs, based upon its assessment of
program requirements, institutional capabilities, and funding needs
throughout the region, and federal, state, and local plans, including
general plans, recreation plans, urban water management plans, and
groundwater management plans. As part of the process of developing
guidelines for projects and programs, the conservancy shall undertake
and facilitate a strategic program planning process involving
meetings and workshops within each of the subregions, with the
purpose of formulating strategic program objectives and priorities
within that subregion. The strategic program shall be updated
regularly, at least once every five years.
33346. (a) The conservancy may expend funds and award grants and
loans to facilitate collaborative planning efforts and to develop
projects and programs that are designed to further the purposes of
this division.
(b) The conservancy may provide and make available technical
information, expertise, and other nonfinancial assistance to public
agencies, nonprofit organizations, and tribal organizations, to
support program and project development and implementation.
(c) The recipient of a grant or loan provided by the conservancy
pursuant to this division for the acquisition of real property shall
provide for the management of the real property to be acquired as
specified in the grant agreement.
33346.5. The conservancy may apply for and receive grants to
carry out the purposes of this division.
33347. (a) The conservancy may acquire from willing sellers or
transferors, an interest in any real property, in order to carry out
the purposes of this division. However, the conservancy shall not
acquire any real property in fee simple.
(b) The acquisition of an interest in real property under this
section is not subject to the Property Acquisition Law (Part 11
(commencing with Section 15850) of Division 3 of Title 2 of the
Government Code), unless the value of the interest exceeds two
hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000), as adjusted for annual
changes to the Consumer Price Index for the State of California, as
calculated by the Department of Finance, per lot or parcel. However,
the conservancy may request the Public Works Board to review and
approve specific acquisitions.
(c) The conservancy shall not exercise the power of eminent domain.
33348. Notwithstanding Section 11005.2 of the Government Code or
any other provision of law, the conservancy may lease, rent, sell,
exchange, or otherwise transfer, an interest, option, or contractual
right in real property, as well as a vested right severable
therefrom, that has been acquired under this division, to a person or
entity, subject to terms and conditions in furtherance of the
conservancy's purposes.
33349. (a) The conservancy shall take whatever actions are
reasonably necessary and incidental to the management of lands or
interests in lands under its ownership or control, and may initiate,
negotiate, and participate in agreements for the management of those
lands or interests with public agencies or private individuals or
entities.
(b) The conservancy may improve, restore, or enhance lands for the
purpose of protecting the natural environment, improving public
enjoyment of or public access to public lands, or to otherwise meet
the objectives of this division, and may carry out the planning and
design of those improvements or other measures.
(c) The conservancy may enter into an agreement with a public
agency, nonprofit organization, or private entity, for the
construction, management, or maintenance of facilities authorized by
the conservancy.
33350. The conservancy shall make an annual report to the
Legislature and to the Secretary of the Resources Agency regarding
expenditures, land management costs, and administrative costs.
33351. The conservancy may expend funds under this division to
conduct research and monitoring in connection with development and
implementation of the program administered under this division.
33352. The conservancy may receive gifts, donations, an interest
in real property, including an in-fee interest, subventions, grants,
rents, royalties, and other assistance and funds from public and
private sources. All funds or income received by the conservancy
shall be deposited in the fund for expenditure for the purposes of
this division.
33353. The conservancy may fix and collect a fee for a direct
service it renders, provided the service is rendered at the request
of the individual or entity receiving the service. The amount of a
fee shall not exceed the conservancy's reasonable costs and expenses
of providing the service rendered. All fees received by the
conservancy shall be deposited in the fund for expenditure for the
purposes of this division.
33354. Proceeds from a lease, rental, sale, exchange, or transfer
of an interest or option in real property, and all other income,
shall be deposited in the fund for expenditure for the purposes of
this division.
33355. The Sierra Nevada Conservancy Fund is hereby created in
the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund shall be available, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, only for the purposes of this
division. 33356. Nothing in this division grants to the conservancy:
(a) Any of the powers of a city or county to regulate land use.
(b) Any powers to regulate any activities on land, except as the
owner of an interest in the land, or pursuant to an agreement with,
or a license or grant of management authority from, the owner of an
interest in the land.
(c) Any powers over water rights held by others.
_____________________________________
All matter omitted in this version of the bill appears in the bill as
amended in the Assembly, May 20, 2004 (JR 11)
____________________________________
See posts above or follow the links.
BTTT!!!!!!!
2.Designates the territory of the Conservancy as the area
lying within the Counties of Alpine, Amador, Butte,
Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Madera,
Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta,
Sierra, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Yuba, described as
the area bounded as follows:
On the east by the eastern boundary of the State of
California; the crest of the White/Inyo ranges; and State
Routes 395 and 14 south of Olancha; on the south by the
State Route 58, Tehachapi Creek, and Caliente Creek; on
the west by the line of 1,250 feet above sea level from
Caliente Creek to the Kern/Tulare County line; the lower
level of the western slope's blue oak woodland, from the
Kern/Tulare County line to Big Bend above Red Bluff; the
Sacramento River from Big Bend north to Cow Creek below
Redding; Cow Creek, Little Cow Creek, Dry Creek, and Dry
Creek Road between the Sacramento River and Lake Shasta;
the Pit River Arm of Lake Shasta; the northerly boundary
of the Pit River watershed; the southerly and easterly
boundaries of Siskiyou County; and within Modoc County,
the easterly boundary of the Klamath River watershed; and
on the north by the northern boundary of the State of
California; excluding both of the following:
A. The Lake Tahoe Region.
B. The San Joaquin River Parkway.
Nope. Our entire County is out. Did ya notice how the 13 member board is skewed toward the political admistration in power (7 Sacramento positions vs. 6 local County supervisors). Also, I see that the 3 fed agencies, NPS, USFS & BLM are "advisors". Looks like the Wild Lands Project to me.
More later, although there's not much more to be said that hasn't already fallen on deaf ears!!! (congratulations Marsh2)
I challenge ANYONE to show me a map with a line delineating the western edge of "the lower level of the western slope's blue oak woodland!"
One former "Republican" Governor of CA is so POPULAR he gets appointed by Eisenhour to the SCOTUS and laughingly hands down the infamous "Cows don't vote" decision that strips rural America of taxation with fair representation in all state senates!
The current "Republican" Governor of CA is so POPULAR he's ready to laughingly sign the "Milking Machine of the Taxpaying Cow Owners Whose Votes Don't Count, of the Sierra-Nevada Act!" All this while claiming to "Blow up those boxes" and literally putting the massive Sierra-Nevada Region in a NEW BOX!!!
Yes, of course he's totally castrated former state senator, now state assemblyman Tim Leslie who is so COWED HE CAN'T EVEN VOTE FOR OR AGAINST THIS MOCKERY OF A "COMPROMISE!"
My assemblyman representative is totally missing in action, sold down the river and should be instead, lying on the tracks infront of this on-coming malignant train screaming VETO!!! (but he's not) What an abject disgrace!!!
Schwarzenrenneger didn't even have to promise this CONserVACANCY to ANYONE to get elected Governor and should veto it, just like his lesser predecessor did!!! (but he won't)
Just look at the corruption of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy... I rest my case, yer dishonor! Yes, I know I'm in contempt of court, but this conservancy is in contempt of the property owning, but no longer controlling, RURAL PEOPLE OF CA!!!
"Milking Machine of the Taxpaying Cow Owners Whose Votes Don't Count, of the Sierra-Nevada Act!"
lmao BUMP
Geeze, I even committed the sin of forgetting to "Ping" you and you found it anyway! I'm glad you enjoyed the venting of my ample spleen!!! (grin)
Hay! Nice tagline!!!
>>Did ya notice how the 13 member board is skewed toward the political admistration in power
Yep. That is the one thing (other than the geographic description) that I did notice. I'm not familiar with the other projects or agencies. The counties (and voters) truly get screwed on this one.
The idea is simple: they want to turn half of North America into wilderness - off limits to people (except for backpackers and the political elite). I am not making this up, there are pending bills in the U.S. Congress about this. From the official website:
A PARK HERE AND A POND THERE isn’t enough for many kinds of plants and animals. Over the past two decades, biologists have come to understand that we must have bigger protected areas—and we must connect these big areas—to ensure that wildlife has the room it needs to roam, to find food, to mate, to survive.
From the Yukon tundra to the high deserts of Mexico, bears, wolves, native trout, and other wild animals are struggling. The West is being fractured into small slivers. Logging, mining, real estate development, oil and gas drilling are destroying habitat and stranding wildlife in isolated islands of backcountry.
That’s why the Wildlands Project’s team of conservation biologists and partner groups have created maps and plans—from the grand scale down to the local level—that link parks, wilderness areas, and other large areas of protected lands through corridors of connected natural habitat—such as wildlife refuges, state parks, national forests, and local land trust holdings.
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.