The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12. (Handout) Priority Legislation Tracking Sheet and attachments Central San 2020 Priority Legislative Tracking Sheet as of 2/19/20 Attachment 1 Federal/ Industry Position Date of Board Author Legislation Also Known As Summary Organization(s) Priority Recommended by Board Notes State Decision List/Position Staff Direction & 1 State Gloria AB 2093 Public records: This bill will require all public agencies to Oppose: California Oppose 02/20/20 2/5/20 Bill introduced. 2/19/20 CSDA requested a D-San Diego writing transmitted maintain all transmitted emails related to Special Districts Call to Action from member agencies. by electronic mail: agency business for at least two years. This Association (CSDA) retention bill is identical to last year's AB 1184 (Gloria) that the Governor vetoed and which the Department of Finance commented "[t]he retention of non-pertinent e-mails and the need to search through those e-mails, particularly for less specific CPRA requests, increases the amount of time needed to complete CPRA requests. This makes compliance with the CPRA more difficult in these instances and produces worse outcomes for persons and entities submitting those requests [emphases added]." 2 State Proposed Bond California's The support letter requests between $750 Support: WateReuse CA No position 02/20/20 2/18/20 The first hearing for the Governor's Measure Climate Bond(s) million and $1 billion in grants and low climate bond is Feb. 26, WateReuse requested interest loans for water recycling funding Call to Action by COB Feb 20. depending on which climate resilience bond moves forward. The support letter also requests the funding be administered by the Water Board's existing Water Recycling Funding program. 3 State Hertzberg SB 1052 Stormwater This bill authorizes municipal wastewater Co-sponsored:California Support 03/05/20 1/23/20 Unanimous decision by CASA Legislative D-Van Nuys Capture and agencies to enter into voluntary agreements Association of Sanitation Committee to move forward with compromise bill Diversion with entities responsible for stormwater Agencies (CASA) and with Hertzberg. 2/18/20 Bill Introduced. Authority management— including municipal, California Coastkeeper industrial, and commercial stormwater Alliance dischargers—to more effectively manage stormwater and dry weather runoff. The bill' supplements the existing authority of all municipal wastewater agencies to enter into projects to divert and treat stormwater and dry weather runoff. Any agreement, project, or use of this authority is completely voluntary for all entities involved. The bill will therefore promote regional interagency cooperation, improve water quality, and make efficient use of publicly owned infrastructure by removing onerous barriers that prevent stormwater capture, treatment and recycling. Central San 2020 Priority Legislative Tracking Sheet as of 2/19/20 Attachment 1 Federal/ Industry Position Date of Board Author Legislation Also Known As Summary Organization(s) Priority Recommended by Board Notes State Decision List/Position Staff Direction 4 State Mullin (Assembly AB 1509 Solid waste: This bill would establish theLithium-Ion Co-sponsored: California Support 03/05/20 2/19/20 Two year bill that will be carried over to Speaker pro Tem) lithium-ion Battery Recycling Program in the Department Product Stewardship 2020 legislative session. D-San Mateo batteries of Resources Recycling and Recovery. The Council (CPSC), South bill would require a manufacturer to provide a Bayside Waste list of products and amount sold to the state. Management Authority, The bill would define "covered product" to and Californians Against mean a lithium-ion battery sold separately or Waste sold with a product. The bill would require the manufacturer to meet specified collection and recycling rates and establish a stewardship program for these batteries. 5 State Bloom AB 1672 Nonwoven This bill would require, commencing January Co-Sponsored: CASA Support 03/05/20 1/23/20 - Two year bill reintroduced in agreement D-Santa Monica disposable 1, 2021, certain nonwoven disposal products and National Stewardship with wipes industry. products to be labeled clearly and conspicuously to Action Council (NSAC) communicate that they should not be flushed, as specified. The bill would prohibit a covered entity, from making a representation about the flushable attributes, benefits, performance, or efficacy of those nonwoven disposal products, as provided. The bill would establish enforcement provisions, including authorizing a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500 per violation to be imposed on a person who violates the bill's provisions. Central San 2020 Priority Legislative Tracking Sheet as of 2/19/20 Attachment 1 Federal/ Industry Position Date of Board Author Legislation Also Known As Summary Organization(s) Priority Recommended by Board Notes State Decision List/Position Staff Direction 6 State Bloom SB 424 Tobacco This bill would require the manufacturer of a Sponsor: NSAC Support 03/05/20 Support 2/19/20 Bill will return as two year bill. Not yet D-Santa Monica products: single- tobacco product to use materials eligible for reintroduced - note some language may change. use and multiuse recycling under state or local recycling programs, including electronic waste recycling programs, to make any reusable component of the tobacco product, or, alternatively, if certain conditions are met, to collect reusable components that are not eligible for recycling through a take-back or mail-back program, as provided. The bill would define "reusable component" to mean a multiuse cigarette filter or a multiuse electronic cigarette that is designed to work for at least one year with daily use. The bill would require a manufacturer to collect reusable components that are household hazardous waste, and send those components to the appropriate recycler, or to reimburse household hazardous waste collection facilities, for the costs of collecting and recycling those reusable components. Enforcement: administrative penalty, on a manufacturer that is in violation of these provisions. 7 State Allen SB 54 (paired California Circular SB 54/AB 1080 establish a comprehensive Support 03/05/20 Support 2/19/20 Bill will return as two year bill. Not yet D-Santa Monica bill is AB 1080) Economy and framework to address the pollution and waste reintroduced Skinner Plastic Pollution crisis. Specifically, single-use plastic D-Berkeley Reduction Act packaging and products sold or distributed in Stern California by must be reduced, recycled or D-Canoga Park composted by 75 percent by 2030. All single- Wiener use packaging and products must be D-San Francisco recyclable or compostable on and after 2030. As part of a shift towards a more circular economy, the bills also instructs CalRecycle to develop incentives and policies to encourage in-state manufacturing using recycled material generated in California. CalRecycle will be given authority to adopt regulations to meet these goals, including developing criteria to determine which packaging material qualifies as recyclable or compostable. Central San 2020 Priority Legislative Tracking Sheet as of 2/19/20 Attachment 1 Federal/ Industry Position Date of Board Author Legislation Also Known As Summary Organization(s) Priority Recommended by Board Notes State Decision List/Position Staff Direction 8 Federal Senator Udall S. (not yet Break Free From The bill requires producers of covered Support: CASA, NSAC Support 03/05/20 Support 2/19/20 Bill introduced. (D-New Mexico) assigned) Plastic Pollution products to finance programs to collect and Representative Act process the product waste and implement Lowenthal (D-CA) cleanup programs with EPA approval. The bill would create a 10-cent national refund program for all beverage containers regardless of material. Beginning January 2022 it would begin to phase out single-use plastic products, and impose a fee on carryout bags. It would create a national standard for recycled content, and protect existing state action. CASA included language that includes wipes as part of the bill. [Your Agency's Letterhead (REQUIRED)] [Date] The Honorable Todd Gloria California State Assembly State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: Assembly Bill 2093 (Gloria) — Oppose [As Introduced] Dear Assembly Member Gloria: The [Name of Your Agency] is respectfully opposed to your Assembly Bill 2093, which will require all public agencies to maintain all transmitted emails related to agency business for at least two years. [Include a brief description of your agency, particularly the services it provides (optional)]. To be clear, this is not a transparency bill, it is a data storage bill. The public will have no greater access to public records under AB 2093, nor will they have less. This bill creates no new disclosures or exemptions of records. This bill only mandates that public agencies retain all emails related to agency business for two years and avoids the constitutionally-required mandate subvention process declaring that the provisions of the bill are in furtherance of the California Public Records Act (CPRA). While this measure is intended to improve public access to government records, in practice it will merely increase the burdens for both public agencies and CPRA requesters. The vast majority of emails consist of auto-replies, spam, and insignificant routine communications of minimal public interest. As the bulk of these emails increases, the burden to search through them and locate responsive records in the event of a CPRA request rises accordingly. Under the CPRA, the requester may be required to bear the cost of this data extraction - and indiscriminately mandating that emails be retained will thus make CPRA requests more expensive, perversely impeding public access. Moreover, for those costs that cannot be passed on to the requester, the public agency has no source for reimbursement, and must divert funds from other public programs. Compelling public agencies to retain masses of routine emails -which neither the sender nor recipient otherwise thought important enough to save - imposes significant burdens on all concerned for minimal public benefit. This point is corroborated by the Department of Finance's analysis of AB 1184 (Gloria, 2019), a bill that is completely identical to AB 2093 that was vetoed by Governor Newsom. In their analysis of AB 1184, the Department of Finance wrote that "[t]he retention of non-pertinent e-mails and the need to search through those e-mails, particularly for less specific CPRA requests, increases the amount of time needed to complete CPRA requests. This makes compliance with the CPRA more difficult in these instances and produces worse outcomes for persons and entities submitting those requests [emphases added]." To further underscore this point, the Governor's veto message of AB 1184 read "[t]his bill does not strike the appropriate balance between the benefits of greater transparency through the public's access to public records, and the burdens of a dramatic increase in records-retention requirements, including associated personnel and data-management costs to taxpayer." AB 2093 (Gloria)—Oppose Page 2 of 2 AB 2093 will add millions of dollars in costs annually to the state and local agencies, including school districts. Public agencies will be forced to pay for additional data storage space as well as hire additional staff to sort through the millions of emails that are exempt from disclosure under the CPRA but mandated to be retained under AB 2093 in order to respond to public records act requests. Without the ability to be reimbursed for this costly unfunded mandate, public agencies will be forced to either raise fees and taxes or cut services to the communities they serve. It is for these reasons that the [Name of Your Agency] must respectfully oppose AB 2093 (Gloria). Should you have any questions about our position, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, [Name of Responsible Officer] [Title] [Name of Your Agency] CC: Raquel Mason, Legislative Assistant, Office of Assembly Member Todd Gloria [Raquel.mason@asm.ca.gov] Dillon Gibbons, Senior Legislative Representative, California Special Districts Association [advocacy@csda.net] WAT USE CALIFORNIA Climate Resilience MajorRecycled Water California'sWater recycling is a sustainable,drought proof source of supply that is climate resilient and prominently featured in the Governor's 2020 Water Resilience Portfolio. • • 1 million to billion in fundingfor grants and low interest loans. SupplyFunding Needs and Water Potential billion waiting list of g projects at the State Water Board. • A recent WateReuse California survey shows more than $10 billion in planned reuse projects statewide. These projects will double recycled water use in Californiaby 1 1/35—enough water to serve more than 4 million • • • Funding for Recycled Water Water Recycling in California Should Be Administered by the State Water Board 2,500,000 Stand-alone funding for water recycling through the State Board's existing Water Recycling Funding 2,000,000 Program is crucial. v Q 1,500,000 ,; Projected Recycled ,523 20-year successful funding program; Water Use 2030/35 v V Q Includes low interest loans,which 1,000,000 through repayment creates ongoing funding source for reuse; Includes planning and recycled water 500,000 "' 2015 Recycled Water Use research component; Timely delivery of projects—$650 Omillion in Prop 1 funding within a year of legislative appropriation. WateReuse California I Jennifer West,Managing Director JWest@watereuse.org 916.669.8401 main 916.496.1470 cell February 18, 2020 Toni Atkins Anthony Rendon Senate President pro Tempore Speaker, California State Assembly State Capitol Room 205 State Capitol, Room 319 Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 Shannon Grove Marie Waldron Senate Minority Leader Assembly Minority Leader State Capitol Room 305 State Capitol Room 3014 Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 RE: Support for$750 million-$1 billion in Climate Resilience Bond Stand-Alone Water Recycling Dear pro Tem Atkins, Speaker Rendon, Leader Grove, and Leader Waldron, WateReuse California (WRCA) and the undersigned agencies strongly urge inclusion of$750 million to $1 billion in grants and low interest loans as a stand-alone allocation to be administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in the final climate resilience bond. The Draft Water Resilience Portfolio correctly identified that "recycled water is a sustainable, nearly drought-proof supply when used efficiently, and the total volume of water California recycles today could triple in the next decade."To meet state goals of reusing 2.5 million acre feet of water in the next decade,funding is needed. There is currently a waiting list of water recycling projects at the SWRCB totaling$3 billion, and a recent WRCA survey found that more than $10 billion in planned reuse projects are in various stages of planning and will need funding.These projects will increase recycled water use in California by 2030- 35—creating enough water for four million households. We are very supportive of the current water recycling program administered by the SWRCB. For over 20 years,the SWRCB has successfully administered the program, which is a combination of grants AND loans.The loan program helps create an ongoing funding source through repayment.The SWRCB was able to administer$650 million from Prop 1 within one year of legislative appropriation.The program works, leverages the funding with a combination of grants and loans, and can get the funding out the door quickly. Based on the demonstrated value and need for recycled water,we respectfully request inclusion of$750 million to$1 billion in a stand-alone program for recycled water to continue to be administered by the SWRCB. Please don't hesitate to contact WateReuse California Managing Director,Jennifer West (jwest@wateresue.org), if you have any questions or need more information. Sincerely, cc: Senator Bob Wieckowski, Chair Senate Budget Sub 2 Senator Brian Jones, Senate Budget Sub 2,Vice Chair Sen. Natural Resources and Water Comm Senator Henry Stern, Chair, Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee Assemblymember Richard Bloom, Chair Assembly Budget Sub 3 Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia, Chair Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Comm Assemblymember Megan Dahle, Chair Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Comm Assemblymember Laura Friedman, Chair Assembly Natural Resources Committee Assemblymember Heath Flora, Vice Chair Assembly Natural Resources Committee Director Kate Gordon, Office of Planning and Research Rachel Machi Wagoner, Deputy Legislative Secretary