BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 31|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 31
Author: De Leon (D), et al
Amended: 8/12/08 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 5-3, 6/25/08
AYES: Steinberg, Kehoe, Kuehl, Machado, Migden
NOES: Hollingsworth, Cogdill, Margett
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 9-5, 8/7/08
AYES: Torlakson, Cedillo, Corbett, Florez, Kuehl, Oropeza,
Ridley-Thomas, Simitian, Yee
NOES: Cox, Aanestad, Ashburn, Dutton, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not relevant
SUBJECT : Statewide Park Development and Community
Revitalization
Act of 2008
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill renames the Urban Park Act of 2006,
the Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization
Act of 2008, and recasts most of its provisions.
ANALYSIS : Under existing law, the 2007-08 Budget Act
includes $14 million from Proposition 84 bond monies for
the administration of a $400 million allocation to the
CONTINUED
AB 31
Page
2
Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) for competitive
grants for local and regional parks.
This bill:
1.Renames the Urban Park Act of 2006, the Statewide Park
Development and Community Revitalization Act of 2008, and
recasts most of its provisions.
2.States that it is the intent of the Legislature, upon
appropriation, that the $400 million made available to
DPR under Proposition 84 to be used to award competitive
grants under this Act. Additionally, this bill specifies
that if there is a conflict between this bill and the
bond, the bond would prevail.
3.Makes a number of legislative findings and declarations
and makes a number of definitions, including one that is
different than that specified by Proposition 84.
4.Specifies some grant criteria that must be included. By
April 1, 2009, DPR would be required to develop
guidelines to develop the newly recast grant program or
develop the procedural guide, which it is also required
to do, for the administration of this chapter. DPR would
be required to solicit written comments and hold public
hearings, as specified, before the guidelines or
procedural guide is adopted.
5.Requires DPR to offer technical assistance to all
applicants and potential applicants for both grant
preparation and project development, as specified, and
authorizes grantees to spend up to 25 percent of the
grant for project planning, design, compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act, and other
incidental costs that are directly related to
construction or acquisition.
6.Authorizes an applicant to apply for a grant to develop
state-owned park lands if the applicant manages those
lands under a contract with the state without state
reimbursement for management costs.
AB 31
Page
3
7.Repeals the section of law that authorizes the use of
grant funds to pay for any portion of the costs of
cleaning up, removing, or remediation any toxic materials
or hazardous substances, if the amount is less than 20
percent of the grant allotment or less than $100,000,
whichever is less.
8.Authorizes a grant recipient to encumber grant monies
within three years of the date of the approval of the
grant and eight years to liquidate.
9.Requires specified information to be posted on DPR's
Internet Web site.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2008-09 2009-10
2010-11 Fund
Program development $268 $268 General
Program implementation4.5 percent of total grant program
DPR estimates it would require about $536,000 to develop
this program and grant administration costs would be about
4.5 percent of the total amount to be awarded to develop
and administer the program costs.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/12/08)
Alianza de los Pueblos del R?o
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees
Amigos de los Rios
Anahuak Youth Soccer Association
ARTScorpsLA
Audubon California
Ballona Network
Beverly Vermont Community Land Trust
California Association of Local Conservation Corps
California Council of Land Trusts
AB 31
Page
4
California League of Conservation Voters
California ReLEAF
California State Horseman's Association
California State Parks Foundation
City of Diamond Bar, Mayor Jack Tanaka
City of Dinuba, Mayor Terry McKittrick, Danny Delgado,
Chair, Dinuba
Parks & Community Services Commission
City of Emeryville
City of Glendale, Director George Chapjian, Parks,
Recreation and
Community Services Department
City of Long Beach
City of Lynwood, Mayor Louis Byrd, Councilwoman Leticia
Vasquez
City of Maywood
City of Oakland
Coalition for Clean Air
Coalition for a Safe Environment
Comite Pro Uno
Communities for a Better Environment
Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas En Norte America
County of Los Angeles
Cultivating Excellence
Defenders of Wildlife
Del Amo Action Committee
Eagle Rockdale Community Garden & Art Park
Earth Day Los Angeles
Eastyard Communities for Environmental Justice
Environment California
Fresno Metropolitan Floor Control District Board of
Directors
Grassroots Coalition
Green LA Coalition
Heal the Bay
Healthy Parks, Healthy Communties, The Trust for Public
Land
Hollywood Chamber of Commerce
Latino Health Access
Latino Urban Forum
League of California Cities
Los Angeles-32 Neighborhood Council
Los Angeles Community Garden Council
Los Angeles Conservation Corps
AB 31
Page
5
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust
Miracle Mile Action Committee
Mujeres de la Tierra
Natural Resources Defense Council
North East Trees
Para los Ni?os
People for Parks
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Planning and Conservation League
Policy Link
Progressive Christians Uniting
River Project
Saint Andrews Square Neighborhood Association
Sierra Club
So CA Watershed Alliance
The Audubon Center at Debs Park
The City Project
The Nature Conservancy
The River Project
Trust for Public Land
Urban Semillas
Verde Coalition
William Vel?zquez Institute
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"AB 31 targets $400 million of Proposition 84 park funds to
underserved communities statewide suffering from
significant park and economic poverty, through a
competitive grants program, administered by the California
Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR). These
communities, largely communities of color, suffer from
higher rates of crime, unemployment, poverty, school
drop-outs, and health ailments, including obesity and
asthma.
"AB 31 seeks to provide essential green spaces to
California's most underserved communities."
CTW:nl 8/12/08 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
AB 31
Page
6
**** END ****