AgdaPkt 2002-05-20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Legislative Bill Action SB 1949 (Soto). Water Board. Ex Parte Commu- portions of a_jurisdiction's NPDES storm water permit nications. SB 1949 establishes much-needed ground that cover the same issues as the requirements in SB rules governing communications between the public 1916 could be used to satisfy those requirements. and members of the State Water Resources Control issues not included in the storm water permit would Board and members of the nine Regional Water still need to be addressed. The League is working Quality Boards on a variety of issues, including with the author's office to refine the language for this development of regulations and policy, enforcement amendment and to suggest additional technical and permitting. Currently, any communication changes to the bill. Staff: Yvonne Hunter, Status: between these board members and the public (includ- SenApps, Position: Support if Amended. ing city officials), known as ex parte communication, is generally prohibited. Instead, SB 1949 permits ex SB 1342 (Morrow). Storm Water Permits. parte communications under certain circumstances, as Maximum Extent Practicable Standard. SB 1342 long as they are fully disclosed. Similar ex par~e generally requires that storm water permits issued by communication are permitted between the public and regional water quality control boards be consistent the Coastal Commission and the California Integrated with the maximum extent practicable (MEP) standard Waste Management Board, without any negative included in the federal Clean Water Act. The bill failed consequences. Rather, such communication fosters passage last week in the Senate Environmental Quality better understanding of issues, a reasonable ex- Committee, but was granted reconsideration. Never- change of perspectives, and more informed decisions theless, it is likely that the bill will face the same fate by the members. Cities frustrated by the current ex at its next hearing. However, because of the signifi- parte constraints for communication with state or cance of this issue to cities, SB 1342 is important regional water board members should send letters to because it brought the issue of MEP and storm water the author, their Senators and members of the Senate program implementation to light within the legislative Appropriations Committee. Staff: Yvonne Hunter, arena. The League thanks Senator Morrow for intro- Status: SenApps, Position: Support. ducing this and other storm water related bills. Staff: Yvonne Hunter, Status: SenEnvQual, Position: Sup- SB 1916 (Figueroa). Local Coastal Plans. Non port. Point Pollution Prevention. ~ 1916 requires a new local coastal plan (LCP) submitted to the California PUBLIC SAFETY Coastal Commission for approval, or a major amend- ment to an existing LCP submitted to the Commission AB 1815 (Frommer). State Bonds. Anti- Terrorism. AB 1815 enacts the California Homeland for approval, to include a nonpoint pollution preven- tion element. The goal of SB 1915 is to address Defense Bonds Act of 2002, and would thereby nonpoint pollution prevention in the planning phases authorize the State Treasurer to issue up to $500 of a prOJect by including such a program in a million in "homeland defense bonds" to fund antiter- ~jurisdiction's LCP. rorism activities of local public safety and emergency services agencies. Staff: Natasha Fooman, Status: After review by the Coastal Subcommittee of the AsApps, Position: Support. League's Environmental Quality Policy Committee, and subsequent concurrence by the League Board of AB 1983 (Dickerson). Wild Land Fuel Reduc- Directors, the League notified the author that we tion. AB 1983 establishes a Fuel Hazard Reduction would support the bill if it is amended. The amend- (FHR) Program at the Department of Forestry and Fire merit requested by the League would clarify that those Protection (CDF) to award competitive grants to encourage the development and use of wild land fuel PAGE 8/PRIORR'Y FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site--www. cacities.org