California Assembly Bill AB933

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/19
• Refer: 3/7/19
• Report Pass: 4/1/19
• Refer: 4/2/19
• Report Pass: 4/9/19
• Refer: 4/9/19
• Refer: 4/24/19
• Report Pass: 5/16/19
• Engrossed: 5/23/19
• Refer: 5/24/19
• Refer: 6/6/19
• Report Pass: 7/11/19
• Refer: 7/11/19
• Refer: 8/12/19

Caption

Ecosystem resilience: watershed protection: watershed coordinators.

Impact

The passage of AB 933 is anticipated to have a substantial impact on state laws related to resource management by formalizing efforts to protect and improve watershed systems. The bill mandates the development of performance measures and accountability controls to evaluate the progress of funded initiatives. It also requires the Department of Conservation to report to the legislature on the outcomes of these efforts every three years, thereby promoting transparency and ongoing adaptation of the initiative as needed. This structured approach underscores the commitment of the state to fostering healthy ecosystems that can withstand the pressures of climate change while supporting local communities.

Summary

Assembly Bill 933, introduced by Assembly Member Petrie-Norris, is focused on enhancing ecosystem resilience through watershed protection in California. The bill aims to establish the Ecosystem Resilience Program under the Department of Conservation to fund the hiring of watershed coordinators and other necessary costs for watershed management. With an emphasis on cooperation among diverse local stakeholders, the program seeks to coordinate efforts to improve watershed health and implement regionally tailored management plans aligned with statewide environmental objectives. Legislators recognize the critical role watersheds play in supplying water and sustaining biodiversity, especially amidst challenges posed by climate change.

Sentiment

General sentiment around AB 933 appears to be positive, with many recognizing the long-term benefits that effective watershed management could bring. Supporters, including various environmental advocacy groups and local stakeholders, argue that investing in watershed coordinators will yield significant returns on investment, enhancing local engagement and awareness. However, concerns were raised regarding the adequacy of funding and resources necessary to ensure the success of the initiative, with some representatives advocating for greater attention to potential local adaptation needs, emphasizing that each watershed is unique and requires specific strategies.

Contention

Notable points of contention involved fears that simply establishing the Ecosystem Resilience Program might not sufficiently address the complexities of watershed management across different geographies. Critics expressed worries about the program's scalability and effectiveness, particularly in measuring real impacts on ecosystem health and local water quality. The requirement for public hearings to discuss guideline adoption was seen as a positive step towards inclusivity, but there were calls for clearer directives on how local governments would be supported in implementing the program effectively, raising questions about the equitable distribution of resources across California's diverse regions.