California State Parks Foundation Legislative Tracking Report The California State Parks Foundation closely monitors legislation, takes positions on issues and actively lobbies for and against legislation that would impact California's state parks.  The following bills have been identified as priority bills by CSPF. For information about these bills or CSPF's legislative agenda, contact our Sacramento office at 916-442-2119.    (Last updated 10/13/09) Click on the bill number to access the Bill Information page at www.Leginfo.ca.gov where you can access bill text and a complete history of the bill. You can also "subscribe" to a bill and get email updates whenever the status of the bill changes.   PRIORITY BILLS- PARK PROTECTION  SB 679 (Wolk)  State parks: acquired land: limits on disposition or use. (Vetoed-10/11/2009). Click here for Elizabeth Goldstein's Statement Summary: Preserves the integrity of California's state park system. This bill requires that no land acquired for the state park system may be used for non state park uses without the substitution of other lands of equal value. Senate Bill 679 enacts commonsense provisions that are clear and assert the need to protect the state's investment in the state park system. SB 679 is consistent with policy that exists in Public Resources Code (PRC) 5401. PRC 5401 prohibits governmental bodies from acquiring properties that are currently in use as park properties and using them for non-park properties. However, no statutory protections exist for situations when lands that are already being used for park purposes are being proposed to be used for other park purposes. SB 679 addresses that gap in the law. Position: Support (Sponsor) More Information SB 372 (Kehoe) State parks system: unit modification, adjustment, or removal. (Vetoed-10/11/2009) Click here for Elizabeth Goldstein's Statement Summary: Sets a high bar for protecting state parks from projects or proposals that threaten parks. It requires that any proposed alteration or modification of a state park must get approval from the state Park and Recreation Commission. The Commission would then need to recommend such a change to the state Legislature, which would then be required to affirmatively act to alter or modify that state park. Putting this high bar of protection in place gives the State Park and Recreation Commission a clear tool to continue to assert their authority to help protect our state parks. Position: Support More Information OTHER PRIORITY BILLS  AB 444 (Caballero) Land use: natural resources: transfer of long-term management funds. (Vetoed-10/11/2009) Summary: This bill clarifies that nonprofits can hold the endowments for mitigation properties that have been transferred to them for permanent preservation. CSPF Position: Support AB 1364 (Evans) Public contracts: state bonds: grant agreements. (Chaptered-10/11/2009) Summary: Authorizes granting agencies to amend the terms of contracts to address deadlines and deliverables that may not be met because of current bond freeze. The ''work stoppage'' order/bond freeze, declared on December 17, 2008, has created uncertainty about the ability of state departments and agencies to adjust existing timelines and project deliverables. AB 1364 provides clear authority to all agencies and departments affected by the freeze, in order to allow them to give clarity to their grantees and vendors. Stopping the clock in late December will have significant impacts to many projects, including environmental projects in state parks and throughout California. It is critical that where deadlines and timelines need to be adjusted, the responsible state agencies have the authority to do so. CSPF Position: Support (Sponsor) SB 555 (Kehoe) Eminent Domain Law: conservation easement. (Vetoed-10/11/2009) Summary: Creates protections for other open spaces and already-protected lands in California. The bill prohibits any government body from condemning a conservation easement unless the agency has directly consulted and responded to the easement holder, and has provided clear and convincing evidence that condemning the easement is necessary. Conservation easements are developed and agreed to specifically to protect land and to safeguard against damaging infrastructure proposals. This legislation will reinforce the need for the state to be vigilant in protecting the lands that have already been set aside as open space, wildlife refuges, buffers to state parks and more. CSPF Position: Support