HI, EVERYONE. HOW'S EVERYONE
DOING? NOW? YOU ALL CAN HEAR ME,
RIGHT? GREAT. OKAY, PERFECT.
GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU ALL SO
MUCH FOR COMING AND TO THE
HEARING TODAY. AND FOR THOSE OF
YOU THAT ARE WATCHING ONLINE AS
WELL AS MY COLLEAGUES, MANY OF
WHOM SCOTT WIENER, SENATOR RENO
HAD TO TRAVEL FROM, FROM
UPSTAIRS TO COME ALL THE WAY
DOWN HERE. FOLKS FROM SAN DIEGO,
EAST BAY, OTHER PARTS OF THE
DISTRICT, ORANGE COUNTY. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE TODAY
ON THIS. AND I SHOULD ALSO SAY
WE HAD A TOUR THIS MORNING WITH
A FERRY THAT TOOK US AROUND THE
BAY LOOKING AT HOW THE
CHALLENGES AROUND PERMITTING AS
IT PERTAINS TO ENSURING WE CAN
HAVE CLIMATE RESILIENCY, THAT
WE'RE THOUGHTFULLY DEVELOPING
OUR SHORELINE IN A WAY THAT IS
STICKS TO OUR ENVIRONMENTAL
GOALS WHILE STILL ALLOWING FOR
US TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT
CAN ADJUST TO THE POTENTIAL SEA
LEVEL RISE THAT WE BELIEVE WILL
BE COMING, WHILE STILL ALLOWING
FOR HOUSING AND ALL THE OTHER
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO
ACCOMMODATE OUR WORKING CLASS
FAMILIES HERE IN CALIFORNIA. SO
THE TOUR WAS VERY EYE OPENING
FOR MANY OF US. I KNOW WE'RE
GOING TO BE JOINED BY OTHER
COLLEAGUES AS WELL, AND I KNOW
SOME FOLKS HAVE TO LEAVE EARLY.
EVERYONE'S GOT A LOT ON THEIR
PLATE TODAY, SO WE'RE JUST GOING
TO GET STARTED. THIS IS THE
SECOND HEARING OF THE ASSEMBLY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON PERMITTING
REFORM. I'M THE CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS BUFFY
WICKS. I REPRESENT THE EAST BAY,
OAKLAND, BERKELEY, RICHMOND
AREA. AND THIS THIS HEARING IS
FOCUSED ON PERMITTING REFORM TO
FACILITATE CLIMATE RESILIENCY.
AS I MENTIONED, WE'LL BE HAVING
OTHER HEARINGS AS WELL, FOCUSED
ON OTHER AREAS AS IT PERTAINS TO
PERMITTING REFORM. WE'RE GOING
TO DO A TRANSPORTATION AND
HOUSING HEARING IN LOS ANGELES.
AND THEN ONE FOCUSED ON
RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS. IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AS WELL A
LOCATION TBD. BUT WE WOULD
WELCOME ATTENDANCE AT THOSE AS
WELL, IF NOT IN PERSON, THEN
REMOTELY. BUT THIS ONE IS
FOCUSED ON CLIMATE RESILIENCY.
AS WE ALL KNOW, CLIMATE CHANGE
IS HAPPENING QUICKLY. I'M NOT
GOING TO SHARE ALL THE
TERRIFYING FACTS, BUT JUST A FEW
TO GET US SET. SET THE STAGE FOR
TODAY. THE TEMPERATURE IN MUCH
OF THE STATE HAS ALREADY GONE UP
BY TWO DEGREES, AND IS EXPECTED
TO GO UP BY FIVE DEGREES BY
MID-CENTURY AND UP NINE DEGREES
AT THE END OF THE CENTURY. SEA
LEVEL RISE IS EXPECTED TO BE 3
TO 10FT AND CAUSE UP TO $230
BILLION IN DAMAGE IN JUST THE
BAY AREA. THE SIERRA SNOWPACK IS
EXPECTED TO GO DOWN BY ONE THIRD
IN 20 BY 2050, AND THE NUMBER OF
ACRES BURNED ANNUALLY DUE TO
WILDFIRE IS UP 250% FROM JUST 30
YEARS AGO. AND TO AVOID THE
WORST ASPECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE,
WE NEED TO REMOVE UP TO 9
BILLION TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE
FROM THE ATMOSPHERE EVERY SINGLE
YEAR. CARBON SEQUESTRATION
COMPANIES ARE DEVELOPING
TECHNOLOGY HERE, RIGHT HERE IN
SAN FRANCISCO, AND THEN
DEPLOYING THEM ELSEWHERE BECAUSE
OF THE PERMITTING CHALLENGES
THAT WE ARE FACED WITH HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. IT TOOK TEN YEARS TO
PERMIT THE SITES RESERVOIR, EVEN
AFTER IT WAS FUNDED. AND YOU
HEAR THAT STORY A LOT. THE
PERMITTING CAN TAKE DECADES TO
BE ABLE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE
CHALLENGES. THE EXPANSION OF THE
LOS VAQUEROS RESERVOIR IN CONTRA
COSTA COUNTY WAS RECENTLY
SCRAPPED, AS RISING COSTS MADE
THE PROJECT ECONOMICALLY
UNATTAINABLE. THE PROJECT'S COST
HAD GROWN FROM $900,000,980
MILLION IN 2017 TO NEARLY 1.6
BILLION DUE TO INFLATION,
INFLATION AND SCHEDULING DELAYS.
OFTEN, THOSE SCHEDULING DELAYS
COME DOWN TO THE ISSUES AROUND
PERMITTING, AS THE PARENT OF A
FOUR YEAR OLD AND A SEVEN YEAR
OLD, THIS IS THE STUFF THAT
KEEPS ME UP AT NIGHT. IS OUR
GOVERNMENT SERVING THE NEEDS OF
OUR PEOPLE? AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT
THE WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE IN TERMS
OF BEING ABLE TO ADJUST TO THE
NEW CLIMATE REALITY, I DON'T
THINK WE'RE DOING IT AS GOOD AS
WE CAN TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN
A CHALLENGING CLIMATE.
CALIFORNIA IS GOING TO NEED TO
BUILD A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN
THE COMING YEARS. WALLS AND
PIPES AND CATCH BASIN AREAS TO
ADDRESS SEA LEVEL RISE AND
FLOODING, DAMS AND RESERVOIRS
AND RECHARGE BASINS TO ADDRESS
DROUGHT CONDITIONS. NEW WAYS OF
MANAGING OUR FORESTS AND
ENVIRONMENT. TO DEAL WITH BOTH
OF THESE CONDITIONS AND
EMBRACING AND DEPLOYING NEW
TECHNOLOGIES TO REDUCE AND
PROACTIVELY REMOVE CARBON FROM
THE ATMOSPHERE. TO BUILD THE
INFRASTRUCTURE WE NEED, WE'RE
GOING TO NEED TO GET BETTER AT
BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE. RIGHT
NOW, WE ARE NOT SO GOOD WHEN IT
COMES TO PERMITTING
INFRASTRUCTURE. MOST OF OUR
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES ARE
DESIGNED TO BE EXTREMELY
CUMBERSOME, OPAQUE AND FRANKLY,
SORT OF SET UP TO GET TO KNOW.
THAT IS, THE STATUS QUO IS WHAT
RULES THE DAY. OFTEN WHEN IT
COMES TO BUILDING NEW
INFRASTRUCTURE. IT'S
UNDERSTANDABLE. A LOT OF THAT
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT WAS
DESIGNED IN A DIFFERENT ERA WHEN
THERE WAS WIDESPREAD SUPPORT FOR
SLOWING DOWN THE STATE'S RAPID
GROWTH AND THE OUTSIZED OUTSIDE
CONDITIONS WEREN'T CHANGING AS
RAPIDLY AS THEY ARE NOW. BUT
THESE PERMITTING REGIMES WERE
NOT SET UP TO ADDRESS EXISTING
CRISIS WE NOW FACE, INCLUDING
RAPID CLIMATE CHANGE, TO ADDRESS
THE PROBLEM WE HAVE NOW. OUR
PERMITTING SYSTEM MUST BECOME
EASY, TRANSPARENT AND DESIGNED
TO GET TO. YES, THE COST OF
INACTION IS JUST TOO HIGH. THE
COST OF INACTION INCLUDES
TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DAMAGES
FROM SEA LEVEL RISE AND
FLOODING, WILDFIRE AND EXTREME
HEAT. AND WHO BEARS THE BRUNT OF
THESE COSTS? THE MILLIONS OF LOW
INCOME HOUSEHOLDS THAT CANNOT
AFFORD TO CRANK THE AC HIGHER OR
PAY HIGHER WATER BILLS, OR JUST
MOVE TO MOVE ALTOGETHER, MOVE.
ALSO BEARING THE BRUNT ARE ALL
THE ANIMAL AND PLANT SPECIES
THAT ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING
BECAUSE OF MAN MADE CHANGES TO
THEIR HABITATS. THAT'S WHY I
THINK THE WORK OF PERMITTING
REFORM TO FACILITATE CLIMATE
RESILIENCY IS INHERENTLY
EQUITABLE AND PRO-ENVIRONMENT.
TODAY, WE'LL BE HEARING FROM AN
ARRAY OF EXPERTS AND
PRACTITIONERS WHO WILL SPEAK TO
PERMITTING REFORM NEEDS TO
ADDRESS THE SEA LEVEL RISE AND
FLOODING. AND MR. TING IS
JOINING US AS WELL. THANK YOU.
PREPARE FOR DROUGHT CONDITIONS
AND FACILITATE THE REDUCTION AND
REMOVAL OF ATMOSPHERIC CARBON.
WHILE THESE FOLKS WILL COVER A
WIDE RANGE OF TOPICS, WE
RECOGNIZE THAT THEY WILL NOT
COVER EVERY ISSUE THAT IS
IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE. AND WHILE
WE MIGHT HEAR SOME HERE HEAR OF
SOME USEFUL CHANGES, THIS SELECT
COMMITTEE IS NOT PURPORTING TO
COME UP WITH ALL THE ANSWERS.
HOPEFULLY SOME OF THEM THOUGH,
BUT MAYBE NOT ALL OF THEM. THE
RANGE OF ISSUES AND ANSWERS IS
MUCH BROADER THAN ANYTHING WE
COULD HAVE TAKEN ON WITH JUST
THIS ONE COMMITTEE. BUT WHAT I'M
HOPING WE ACCOMPLISH TODAY AND
THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, IS TO
HIGHLIGHT THE FUNDAMENTAL NEED
TO CHANGE HOW WE GO ABOUT DOING
BUSINESS FROM ONE THAT'S
DESIGNED TO GET TO KNOW, TO ONE
THAT IS DESIGNED TO GET TO. YES,
IT'S MORE OF A WAY OF THINKING
THAN ANYTHING ELSE. WE'VE HEARD
THAT THIS IS ALREADY HAPPENING
IN A LOT OF PLACES. THE NATURAL
RESOURCES AGENCY CUTTING GREEN
TAPE INITIATIVE THAT WE HEARD
ABOUT IN OUR FIRST HEARING IN
JUNE, BUT THERE'S MORE WORK TO
BE DONE. THERE'S LOTS MORE WORK
TO BE DONE. THIS IS HARD WORK.
STRUCTURAL CHANGE ALWAYS IS. BY
SHINING A LIGHT ON THE ISSUE OF
PERMITTING REFORM, MY HOPE IS
THAT WE CAN SPEED UP THAT
PROCESS, ENCOURAGING THOSE
ALREADY MAKING CHANGE AND
MOTIVATING THOSE THAT HAVE NOT
STARTED YET. WE HAVE TO GET THIS
DONE. WE HAVE TO GET IT DONE
RIGHT, AND WE HAVE TO GET IT
DONE SOON, BECAUSE WE KNOW
CLIMATE CHANGE IS COMING. WITH
THAT, I WANT TO FIRST OFFER
REMARKS BY MY COLLEAGUES AGAIN,
SOME OF WHOM MAY HAVE TO LEAVE
EARLY. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE
GET THEM ON THE RECORD. AND
AGAIN, I THINK OTHERS MIGHT BE
JOINING. SO I'M HAPPY TO TAKE
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS FROM ANY
OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE
INTERESTED. WE HAVE MR. WARD.
WHY DON'T YOU GO FIRST? THANK
YOU, MISS WICKS. MADAM CHAIR, I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE INVITATION
TO BE HERE IN SAN FRANCISCO.
COMING FROM SAN DIEGO, IT'S BEEN
NICE TO BE ABLE TO COME UP HERE
AND BE ABLE TO SEE SOME OF THE
PROJECTS, SOME OF THE VISION WE
HAVE FOR THE BAY, SOME OF THE
IMPORTANT WORK THAT NEEDS TO GET
DONE. AND AS THE ASSEMBLY'S
HOUSING CHAIR, I KNOW THAT
WORKING ON, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF
DIFFERENT AREAS OF SOLUTIONS
THAT WE NEED ON PERMITTING
REFORM IS ONE THAT IS GOING TO
BE ABLE TO HELP US SORT OF
ANSWER SOME KEY QUESTIONS,
REALLY GOING BACK TO THE DRAWING
BOARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS
NECESSARY WITHOUT, YOU KNOW,
INTERRUPTING OR WITHOUT
DISRUPTING, YOU KNOW, KEY KIND
OF ENVIRONMENTAL OR OTHER OTHER,
OTHER AREAS OF REVIEW THAT WE
NEED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE FOR
THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR
SURROUNDING AREA, THAT WE'RE
WE'RE BEING, YOU KNOW,
THOUGHTFUL ABOUT DEVELOPMENT,
BUT WE KNOW WE NEED TO DO A LOT
MORE. AND THE ISSUE OF
PERMITTING REFORM CERTAINLY IS
NOT LIMITED TO THE SUBJECT AREA
OF HOUSING, WORKING ON
INFRASTRUCTURE, WORKING ON
CLIMATE RELATED SOLUTIONS. AS
YOU'VE, YOU KNOW, OUTLINED AS
WELL, IS SOMETHING THAT IS A KEY
PRIORITY OF MINE AND IMPORTANT
TO THE SAN DIEGO REGION AS WELL.
SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO ALL
THE PRESENTERS HERE TODAY TO BE
ABLE TO HEAR ABOUT WHAT'S COMING
DOWN THE PIPELINE, WHAT THE
EXPERIENCES HAVE REALLY BEEN
TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE
REGULATORY PROCESS SO THAT WE
CAN HAVE A CRITICAL REVIEW OF AS
WE HEAD BACK TO THE NEXT
SESSION, WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO
BE ABLE TO MORE EFFICIENTLY BE
ABLE TO GET FROM A TO Z, WHILE
NOT COMPROMISING SOME OF OUR
OTHER SHARED VALUES TOO. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR. GRAYSON.
THANK YOU, CHAIR WIX. DELIGHTED
TO BE HERE. AND QUICKLY, BECAUSE
I DO WANT TO GET INTO THE
MEETING AS WELL. AND HOPEFULLY
IT'S NOT TOO FAR OFF TOPIC.
HOWEVER, PERMITTING REFORM IS
DESPERATELY, DESPERATELY NEEDED,
ESPECIALLY WHEN GREEN AND CLEAN
ENERGY AND MANUFACTURING RISE UP
WITHIN JURISDICTIONS. AND THEN
THEY ACTUALLY GET A SEQUEL
APPROVAL AND THEN A LOCAL
JURISDICTION OR SOMEONE LIKE
THAT WOULD TAKE THAT PROJECT AND
USE IT TO BENEFIT THEMSELVES IN
THE SENSE OF ADD ONS. WHAT WE
CALL ADD ONS TO THE PERMIT. AND
THAT WAS VERY COSTLY IN THE
SENSE THAT A COMPANY WOULD WOULD
RISE UP AND ACTUALLY CLEAN
ENERGY SECTORS AND THEN GET
CAUGHT UP WITH A PROJECT THAT
DOESN'T PENCIL OUT BECAUSE OF
COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT ARE
BEING DEMANDED OF IN ORDER TO
GIVE A PERMIT. SO AGAIN, NOT
TRYING TO BE OFF TOPIC, MAYBE
RANTING JUST A LITTLE BIT, BUT
I'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS IN
THE PAST FEW MONTHS AND WEEKS
THAT INVOLVE PROJECTS THAT WOULD
HAVE CLEARLY PENCILED, THAT
WOULD HAVE CLEARLY HELPED US
REACH OUR CLIMATE GOALS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT CAN'T GET
THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS
BECAUSE OF LOCAL OBSTACLES AND
SO LOOKING FOR A WAY TO CREATE
PATHWAYS THROUGH THOSE OBSTACLES
SO THEY DON'T GET CAUGHT UP IN
THE FRAY. THANK YOU, MR. CARILLO.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I DO
REPRESENT THE HIGH DESERT IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. I'M EAGER
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE
CHALLENGES THAT YOU HAVE HERE IN
THE BAY AREA AND ALONG THE
COASTLINE AND THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. FOR US, WE HAVE DIFFERENT
CHALLENGES. CERVANTES IN THE
DESERT. NEVERTHELESS, I'M HERE
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE
CHALLENGES THAT YOU ARE FACING
HERE IN THE BAY AREA AND LOOKING
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EVERYONE
HERE TO FIND THE SOLUTIONS TO
GET THE RESOURCES THAT YOU NEED.
THANK YOU. AND IT SHOULD ALSO BE
NOTED, MR. CARILLO AS CHAIR OF
OUR LOCAL GOVT COMMITTEE, WHICH
IS GOING TO SERVE AS AN
IMPORTANT ROLE IN THIS WORK THAT
WE DO. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE, MISS QUIRK-SILVA. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. PLEASED TO BE
UP HERE. THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL
AREA AND FINALLY HAVE A LITTLE
FALL WEATHER. BUT AS WE HAVE
NOTED, THE TEMPERATURES HAVE
BEEN EXTREMELY HOT. WE DON'T
HAVE TO BE WAITING FOR CLIMATE
CHANGE TO HAPPEN. WE ARE ALREADY
EXPERIENCING IT, NOT ONLY HERE
IN CALIFORNIA, BUT ACROSS REALLY
THE WORLD. I THINK ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD FROM MY
LOCAL GOVERNMENT DAYS NOW, TEN
YEARS INTO THE ASSEMBLY, IS
SIMPLY HOW DO WE CUT THROUGH THE
RED TAPE AND WE CAN CALL IT
GREEN TAPE OR RED TAPE, BUT WE
KNOW THAT PROJECTS
INFRASTRUCTURE ARE TAKING TOO
LONG AND THE LONGER WE WAIT FOR
THESE MAJOR INVESTMENTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE, THE LONGER WE'RE
KICKING THE BALL DOWN, NOT ONLY
FOR HOUSING, BUT OF COURSE, WHAT
WE SAW THIS MORNING WITH RIGHT
THERE IN THE BAY WITH EROSION.
AND SO FORTH. SO I THINK IT'S
EXCITING TO BE HERE AND ACTUALLY
BE OUT ON THE BAY AND SEE
EXAMPLES OF HOW WE CAN DO THIS
WITH ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDS, BUT
IT MUST BE DONE. AND WE NEEDED
TO BE DOING THIS 20 YEARS AGO.
SO I'M EXCITED FOR TODAY. THANK
YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, SENATOR
WIENER. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR,
AND THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING ME.
EVEN THOUGH I'M IN THE, I GUESS,
THE WRONG HOUSE. BUT I
APPRECIATE YOU INCLUDING ME.
STILL, WE STILL LIKE YOU. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR WORK. JUST THE BOTTOM
LINE, PERMITTING, IS HORRIBLY
BROKEN IN CALIFORNIA. IT'S. AND
WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE ACTION,
OUR PERMITTING LAWS, INCLUDING
LAWS THAT ARE SUPPOSEDLY
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, ARE ACTUALLY
UNDERMINING AND PREVENTING
EFFECTIVE CLIMATE ACTION. AND WE
HAVE TO BE VERY, VERY HARD NOSED
ABOUT THAT. AND THESE ARE LOCAL
PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. THEY
ARE MANDATES THAT ARE PLACED ON
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BY THE STATE,
AND THEY ARE ALSO SITUATIONS
WHERE FAR TOO MANY AGENCIES HAVE
TO SIGN OFF ON A PERMIT. A FEW
YEARS BACK, I DID SOME WORK
AROUND MARICULTURE AND TRYING TO
PROMOTE MARICULTURE, WHICH IS A
CLIMATE SOLUTION IN ADDITION TO
OTHER BENEFITS AND TO GET A KELP
FARMING PERMIT. I THINK YOU HAD
TO GO THROUGH LIKE 10 OR 12 OR
MORE DIFFERENT AGENCIES, AND
THAT IS SO EMBLEMATIC OF WHAT WE
HAVE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN IN
CALIFORNIA. LAYER UPON LAYER OF
PROCESS AND OFTEN PROCESS FOR
THE SAKE OF PROCESS AND PROCESS
BEING VALUED OVER RESULTS. AND
WE HAVE TO ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT
IT'S THE RESULTS THAT MATTER,
NOT THE PROCESS. AND WE HAVE TO
STOP WITH THE VALUING OF PROCESS
OVER EVERYTHING ELSE, WHICH IS
WHAT CALIFORNIA HAS EFFECTIVELY
DONE. AND IT'S FRANKLY
STRANGLING THE STATE. WE ALSO
NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE
ARE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF OUR
PERMITTING PROBLEMS IN
CALIFORNIA. I MENTIONED LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS, AND SOMETIMES TOO
MANY AGENCIES HAVING TO SIGN
OFF, BUT WE HAVE TO ALSO JUST
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SEQUA,
IS A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM,
AND THAT IS A STATE LAW THAT IS
IMPOSED ON EVERYONE, ON STATE
AGENCIES, ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS,
ON REGIONAL AGENCIES, AND
EVERYONE IS REQUIRED TO COMPLY
WITH IT. AND WE HAVE CEQA,
WHATEVER ITS INTENT, WHEN IT WAS
PASSED, IT HAS NOW BECOME SORT
OF A FRANKENSTEIN MONSTER. IT'S
THE LAW THAT SWALLOWED
CALIFORNIA. IT IS USED
OVERWHELMINGLY FOR PURPOSES THAT
HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO
WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. IT IS USED.
YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO. YOU CAN
FILE AN ANONYMOUS CEQA APPEAL.
YOU IT CAN BE USED TO SLOW DOWN.
ANYONE WHO WHO HAS THE MONEY TO
HIRE A LAWYER CAN USE IT TO SLOW
DOWN, SCREW UP, OR KILL A
PROJECT AND WE HAVE TO START
REFOCUSING CEQA AS A CLIMATE
ACTION LAW AND MOVE AWAY FROM
ALLOWING IT TO BE USED FOR
COMPLETELY NON ENVIRONMENTAL
PURPOSES. SIMPLY BECAUSE SOMEONE
HAS THE MONEY TO HIRE A LAWYER.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THE
CONVERSATION TODAY. AND AGAIN,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK, MADAM
CHAIR. THANK YOU. SENATOR. MR.
TING, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE
SOME OPENING REMARKS? SURE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANKS
FOR HAVING ME AS WELL. AND VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE YOU FOCUSING ON
THIS ISSUE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU AND A
NUMBER OF OTHER COMMITTEE
MEMBERS HAVE FOCUSED ON
PERMITTING AS IT RELATES TO
HOUSING, BUT REALLY TALKING
ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND IN
PARTICULAR SEA LEVEL RISE AND
DROUGHT CONDITIONS. WE JUST NEED
TO LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN
FLORIDA TO KNOW THAT WE ARE ONE
NATURAL DISASTER AWAY FROM
POTENTIALLY SOME CATASTROPHIC
ISSUES. YOU OFTEN SEE, SOMETIMES
MANY YEARS. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
WATER, ESPECIALLY IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. AND THEN SOME YEARS WE
HAVE TOO MUCH WATER. WE SEE
FLOODING. AND SO BEING READY AND
PREPARED FOR A NUMBER OF THOSE
ISSUES, THERE IS THERE THERE
NEEDS TO BE A SENSE OF URGENCY.
THESE PROJECTS NEED TO HAPPEN
NOW. AND AS EVERYONE HAD
MENTIONED, IT OFTEN TAKES WAY
TOO LONG. EVEN ONCE WE DECIDE
WHAT THEY ARE TO GET IT GOING.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU FOR
HIGHLIGHTING THIS ISSUE AND
BRINGING US TOGETHER AND ALSO
BRINGING MANY OF THESE THOUGHT
LEADERS VERY MUCH LOOK FORWARD
TO THE DISCUSSION. THANK YOU.
AND I SEE MISS PAPIN HAS JOINED
US. SHE CHAIRS THE WATER, PARKS
AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE IN THE
ASSEMBLY. DID YOU WANT TO MAKE
ANY OPENING REMARKS? YOU DON'T
HAVE TO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO,
BUT I GOT TO KEEP UP WITH
WIENER. YEAH. NO, I'M JUST
DELIGHTED TO BE HERE. I THERE'S
A LOT OF FOLKS I FOUND IN THE
LEGISLATURE THAT ARE VERY
INVOLVED WITH THE REDUCTION OF
CARBON EMISSIONS, AND THEY'RE
DOING A FINE JOB. BUT I HAVE
LONG SOUGHT TO FOCUS MY ENERGIES
ON CLIMATE ADAPTATION BECAUSE
EVEN IF WE STOP POLLUTING IN THE
MORNING, THERE IS STILL A
TREMENDOUS NEED TO ADAPT.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS HERE, AND I
COME FROM BEING INVOLVED IN A
LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
AND SO THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR,
FOR CONVENING US SO THAT WE CAN
FOCUS ON SOME OF THE
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED. I
KNOW IT TOUCHES ON HOUSING, BUT
IT WE NEED TO HAVE DONE THIS
WORK YESTERDAY. SO I'M EXCITED
TO GET FORWARD TO GET INVOLVED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THE
COFFEE HAS ARRIVED. MISS PAPIN,
IF YOU WOULD LIKE ANY, LET ME
KNOW. YOU WEREN'T HERE WHEN WE
TOOK THE ORDER. BUT GREAT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR THE WELCOMING
REMARKS. VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE PANELS
TODAY. THE FIRST ONE IS GOING TO
BE ON THE NEED TO ADDRESS SEA
LEVEL RISE AND FLOODING. THE
SECOND ONE IS GOING TO BE ON
PREPARING FOR DROUGHT
CONDITIONS. AND THE THIRD ONE IS
GOING TO BE ON THE NEED TO
FACILITATE THE REDUCTION OR
REMOVAL OF ATMOSPHERIC CARBON.
SO WITH THAT, WOULD THE PANEL
ONE PLEASE COME UP? I THINK YOU
KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
SO THIS IS AS I SAID, PANEL ONE
PERMITTING REFORM NEEDED TO
ADDRESS SEA LEVEL RISE AND
FLOODING WILL ALLOW EACH
PANELIST TO SELF INTRODUCE. AND
EACH OF YOU HAVE A COUPLE
MINUTES TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS.
AND THEN WE'LL DO Q&A FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. WE'LL START
HERE. THANK YOU. CHAIR.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, FOR THE
INVITATION TO BE HERE TODAY. I
AM PLEASED TO PROVIDE THE
REMARKS THIS AFTERNOON THAT WILL
PROVIDE THE CONTEXT AND A
SCIENCE FOUNDATION FOR YOUR
DISCUSSION ON SEA LEVEL RISE AND
COASTAL FLOODING. MY NAME IS LIZ
WHITEMAN. I AM PRIVILEGED TO
SERVE AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE CALIFORNIA OCEAN SCIENCE
TRUST, AN INDEPENDENT SCIENCE
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION ACTUALLY
CREATED BY THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE TO BRING SCIENCE TO
THE DECISIONS SHAPING THE FUTURE
OF OUR COAST AND OCEAN HERE IN
THE STATE. I'LL SHARE A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT WHAT'S CAUSING SEA
LEVEL RISE AND COASTAL FLOODING.
WHAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING TODAY,
WHAT TO EXPECT FOR THE FUTURE IN
TERMS OF IMPACTS TO PEOPLE,
INFRASTRUCTURE AND NATURAL
HABITATS. THIS IS A SUMMARY OF
RESEARCH FROM SO MANY DIFFERENT
SCIENTISTS ACROSS THE STATE,
INCLUDING MEMBERS OF A SCIENCE
TASK FORCE CONVENED BY THE OCEAN
SCIENCE TRUST AND THE OCEAN
PROTECTION COUNCIL OVER THE PAST
COUPLE OF YEARS TO PROVIDE A
SCIENCE FOUNDATION FOR THE
STATE'S POLICY THAT WAS ADOPTED
EARLIER THIS YEAR BY THE OCEAN
PROTECTION COUNCIL. IT'S EASY TO
THINK OF SEA LEVEL RISE AS
SOMETHING FOR THE FUTURE.
HOWEVER, CALIFORNIA IS ACTUALLY
EXPERIENCED EIGHT INCHES OF SEA
LEVEL RISE OVER THE LAST
CENTURY, AND THAT RATE IS
INCREASING. THE CURRENT RATE IS
ALREADY TRIPLE THAT OF THE
BROADER 20TH CENTURY RATE. AND
PUT ANOTHER WAY, WHAT WE'VE
EXPERIENCED IN THE LAST 100
YEARS, WE ANTICIPATED TO
EXPERIENCE IN THE NEXT 30 ALONE,
SEA LEVEL RISE OCCURS PRIMARILY
AS OCEAN WARMING CAUSES THERMAL
EXPANSION OF THE OCEANS AND
ADDITIONAL INPUT OF FRESH WATER
AS THE POLAR GLACIERS MELT AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL WATER. BOTH
OF THESE PROCESSES RESULT FROM
THE ONGOING WARMING OF THE
PLANET DUE TO GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS. SO THERE'S AN
INTERESTING TRADE OFF THAT
BECOMES PART OF THIS
CONVERSATION. NOW, THAT SCIENCE
FOUNDATION FOR THE STATE'S
POLICY THAT I MENTIONED LAYS OUT
A SET OF SCENARIOS FOR THE
FUTURE, A SET OF POSSIBLE
FUTURES THAT WE MAY EXPERIENCE
AND THAT REALLY DEPEND ON WHERE
WE ARE AS A SOCIETY IN TERMS OF
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
TRAJECTORIES OF GLOBAL
DEVELOPMENT, AND INCORPORATE THE
FACT THAT WE DON'T COMPLETELY
UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH THE POLAR
ICE SHEETS WILL MELT AND HOW
MUCH THAT WILL THEN CONTRIBUTE
TO RISING SEA LEVELS. SO WE'RE
GOING TO BE CONFRONTED WITH
CONTINUING UNCERTAINTY, BUT NEED
TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION.
DESPITE THAT. SO USING
OBSERVATIONS, THIS IS NOT JUST
MODELING. WE CAN SEE HOW WE'RE
CURRENTLY TRACKING ALONG THE
CALIFORNIA COAST AND PROJECT
THAT FORWARD. THIS REVEALS THAT
BY 2050, WHERE SEA LEVELS ARE
MOST LIKELY TO RISE BY 0.8FT ON
AVERAGE ACROSS THE CALIFORNIA
COAST, YOU MIGHT OFTEN HEAR THAT
ROUNDED TO A FOOT BY MID-CENTURY.
WE CAN USE THESE SCENARIOS TO
PLAN OUT INTO FURTHER INTO THE
FUTURE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT Ã
PROJECT LIFESPAN AND THE DEGREE
OF RISK THAT WE'RE WILLING TO
ASSUME FOR IT. BY 2100. AVERAGE
STATEWIDE SEA LEVELS ARE
EXPECTED TO RISE BETWEEN 1.6 AND
3.1 FEET. THAT'S THE MOST LIKELY,
ALTHOUGH HIGHER AMOUNTS ARE
CERTAINLY POSSIBLE. SO WHAT? SO
WHAT DO THESE NUMBERS MEAN? AND
SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED ABOUT
THAT FOOT BY MID-CENTURY, SEA
LEVEL RISE WILL INCREASE THE
SEVERITY AND FREQUENCY OF
COASTAL FLOODING EVENTS, WITH A
PARTICULARLY RAPID RISE IN THE
2030S. SO WE GET A GLIMPSE INTO
THAT FUTURE DURING KING TIDES. I
FEAR YOU'VE EITHER SEEN OR HAVE
SEEN THE IMAGES OF THE WAVES
OVERTOPPING THE EMBARCADERO. SO
WHAT WE EXPERIENCED TODAY IS A
ONCE IN A LIFETIME COASTAL FLOOD
IS PROJECTED TO OCCUR ANNUALLY
BY 2050 AND DAILY BY 2100. SO
THAT JUST SETS THE MAGNITUDE OF
THE ISSUE HERE. ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT WE DON'T OFTEN THINK
ABOUT IS WHAT'S HAPPENING
UNDERGROUND. GROUNDWATER RISE
POSES A THREAT TO BELOW GROUND
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FRESHWATER
AQUIFERS, AS SEA LEVEL RISES IN
SOME PLACES, THE GROUNDWATER
WILL RISE WITH IT, MOBILIZING
CONTAMINANTS, EXPOSING OUR
SUBSURFACE INFRASTRUCTURE TO
CORROSIVE SALT WATER AND
FOUNDATIONS TO SALTWATER, AND
THREATENING OUR FRESHWATER
AQUIFERS WITH SALINITY INCREASES
AND THE SOCIETAL IMPACTS OF THAT
SHALLOW AND EMERGING GROUNDWATER
ARE PROJECTED TO BE ABOUT AS
MUCH AS THE IMPACTS OF WHAT YOU
SEE VISIBLY OVER GROUND. EVEN AS
WE'RE STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
THE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF WHERE
AND HOW MUCH WE'LL SEE THOSE
IMPACTS. AND FINALLY, THE
IMPACTS OF EPISODIC COASTAL
STORMS ARE ALREADY WORSE THAN
THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN 50 YEARS
AGO WITHOUT SEA LEVEL RISE.
THINK BACK TO JANUARY OF 2023
AND THE 11 OR SO ATMOSPHERIC
RIVERS THAT WE EXPERIENCED. AND
ON JANUARY 5TH, WAVE HEIGHTS
REACHED 28FT OFFSHORE FROM
MONTEREY BAY AND MADE EVEN
HIGHER BY SIMULTANEOUSLY
HAPPENING WITH SPRING TIDES AND
WITH ONSHORE WINDS THAT PUSHED
THE WAVES EVEN HIGHER. THIS WAS
THE EVENT THAT CAUSED WEST CLIFF
DRIVE IN SANTA CRUZ TO FALL INTO
THE OCEAN AND DAMAGED AN AWFUL
LOT OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
INFRASTRUCTURE. THOSE KINDS OF
EVENTS ARE EXPECTED TO BOTH GET
WORSE AS A RESULT OF CLIMATE
CHANGE, AND BE MADE EVEN MORE
WORSE BY SEA LEVEL RISE, BECAUSE
THEY'RE OCCURRING ON TOP OF A
HIGHER LEVEL OF WATER. SO I CAN
UNDERSTAND HOW THESE SOBERING,
FRIGHTENING STATISTICS, AS THE
CHAIR ALREADY MENTIONED, CAN
FEEL PARALYZING. AND SO I WOULD
UNDERSCORE THAT IT HAS ALSO BEEN
SHOWN THAT THERE IS A MORE
SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC COST TO
INACTION, JUST IN TERMS OF THE
HARM AND LOSSES THAT WILL BE
EXPERIENCED THROUGH THESE KINDS
OF EVENTS AND SEA LEVELS RISING.
BUT PLANNING FOR AN UNCERTAIN
FUTURE IS UNDOUBTEDLY HARD, AND
WE NEED NEW FRAMEWORKS AND
WORKFLOWS TO BE ABLE TO ACT AND
MAKE DECISIONS. ONE POSSIBILITY
THAT MAY HELP IS AN ADAPTATION
PATHWAYS APPROACH. THIS IS AN
ACADEMICALLY DEVELOPED APPROACH
THAT MAY OFFER SOME AVENUES FOR
EXPLORATION IN YOUR CONTEXT.
IT'S A PATHWAYS I HEARD THE
MEMBER MENTION PATHWAYS. IT MAY
NOT ALWAYS BE POSSIBLE FOR
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO BEAR
THE COST OF ADAPTING TO ALL THE
WAY TO THE POSSIBILITY OF SEA
LEVEL RISE AT 2100, IN ONE FELL
SWOOP. SO ADAPTATION PLANNING
PATHWAYS, SEQUENCE ACTIONS
THROUGH THE LIFESPAN OF A
PROJECT SO THAT YOU CAN TAKE
ACTION NOW WITH FULL
TRANSPARENCY OF WHAT OPTIONS
WILL REMAIN ON THE TABLE FOR YOU,
AND A PREDETERMINED THRESHOLDS
THAT YOU WILL START TO TAKE
THOSE ACTIONS AND MOVE ALONG
YOUR PATHWAY INTO THE FUTURE.
TWO FINAL POINTS I WAS IN
SAUSALITO WITH COLLEAGUES
YESTERDAY AS WE BROUGHT TOGETHER
RESEARCHERS WITH FINANCE AND
INSURANCE SECTORS, STATE AND
FEDERAL FOLK, TO EXPLORE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR CREATIVE
FINANCING AND INSURANCE TO BE
ABLE TO UNLOCK CAPITAL, REDUCE
AND TRANSFER RISK, AND ENABLE
ADAPTATION PROJECTS TO
ACCELERATE THE CONVERSATION FOR
ME REALLY UNDERSCORED THE NEED
FOR A NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH TO
HOW WE ARE MAKING THESE
DECISIONS IN THE BROAD CONTEXT
OF THE BROAD SUITE OF COMMUNITY
NEEDS. WE'RE STILL DIGESTING THE
OUTCOMES OF THAT REALLY RICH
CONVERSATION YESTERDAY, BUT I
WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO
FOLLOW UP AND SHARE A SUMMARY
AND DISCUSS THE OUTCOMES OF THAT
WORK AND I'LL JUST CONCLUDE WITH
APPRECIATION FOR THE MANY
SCIENTISTS I WORK WITH WHO ARE
HELPING US UNDERSTAND THESE
COMPLEX PROCESSES AND OFFER THAT
THE OCEAN SCIENCE TRUST, AS AN
ENTITY CREATED BY THE
LEGISLATURE, IS HERE TO SERVE
AND SUPPORT. AND WE WOULD BE
HAPPY TO ENGAGE WITH YOU FURTHER
AS THIS DIALOG CONTINUES. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO GO NEXT,
MADAM CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE US
TO PROCEED ACCORDING TO THE
AGENDA? SURE. ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO
NEXT THEN. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, SENATORS AND ASSEMBLY
MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME
HERE TO TALK. MY NAME IS SARAI
COHEN. I WORK FOR THE US
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING
THE BAY RESTORATION REGULATORY
INTEGRATION TEAM. THERE WAS A
TIME, NOT TOO LONG AGO WHEN OUR
COASTS AND WATERS WERE VIRTUALLY
UNPROTECTED. PEOPLE LOOKED AT
THE WATER AND DECIDED NOT TO
SWIM. OUR BAYS DID NOT SUPPORT
FISHING OR CRABBING. RIVERS
CAUGHT ON FIRE. IT LOOKED LIKE
PUBLIC ACCESS TO OUR INCREDIBLE
COASTLINE AND BEACHES WOULD SOON
BE IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE OF
DEVELOPMENT. THAT WAS BEFORE
COALITIONS OF CITIZENS CALLED ON
THEIR REPRESENTATIVES, LIKE
THOSE HERE TODAY, TO PASS
LEGISLATION PROTECTING AIR,
WATER, LAND AND PUBLIC HEALTH.
THESE LAWS HAVE LED TO
TRANSFORMATIVE AND GENERATIONAL
CHANGE. OUR EXISTING REGULATIONS
PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE
ENVIRONMENT, AND GIVEN THE
CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA, THEY ARE
STILL RELEVANT TODAY. THE
CHALLENGE FOR REGULATORY
AGENCIES IS TO BE ABLE TO
QUICKLY ADAPT TO ADDRESS SEA
LEVEL RISE AND CLIMATE
RESILIENCY NEEDS WHILE SERVING
THE WHOLE PUBLIC MULTI-BENEFIT
RESTORATION AND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ARE COMPLEX
AND OFTEN COMPETING INTERESTS
MUST BE CAREFULLY BALANCED,
SOMETIMES WITH DIFFICULT
CHOICES. HOW DO WE PROTECT
COMMUNITIES? PROVIDE PUBLIC
ACCESS, ENSURE PROJECTS ARE
BALANCED EQUITABLY, THAT RIGHT
HISTORICAL WRONGS, RESTORE
HABITATS AND PROTECT WATER
QUALITY? ALL UNDER THE
INCREASING PRESSURE TO ACT
RAPIDLY IN THE FACE OF SEA LEVEL
RISE AND CLIMATE CHANGE. THE
URBAN LANDSCAPE, INCLUDING
IMPORTANT INFRASTRUCTURE, WAS
BUILT LONG BEFORE WE IDENTIFIED
MANY OF THESE CHALLENGES OR MADE
THOUGHTFUL CHOICES ABOUT HOW TO
DESIGN AN EQUITABLE AND
SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR ALL THE
COMMUNITIES OF THE BAY. WE NEED
TO INNOVATE AND PILOT NEW
SOLUTIONS AT GREATER SCALES.
WHILE EVALUATING THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF OUR ACTIONS.
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY
RESTORATION AND REGULATORY
INTEGRATION TEAM, OR BRETT, IS A
COLLABORATIVE EFFORT OF
REGULATORY AND RESOURCE
AGENCIES. THE STATE COASTAL
CONSERVANCY AND SF BAY
RESTORATION AUTHORITY AND
NONFEDERAL PUBLIC FUNDING
AGENCIES. THE FOCUS IS ON
PERMITTING FOR MULTI-BENEFIT
RESTORATION PROJECTS AND THE
ASSOCIATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT AND
PUBLIC ACCESS INFRASTRUCTURE
THAT IS IN AND ALONG THE BAY
SHORELINE, IN ADDITION TO
PERMITTING STAFF ALL BRETT
AGENCIES HAVE AGENCY MANAGERS ON
THE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE, WHICH WORKS CLOSELY
WITH THE BRETT TO
COLLABORATIVELY IDENTIFY AND
RESOLVE POLICY ISSUES AND
CONFLICTS. THIS REALLY IS AN
EFFORT THAT WAS STARTED BY
PERMITTING AGENCY STAFF WHO SAW
THE OPPORTUNITIES TO RESTORE
100,000 ACRES OF TIDAL WETLANDS.
WITH THE PASSING OF MEASURE AA,
AND WANTED TO DO WHAT THEY COULD
TO LEAN IN. IN 2017, MULTIPLE
WORKSHOPS AND MEETINGS WERE HELD
TO DISCUSS THE SHARED PERMITTING
AND MONITORING NEEDS FOR
WETLANDS AROUND THE SF ESTUARY.
RESTORATION PROPONENTS,
ORGANIZATIONS AND FOUNDATIONS
IDENTIFIED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
REGULATORY PROCESS AS A FOCUS
THAT WAS NEEDED TO SUCCESSFULLY
ACCOMPLISH THE MEASURE. AA GOALS
TO PROTECT, RESTORE, AND ENHANCE
SAN FRANCISCO BAY. AGENCY STAFF
AND MANAGERS WORKED WITH THE
STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY AND SF
BAY AREA TO PROPOSE A DEDICATED
TEAM OF REGULATORY STAFF,
SUPPORTED BY FUNDING FROM THE
RESTORATION AUTHORITY, FOR
PROJECTS THAT QUALIFY FOR
MEASURE AA FUNDING. WITHOUT THIS
TARGETED FUNDING, MANY AGENCIES
COULD NOT COMMIT TO DEDICATED,
CONSISTENT STAFFING FOR THESE
PROJECTS. THE BRIC CONSISTS OF
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE US ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS, US FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE, NOAA'S
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES
SERVICE, SAN FRANCISCO BAY
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE, AND THE SAN
FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. THE EPA
IS WE PARTICIPATE IN THE BID ON
AN AD HOC BASIS. THE COST FOR
THE PERMITTING STAFF WAS
APPROXIMATELY 1.5 MILLION FOR
FIVE YEARS, WITH FUNDING COMING
FROM THE RESTORATION AUTHORITY,
THE COASTAL CONSERVANCY, BAY
AREA TOLL AUTHORITY, VALLEY
WATER AND EAST BAY REGIONAL
PARKS DISTRICT. IN ADDITION TO
SUPPORTING THE INITIAL FUNDING
FOR THE TEAM, THE COASTAL
CONSERVANCY AND SFRA CONTINUE TO
BE ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL IN
MANAGING THE FUNDING AND ALSO
COORDINATING AGENCY AGREEMENTS.
THE BRIT WORKS BY FOCUSING ON
THE PRE-APPLICATION PROCESS AND
WORKING WITH PROJECT PROPONENTS
TO INCREASE CERTAINTY BY
IDENTIFYING CRITICAL PARTS,
INCLUDING CONTRACTING AND
CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES AND
TRYING TO WORK TOWARDS THOSE WE
ENGAGE WITH. PROJECTS EARLY AND
OFTEN TO IDENTIFY ISSUES AND
PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON REQUIREMENTS
TO HELP PROJECTS NAVIGATE THE
PERMITTING PROCESS. BECAUSE OF
THEIR EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE,
BRIT STAFF ARE ABLE TO GUIDE
APPLICANTS IN WHAT SEA LEVEL
RISE INFORMATION THEY SHOULD.
THEY SHOULD USE WHEN SUBMITTING
PROJECTS AND ARE ABLE TO
EXPEDITE THE PERMIT PROCESS BY
HELPING PROPONENTS IDENTIFY
EFFICIENCIES LIKE PROGRAMMATIC
PERMITS, EXPEDITED
CONSULTATIONS, AND STREAMLINED
PROCESSES LIKE CUTTING THE GREEN
TAPE. WE FOUND THAT WHEN
COMBINING EXPERIENCE REGULATORS
WITH PERMITTING EFFICIENCIES AND
STREAMLINING TOOLS, THIS
PRODUCES INCREASED RESULTS. THE
BRIT FINDS FLEXIBILITY WITHIN
EXISTING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW
MORE EFFICIENT PROJECT
PERMITTING WHEN THERE ARE
CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS OR
POLICY THAT CAN POTENTIALLY
DELAY PERMITTING. THE BRIT WORKS
WITH THE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE TO ELEVATE THOSE
ISSUES. THE CURRENT WORKLOAD
INCLUDES 32 MULTI-BENEFIT
PROJECTS IN NINE BAY AREA
COUNTIES. THIS INCLUDES TEN
FULLY PERMITTED PROJECTS. THESE
PROJECTS WILL RESULT IN GREATER
FLOOD PROTECTION, PUBLIC ACCESS,
HABITAT RESTORATION, AND WATER
QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS. THE BRIT
ACTIVELY SEEKS FEEDBACK FROM
PROJECT PROPONENTS THROUGH
SATISFACTION SURVEYS AND ONE ON
ONE INTERVIEWS TO IMPROVE OUR
PROCESS. IN ADDITION TO
PERMITTING PROCESS, THE BRIT AND
MANAGERS ON THE POLICY AND
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE WORK ON
COMPLEX POLICY ISSUES THAT ARISE
IN MULTIPLE PROJECTS, INCLUDING
HOW TO PERMIT RESTORATION
PROJECTS THAT RESULT IN TAKE FOR
FULLY PROTECTED STATE SPECIES,
AND ALSO THOSE THAT NEED TO
ESTABLISH ARTIFICIAL REEFS. A
MAJOR FOCUS IS CURRENTLY
COORDINATING SORRY. A MAJOR
FOCUS CURRENTLY IS COORDINATING
THE PERMIT PROCESS FOR NATURE
BASED SOLUTIONS, INCLUDING
HORIZONTAL LEVEES AND ECOTONE
LEVEES. THERE IS NOT ONE WAY TO
GET TO A CLIMATE RESILIENT
FUTURE. THIS REALLY IS A YES AND
SITUATION THAT REQUIRES MULTIPLE
SOLUTIONS. COLLABORATIVE
PERMITTING, STREAMLINED
SOLUTIONS, AND LEADERSHIP THAT
UNDERSTANDS RISK AND UNCERTAINTY
AND SUPPORTS AGENCY STAFF AND
MANAGERS WHO ARE MAKING THE
NECESSARY PARADIGM SHIFTS AND ON
THE GROUND CHANGES. EVERYONE
SHOULD BE ENGAGED, NOT JUST
RESTORATION PRACTITIONERS,
PROJECT PROPONENTS AND
REGULATING AGENCIES, BUT ALSO
NEIGHBORING LANDOWNERS, LOCAL
COMMUNITIES, OVERLAPPING
INFRASTRUCTURE AND INTERESTED
PARTIES THAT HAVE HISTORICALLY
BEEN LEFT OUT OF THE PLANNING
AND DESIGN PROCESSES. INCREASED
COLLABORATION WILL ALSO ENABLE
US TO BUILD BETTER STREAMLINED
PROCESSES WHERE WE ENSURE THAT
SOVEREIGN TRIBAL NATIONS ARE NOT
EXCLUDED FROM PROJECTS ON THEIR
LANDS OR ANCESTRAL TERRITORIES
DUE TO REGULATORY EXEMPTIONS. WE
NEED BOLD ACTION THAT USES
REGIONAL PRIORITIES AND SCIENCE
TO RETHINK TRADITIONAL GRAY
INFRASTRUCTURE AND INCENTIVIZE
NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS. AS EPA
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN, MIGRATION
SPACE FOR WETLANDS AND COASTAL
RESOURCES IS CRITICAL.
CHALLENGING DECISIONS WILL NEED
TO BE MADE AROUND DEFENDING
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND
BALANCING WHERE TO CREATE SPACE
FOR THE RISING SEA AND MIGRATING
BAY LANDS ON THE SHORELINE. IN
THE BRIT, WE'VE SEEN THAT WE CAN
BALANCE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
WITH THOUGHTFUL CLIMATE
RESILIENCY. WE HAVE LEARNED
ITERATIVELY AND SHARED THOSE
LESSONS WITH PROJECT PROPONENTS
AND OTHER AGENCIES. BUT WE NEED
EVERYONE AT THE TABLE. THIS
INCLUDES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
LIKE UTILITIES AND RAILROADS,
AND ALSO INCLUDES PROACTIVE
LEADERSHIP THAT SUPPORTS FUNDING
FOR INTERAGENCY TEAMS, ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT, AND INNOVATIVE
PROCESSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. OKAY. THANK YOU,
CHAIR WIX. AND DISTINGUISHED
SENATOR AND ASSEMBLY MEMBERS FOR
CONDUCTING TODAY'S HEARING. MY
NAME IS LYNN BATTERMAN. I'M THE
CEO OF THE SAN MATEO COUNTY
FLOOD AND SEA LEVEL RISE
RESILIENCY DISTRICT. WE'RE ALSO
KNOWN AS ONE SHORELINE. TODAY,
I'LL BRIEFLY DISCUSS WHAT ONE
SHORELINE IS AND DOES WHAT OUR
CHALLENGES ARE IN TERMS OF
PERMITTING, AND A FEW IDEAS ON
HOW TO ADDRESS THEM. I WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE ASSEMBLYMEMBER
PAPAN, WHO IS ON OUR FOUNDING
BOARD AND ON OUR BOARD FOR
SEVERAL YEARS AND WAS A REAL
LEADER IN THE FORMATION OF ONE
SHORELINE AND GETTING IT OFF THE
GROUND. WE WERE ESTABLISHED ON
JANUARY 1ST, 2020 THROUGH STATE
LEGISLATION. SO JUST TO THE
SOUTH OF HERE SITS SAN MATEO
COUNTY, WHICH, LIKE MANY AREAS
OF CALIFORNIA, HAS ALREADY BEEN
SEVERELY AFFECTED BY THE WATER
RELATED IMPACTS OF CLIMATE
CHANGE, INCLUDING EXTREME
STORMS, DROUGHT AND COASTAL
EROSION. BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOW
LYING, URBANIZED BAY SHORELINE
AND AN EXPANSIVE AND EXPOSED
PACIFIC COASTLINE, RISING SEA
LEVEL AND GROUNDWATER THREATENS
MORE PEOPLE AND PROPERTY IN SAN
MATEO COUNTY THAN IN ANY OTHER
IN CALIFORNIA. ADDRESSING THIS
TRANSFORMATIVE THREAT REQUIRES
MULTIJURISDICTIONAL
MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH THAT
DOESN'T UNDERESTIMATE THE
CHALLENGE. THAT'S WHY, WITH THE
FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF ALL 20
CITIES IN SAN MATEO COUNTY AND
THE COUNTY, ONE SHORELINE WAS
ESTABLISHED BY STATE
LEGISLATION. AS I MENTIONED, AS
THE FIRST COUNTYWIDE INDEPENDENT
GOVERNMENT AGENCY TO FOCUS ON
CLIMATE IN THE STATE. IN
ADDITION TO PURSUING A STABLE
SOURCE OF OPERATING FUNDING, ONE
SHORELINE HAS THREE PRIORITIES,
ALL OF WHICH RELATE TO
PERMITTING. AND I'LL TALK ABOUT
THAT. NOT SURPRISINGLY, A TOP
PRIORITY IS TO ADVANCE PROJECTS
THAT ALIGN LONG TERM RESILIENCE
ACROSS JURISDICTION FOR
DEVELOPED NATURAL AND PUBLIC
ACCESS AREAS. THE STATE'S
PERMITTING REGIME TO APPROVE
SUCH PROJECT COVERS MOST OF THE
DEFINITIONS OF THE WORD REGIME
SYSTEM, PROCESS, OR A
BUREAUCRATIC AND AUTOCRATIC FORM
OF GOVERNMENT. OUR PERMITTING
REGIME IS DESIGNED TO REFLECT
OUR VALUES, AND IT IS
IMPLEMENTED AT REGULATORY
AGENCIES BY DEDICATED,
IMPRESSIVE STAFF. BUT IT IS TOO
COMPLEX, UNCOORDINATED AND
DISCRETIONARY. OUR PERMITTING
REGIME DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THE
SOCIETAL VALUE OF BUILDING
CLIMATE RESILIENCE, AND IT IS
ROOTED IN 50 YEAR OLD LAWS THAT
ARE UNDERSTANDABLY MORE FOCUSED
ON MAINTAINING HISTORIC
CONDITIONS THAN ON CREATING
HABITAT THAT CAN SURVIVE RAPIDLY
CHANGING CONDITIONS. OUR
AGENCY'S SECOND PRIORITY WAS NOT
FORESEEN WHEN IT WAS ESTABLISHED
IN STATE LAW. WE WERE
ESTABLISHED AS LONG TERM
RESILIENCY AGENCY, BUT WE
IMMEDIATELY NOTICED THAT MANY
EXISTING AND RECENTLY PROPOSED
OR PERMITTED DEVELOPMENTS ALONG
THE SHORELINE AND CREEKS REDUCE
OPTIONS TO BUILD RESILIENCE,
ESPECIALLY RESILIENCE THAT
INCORPORATES NATURAL
INFRASTRUCTURE AGAINST FLOODING,
SEA LEVEL RISE AND GROUNDWATER
RISE. SO I WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THAT LAST POINT. THE CURRENT
PERMITTING REGIME ALLOWS PRIVATE
AND PUBLIC AGENCY DEVELOPMENT
RIGHT UP TO THE WATER'S EDGE,
BUT NOT NEAR SHORE IN THE WATER.
THIS MAKES IT MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT AND COSTLY TO BUILD
RESILIENCE, ESPECIALLY
RESILIENCE THAT UTILIZES NATURAL
INFRASTRUCTURE. SO IN A SENSE,
THE PERMITTING REGIME IS
CONTRAVENING THE STATE'S GOALS
AND LOCAL GOALS FOR BUILDING
HABITAT. BECAUSE IT IS
PERMITTING PROJECTS THAT
ELIMINATE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
PUTTING HABITAT IN ON THE
SHORELINE. TO ADDRESS THAT, IN
SAN MATEO COUNTY, ONE SHORELINE
DEVELOPED LANGUAGE FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS TO INTEGRATE CLIMATE
RESILIENCE INTO THEIR GENERAL
PLAN, SPECIFIC PLANS, ZONING
ORDINANCES AND REVIEWS OF
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS. AND NOW
WE'RE EXTENDING THIS TO PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE, PROVIDING
GUIDANCE, GUIDANCE OR
STORMWATER, WASTEWATER, WATER,
RECYCLING, ROADS AND PARKS ARE
DESIGNED FOR FUTURE CONDITIONS
AND NOT HISTORIC ONES. RIGHT
NOW, A LOT OF THAT
INFRASTRUCTURE IS STILL BEING
DESIGNED FOR HISTORIC EVENTS,
AND WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT
FUTURE EVENTS WHEN WE'RE
INSTITUTING NEW DESIGNS FOR
PARKS, ROADS, STORMWATER
SYSTEMS, WASTEWATER SYSTEMS, ALL
OF THAT, BECAUSE TODAY IT'S
STILL BEING DESIGNED FOR A
HISTORIC EVENT. MY GOAL FOR
THESE ASSETS IS TO FUNCTION FOR
THEIR INTENDED LIFESPAN AND
CONTRIBUTE TO REGIONAL
RESILIENCE. BUT WE CANNOT DO
THIS ALONE. OUR RESILIENCY
REQUIREMENTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE
WHEN STATE PERMITS DON'T SUPPORT
THEM. WHEN ONE SHORELINE STATE
LEGISLATION PASSED IN 2019, FIVE
YEARS AGO, IT ALSO DID NOT
ANTICIPATE WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY
BE FOCUSED ON CLIMATE DRIVEN
ATMOSPHERIC RIVERS. AS IT WAS
MENTIONED, THAT ARE MADE WORSE
BY STORM SURGE AND SEA LEVEL
RISE, AND HIGHER TIDES. BUT BUT
THE DROUGHT AND DELUGE CYCLES IN
2021, 2022 AND 2023 BROUGHT
SIGNIFICANT FLOODING AS A RESULT
OF SUBSTANTIAL RAINFALL AND OUR
INABILITY TO SAFELY DRAIN THAT
WATER TO THE BAY AND OCEAN. THIS
FINAL ONE, SHORELINE PRIORITY
RELATES BOTH TO THE PLANNING
POLICY GUIDANCE I JUST DISCUSSED
AND TO THE PERMITS THAT WE ARE
NOW SEEKING TO REMOVE DEBRIS
THAT'S BUILT UP OVER DECADES IN
THE MOST FLOOD PRONE STRETCHES
OF CREEKS IN OUR COUNTY.
IMPORTANTLY FOR THIS
CONVERSATION, TODAY, MOST
FLOODING EVENTS OCCUR WHERE
CREEKS INTERSECT WITH CALTRANS
ROADWAYS. SO WE'RE WORKING WITH
CALTRANS SO THAT OUR PERMITS
ENABLE THEM TO MAINTAIN BE
MAINTAINED UNDER AND NEAR
HIGHWAY 101 AND EL CAMINO. IN
THE CASE OF OUR COUNTY, IN OUR
WORK TO SECURE THIS PERMIT TO
REMOVE DEBRIS IN FLOOD PRONE
AREAS, WE FOUND THAT THE ONLY
WAY TO EXPEDITE SUCH PERMITS IS
TO APPLY AS AN ATMOSPHERIC RIVER
IS BARRELING TOWARDS US, OR
AFTER FLOODING JUST OCCURRED AND
OUR PERMIT APPLICATION TO REMOVE
THIS PROVEN THREAT DOES NOT
RECOGNIZE THE INHERENT BENEFITS
OF THAT EFFORT. IT'S TREATED AS
AS IF IT WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS
COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO
PROVIDING SOCIETAL BENEFIT. IN
CONCLUSION, WE KNOW THAT CLIMATE
CHANGE IS NOT WAITING FOR A
PERMIT, AND WE NEED STATE
PERMITTING REGIME THAT CAN MEET
THIS MOMENT. IN SOME CASES, A
STATE REGULATORY AGENCY NEEDS TO
ADJUST THEIR FOCUS OR MAKE MORE
EFFICIENT THEIR PROCESS, AS WAS
DISCUSSED WHILE IN OTHER CASES
AGENCIES SHOULD HAVE EXPANDED
AUTHORITY. HERE ARE FIVE IDEAS
TO CONSIDER THAT UPHOLD OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES AND WOULD
HELP THE STATE'S PERMITTING
REGIME GET TO. YES, I SUBMIT
THAT PERMITS SHOULD RECOGNIZE
THE VALUE OF THE PROJECTS OR
PROJECTS THAT BUILD CLIMATE
RESILIENCE. PERMITS SHOULD
SUPPORT PROPOSALS TO BUILD
HABITAT RESILIENT TO FUTURE
CONDITIONS IMPLICIT IN THESE, IN
THESE FIVE COMMENTS IS THAT THEY
DO NOT CURRENTLY DO THAT. SO THE
FIRST IS THAT THEY SHOULD
RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF
RESILIENCE PROJECTS. THEY DO NOT
NEW THAT PERMITS SHOULD SUPPORT
PROPOSALS THAT BUILD RESILIENT
HABITAT TO FUTURE CONDITIONS,
RATHER THAN JUST HISTORIC
CONDITIONS. THEY DO NOT DO THAT.
THE PERMITTING CLOCK REGULATORY
AGENCIES WORK UNDER SHOULD NOT
BE EASILY PAUSED OR RESET. RIGHT
NOW, IT IS. THEY CAN JUST RESET
THE CLOCK. WHAT'S THE POINT OF
THE CLOCK IF YOU CAN RESET IT?
STATE AGENCIES SHOULD HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO APPROVE LAND USE
PLANS AND PROJECT PERMITS, SUCH
AS FOR HOUSING. WE NEED HOUSING,
ROADS, PARKS, UTILITIES, ALL THE
THINGS THAT MAKE OUR COMMUNITIES
FUNCTION THROUGH THE LENS OF
CLIMATE DRIVEN FUTURE
CONDITIONS. CURRENTLY, THAT'S
NOT DONE. FINALLY, PERMITS
REMOVE TO REMOVE A PROVEN
FLOODWAY FROM MAJOR STORMS
SHOULD BE EASIER TO OBTAIN
OUTSIDE OF WHEN THAT STORM IS
INCOMING. SO I'M HAPPY TO GET
MORE SPECIFIC ON THESE POINTS
AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND OUR
LAST WITNESS FOR THIS, THIS
SECTION. THANK YOU, LYNN. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JOHN
BOURGEOIS. I'M A WETLAND
ECOLOGIST BY TRAINING. IF YOU
MAY HAVE DEDUCED FROM MY LAST
NAME, I'M ACTUALLY FROM THE
SWAMPS OF SOUTH LOUISIANA. BUT I
HAVE BEEN WORKING IN SAN
FRANCISCO BAY MARSHES FOR ABOUT
25 YEARS. I'VE SPENT MY ENTIRE
CAREER HERE TRYING TO GET
HABITAT PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED IN
SAN FRANCISCO BAY. I'M CURRENTLY
THE DEPUTY OFFICER AT VALLEY
WATER. VALLEY WATER IS A VERY
UNIQUE WATER AGENCY. WE SERVE
SANTA CLARA COUNTY, WHICH IS
SILICON VALLEY. WE HAVE A WATER
UTILITY MISSION. WE HAVE A FLOOD
RISK REDUCTION MISSION, BUT WE
ALSO HAVE A STEWARDSHIP MISSION.
SO THAT MAKES US KIND OF UNIQUE
AMONG WATER AGENCIES. MY
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IS
OWNERSHIP OF THAT STEWARDSHIP
MISSION. WE ALSO DO ALL OF THE
PERMITTING CEQA, NEPA CLEARANCE
FOR ALL OF OUR LARGE CAPITAL
PROJECTS, WHICH IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR A LOT OF THE GRAY HAIR YOU
SEE ON ME TODAY PRIOR TO JOINING
VALLEY WATER, THOUGH, I'M NOT
JUST HERE REPRESENTING VALLEY
WATER. I'M ALSO HERE BECAUSE I
PERSONALLY WANT TO BE HERE
BECAUSE I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT
THIS. I SERVED ALMOST A DECADE
AS THE EXECUTIVE PROJECT MANAGER
FOR THE SOUTH BAY SALT POND
RESTORATION PROJECT, WHICH IS
THE LARGEST WETLAND RESTORATION
PROJECT OUTSIDE OF LOUISIANA AND
FLORIDA. I WAS YOU KNOW, NAIVE
GOING INTO THAT PROJECT WHEN I
FIRST STARTED AS THE PROJECT
MANAGER, THINKING, OH,
PERMITTING IS GOING TO BE EASY.
THIS IS A VOLUNTARY RESTORATION
PROJECT. EVERYBODY LOVES THIS
PROJECT. PERMITTING SHOULD BE
EASY AND FAST, RIGHT? IT WAS
NOT. AND I UNDERSTAND SOME OF
THE REASONS FOR THAT. EVERYONE
NEEDS TO BE TREATED EQUITABLY
AND SO THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO
TREAT A WETLAND RESTORATION
PROJECT ANY DIFFERENT THAN A
DEVELOPMENT OR A PARKING LOT.
AND I SUGGEST THAT MAYBE WE
SHOULD. AND I'M GLAD SORAYA IS
HERE, BECAUSE I THINK I WAS
ACTUALLY AT THE TABLE IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE BRIT, AND I
THINK IT IS A GREAT MODEL THAT
DESERVES SOME FURTHER
EXPLORATION AND LOOK AT WHAT'S
WORKING AND WHAT'S NOT. I THINK
A LOT OF THE CONCEPTS THERE ARE
REALLY STRONG AND CAN BE APPLIED
ELSEWHERE. I'D ALSO LIKE TO CALL
ATTENTION TO WHAT SHE MENTIONED
IS THE POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE, WHICH IS THE LEVEL
ABOVE THE PEOPLE ACTUALLY
ISSUING THE PERMITS. AND LARRY
GOLDMAN AT THE TIME ASKED ME
WHEN I WAS WITH THE SALT POND
PROJECT, YOU KNOW, JOHN, WHAT
ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE
HANGING YOU UP? WHAT ARE SOME OF
THE POLICY CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE
REGULATORS? AND THERE'S A LOT OF
THEM. YOU KNOW, NOT EVERYONE HAS
THEIR OWN JURISDICTION AND
THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS ALIGNED AND
THEY'RE IN CONFLICT. AND SO THAT
THAT POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE IS ACTUALLY EXPLORING
SOME OF THOSE POLICY CONFLICTS
THAT CAN HANG UP PROJECTS
SIGNIFICANTLY. THEY'RE ACTUALLY
LOOKING TO RESOLVE THOSE. AND SO
I THINK THAT'S DEFINITELY
SOMETHING THAT SHOULD SHOULD
GARNER A LITTLE MORE ATTENTION.
IS THOSE EFFORTS TRYING TO
RESOLVE POLICY CONFLICTS BETWEEN
THE REGULATORS, WHICH CAN CAUSE
APPLICANTS A LOT OF
CONSTERNATION. SO I'M GLAD YOU
GUYS GOT OUT ON THE BAY TO
ACTUALLY SEE SOME OF THE STUFF,
BUT I'M ASSUMING YOU'VE KIND OF
STUCK PRETTY CLOSE TO HERE
AROUND THE NORTH BAY. IF YOU HAD
GONE UP INTO SASSOON, IF YOU'D
GONE DOWN TO THE FAR SOUTH BAY,
YOU WOULD HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT
EXPERIENCE. AND THAT KIND OF IS
A TELLTALE SIGN OF, YOU KNOW,
THE VARIETY OF TYPES OF
SHORELINES WE HAVE ON THE BAY.
YOU LOOK AT THE ISSUES FACING
THE EMBARCADERO AND THE FLOOD
RISK THAT THEY HAVE TO DO. IT'S
A VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT LYNN
IS HAVING TO DEAL WITH IN SAN
MATEO COAST. IT'S VERY DIFFERENT
FROM WHAT WE'RE HAVING TO DEAL
WITH IN THE SANTA CLARA
SHORELINE VALLEY WATER IS
ACTUALLY PARTNERING STILL WITH
THE SOUTH BAY SALT POND
RESTORATION PROJECT. WE HAVE AN
UNPRECEDENTED OPPORTUNITY DOWN
THERE BECAUSE OF THE FORMER. I
THINK SAN DIEGO BAY HAS SALT
POND RESTORATION AS WELL. THESE
SALT PONDS CAN BE RESTORED, SO
YOU CAN REALLY FOCUS ON MORE
NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS. BUT NOT
ALL AREAS ARE CREATED EQUAL.
THEY'RE NOT ALL. THEY DON'T ALL
HAVE THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES. AND
SO WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
BUT WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE GOALS OF
THESE PROJECTS ARE ALL VERY
SIMILAR. RIGHT. WE'RE TRYING TO
PROVIDE FLOOD RISK REDUCTION.
AND WE ARE IN A RACE. RIGHT. SEA
LEVEL RISE AS LYNN SAID, SEA
LEVEL RISE ISN'T WAITING FOR A
PERMIT. RIGHT? WE ARE. AND THE
LONGER WE WAIT, THE LONGER IT'S
THE HARDER IT'S GOING TO BE. FOR
SOME, ESPECIALLY SOME OF THESE
NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS TO CATCH
UP. RIGHT. WE HAVE TO GET THESE
THESE RESTORATION PROJECTS UP
AND RUNNING AND THE HABITAT
ESTABLISHED BEFORE IT CAN
PROVIDE THOSE BENEFITS. AND SO
THAT'S A REAL THAT'S A REAL
ISSUE OF MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE
COGNIZANT THAT TIME IS OF THE
ESSENCE, THE ONE THING I'VE
LEARNED IN MY 20 PLUS YEARS OF
TRYING TO GET LARGE SCALE
PROJECTS PUT IN THE GROUND, IS
THAT LARGE SCALE MULTI-BENEFIT
MULTI-JURISDICTION MEANS
COMPROMISE, PERIOD. AND
SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN
TALK TO, YOU KNOW, LEADERS, YOU
CAN TALK TO HEADS OF AGENCIES,
AND EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT.
BUT WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO
ACTUALLY GETTING A PERMIT, IT'S
ADHERED TO BY THE LETTER OF THE
LAW. RIGHT. AND SO THERE'S A
LITTLE BIT OF LOST IN
TRANSLATION GOING ON BETWEEN THE
NEED FOR COMPROMISE TO GET THESE
PROJECTS DONE AND THE ACTUAL
EXECUTION OF THAT. I'D ALSO LIKE
SOMETHING THAT THAT SARAI
TOUCHED ON. YOU MAY HAVE CAUGHT
VALLEY WATER'S NAME IN HER
TALKING POINTS ABOUT. WE ARE ONE
OF THE FUNDERS OF THE BRITS, SO
WE ACTUALLY PAY. SO WE NOT ONLY
PAY FOR MEMBERS OF THE BRIT, WE
PAY FOR MEMBERS, STAFF MEMBERS
AT CDFW, WE PAY FOR STAFF
MEMBERS AT THE REGIONAL BOARD.
THERE IS A STAFFING SHORTAGE.
THERE'S NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO GET
THIS WORK DONE. AND I WOULD ALSO
ARGUE THAT WE SHOULD ALSO MAYBE
LOOK AT THE PAY SCALE, BECAUSE
THERE IS A LOT OF TURNOVER AT
THESE POSITIONS. I MEAN, THESE
ARE THESE ARE BRIGHT, PASSIONATE
PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING IMPORTANT
WORK AND THERE'S HIGH TURNOVER
AND THAT CAUSES DELAYS AS WELL.
IN THE NINE YEARS I WAS WITH THE
SOUTH BAY SALT POND RESTORATION
PROJECT, I WON'T NAME THE
AGENCY, BUT THERE WAS ONE
AGENCY. I HAD FIVE DIFFERENT
ANALYSTS IN THOSE NINE YEARS.
EVERY TIME I HAD A NEW PERSON
APPOINTED TO ME, I HAD TO START
FROM SCRATCH. RIGHT? AND THAT
TAKES TIME. AND THAT'S HAPPENING
AT ALL THE AGENCIES. THE
RETENTION IS REALLY IMPORTANT AT
THESE AGENCIES AND CONTINUITY
FOR THESE, THESE SORTS OF
THINGS. AND THAT'S WHY THE BRIT,
HAVING DEDICATED STAFF FOR THIS
VERY SPECIFIC TYPE OF PROJECT,
IS REALLY AN IMPORTANT, AN
IMPORTANT THING. SO I COULD
REGALE YOU WITH HORROR STORIES.
I WON'T DO THAT. I ALSO HAVE A
LIST OF POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS. I
CAN I CAN GO THROUGH THOSE SOME
OF THOSE REALLY QUICKLY. BUT I
KNOW YOU WANT TO GET TO Q&A. I
THINK STOPPING THE CLOCK IS A
BIG ONE, RIGHT? ALL THESE
AGENCIES HAVE TIMELINES THAT
THEY HAVE TO HIT, BUT THAT
TIMELINE DOESN'T START UNTIL
YOUR APPLICATION IS DEEMED
COMPLETE. SO THERE'S A LITTLE
LOOPHOLE. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO
SEE MAYBE SOME LIMIT ON THE
BITES AT THE APPLE BEFORE THAT.
I TOTALLY RESPECT THAT THESE
AGENCIES NEED TO HAVE ALL THE
INFORMATION AT THEIR DISPOSAL TO
MAKE A DECISION, AND THEY SHOULD
HAVE A COUPLE OF BITES AT THE
APPLE. BUT AT SOME POINT, I'VE
LITERALLY BEEN ASKED BY
REGULATORS TO PROVIDE THE SAME
INFORMATION IN GRAPHICAL FORM
INSTEAD OF TABLE FORM. IT'S
LIKE, IS THAT REALLY IT'S THE
INFORMATION IS THERE, YOU KNOW,
SO I THINK WE NEED TO GET AWAY
FROM THOSE SORTS OF THINGS THAT
KIND OF PROLONG THE TIMELINE. IF
INFORMATION IS MISSING.
ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S ONE THING.
BUT IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT IT
IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT AND ALL
THE DIFFERENT AGENCIES HAVE
SIMILAR INFORMATION REQUESTS
JUST IN SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
FORMATS, THE JURISDICTIONAL
JURISDICTIONS ARE SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT. SO I THINK MAYBE
GIVING THEM A LIMITED NUMBER OF
BITES AT THE APPLE. I THINK
WHERE JURISDICTIONS OVERLAP,
AGENCIES SHOULD ACCEPT
MITIGATION. THE SAME MITIGATION
PACKAGES. RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S
THAT'S A THAT'S A BIG ONE. FOR
EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, THESE
LANDSCAPE SCALE HABITAT PLANS
HCP, NCC, NCC, SOME AGENCIES
ACCEPT THEM AS MITIGATION AND
PREFER THEM AS MITIGATIONS.
OTHERS DON'T ACCEPT THEM AT ALL.
SO YOU END UP SOMETIMES DOUBLE
MITIGATING AND HAVING TO
COORDINATE THAT. I TALKED ABOUT
STAFFING AND YEAH, I'LL STOP
THERE. BUT THANK YOU. GREAT.
WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL
OF OUR PANELISTS. I'D LIKE TO
OPEN IT UP NOW FOR QUESTIONS
FROM MY COLLEAGUES. MISS PATTON,
IF I COULD JUST START SO I WANT
TO THANK MISS COHEN FOR YOUR
YOUR TESTIMONY. IT WAS
FASCINATING TO ME HOW MANY
DIFFERENT AGENCIES YOU REFERRED
TO IN TRYING TO BRING THEM
TOGETHER, BECAUSE I KNOW, LIKE
IN MY JURISDICTION. THANKS, LEN,
FOR YOUR HISTORY, IF YOU WILL,
BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE'VE HAD
AGENCIES WAIT UPWARDS OF FIVE
YEARS TO GET A PERMIT, AND IT
JUST DOES NOT WORK. SO MY
QUESTION IS, IS THERE SOME
MERIT, MAYBE, MISS COHEN, TO YOU
WITH YOUR INVOLVEMENT WITH
BRITT, IS THERE SOME MERIT TO
WHAT MR. BOURGEOIS TALKED ABOUT,
WHICH IS CAN WE HAVE OVERLAPPING
SATISFACTION OF INFORMATION?
BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE I
REMEMBER WAITING FOR BCDC FOR AN
ETERNITY TO GET A PUMP AND LEVEE
STATION DONE IN MY DISTRICT, AND
THIS WAS WHEN I WAS ON THE CITY
COUNCIL. AND THE LONGER WE
WAITED, THE MORE FOLKS WERE IN
THE FLOOD ZONE AND THE MORE THEY
PAID IN FLOOD INSURANCE. AND IT
WAS REALLY, REALLY DIFFICULT FOR
FOLKS THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, OF
MODEST MEANS. AND FLOOD
INSURANCE IS NO CHEAP DATE. I
KNOW THAT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT TO
DO WITH THE BUILDING, BUT ONE
THING I DO WANT TO MENTION IS IN
OUR DISTRICT. IN MY DISTRICT, WE
ALSO TRIED TO MAKE IT SUCH THAT
IF PEOPLE WANT TO COME IN AND
BUILD PART OF THE BUILDING, THAT
THEY'RE GOING TO DO HAS TO
SATISFY SOME LEVEL OF
ACCOMMODATION FOR SEA LEVEL
RISE. SO THERE'S LOTS THAT CAN
BE DONE ON THE FRONT END OF
BUILDING AS WELL. DOES IT MAKE
IT ANY CHEAPER? BUT AT LEAST IT
PREPARES US FOR THE FUTURE. BUT
IN ANY EVENT, MISS COHEN, IF YOU
COULD ANSWER ABOUT CAN WE MAKE
THE SATISFACTION OF CERTAIN
INQUIRIES OVERLAP AMONG
AGENCIES? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR QUESTION. SO MR. BOURGEOIS
WAS AT MANY OF THOSE MEETINGS IN
2017 AND EXPRESSED A LOT OF
SIMILAR INFORMATION, WHICH IS
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HELPED
GUIDE US WITH THE BRIT. AND SO
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE REALLY
BEEN TESTING THROUGH THE BRIT IS
TO HAVE A ROBUST PRE-APPLICATION
PROCESS TO TRY TO WORK OUT THOSE
INTERSECTIONS. WE INITIALLY
REALLY WANTED TO GET TO WHEN TO
HAVE A PROJECT, SUBMIT
APPLICATIONS TO ALL AGENCIES
CONCURRENTLY. WE HAVEN'T QUITE
ACHIEVED THAT. WE'RE STILL NOT
ABLE TO GET THE SEQUENCE
ENTIRELY RIGHT, BUT IT DOES
ENGAGE PROJECT PROPONENTS
EARLIER. SO IT IS EXTENDING KIND
OF THEIR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
AGENCIES LONGER. BUT ONE OF THE
THINGS WE'RE ABLE TO DO IS WORK
OUT SOME OF THOSE OVERLAPPING
ISSUES ABOUT MITIGATION, ABOUT
JURISDICTION, ABOUT THE
QUESTIONS OF WHAT INFORMATION WE
NEED TO ANALYZE. SO, YES, IT IS
IMPROVING THE PROCESS ABOUT
THOSE OVERLAPPING ISSUES. AND
INTERSECTING ISSUES, BUT IT IS
STILL SOMETHING THAT THE
AGENCIES NEED TO GET TOGETHER TO
TALK ABOUT. OTHERWISE YOU'RE
GETTING SEQUENCING. YOU'RE
GETTING THINGS KING. YOU KNOW,
ONE AFTER THE OTHER INSTEAD OF
PARALLEL. SO THAT IS ONE OF THE
STRENGTHS OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO. THANK YOU. BEFORE YOU GO.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND THE
LENGTH THAT THAT TAKES, WHICH IS
DIFFERENT THAN PERMITTING PER
SE. WHEN YOU AGREE. SO ALL SIX
AGENCIES THAT ARE ON THE BRIT
PLUS EPA ARE PERMITTING
AGENCIES. SO THEY EITHER ARE
ISSUING STATE OR FEDERAL PERMITS
OR LICENSES OR WATER QUALITY
CERTIFICATIONS. SO THEY'RE ALL
SOME PART OF THE WHAT I WOULD
CONSIDER THE ACTUAL PERMIT
PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK
GREAT. AND MISS PETRIE-NORRIS
HAS A QUESTION. AND SHE'S
JOINING US FROM SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA. SHE'S ALSO CHAIR OF
OUR ENERGY AND UTILITIES
COMMITTEE. SO THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE. THANK YOU. WELL
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. REALLY
APPRECIATE YOU CONVENING US FOR
THIS HEARING AND FOR BRINGING US
TOGETHER AS PART OF THE SELECT
COMMITTEE. I THINK THE FACT YOU
HAVE HAVEN'T DONE A MEMBER COUNT,
BUT, YOU KNOW, A DAIS FULL OF
MEMBERS JOINING FOR THIS HEARING
AND FLYING UP TO BE PART OF IT,
I THINK REALLY IS A TESTAMENT TO
THE FACT THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT
PERMIT REFORM, I THINK, IS ONE
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHALLENGES
THAT WE FACE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IN THE YEARS AHEAD.
YOU KNOW, IT TOUCHES SO MANY OF
OUR CRITICAL PRIORITIES, WHETHER
IT'S HOUSING, CLEAN ENERGY OR
BUILDING CLIMATE RESILIENCE. AND
I REPRESENT A DISTRICT IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, AS IN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA, SEA LEVEL RISE IS A
HUGE, HUGE CHALLENGE FOR OUR
COASTAL COMMUNITIES. AND REALLY,
THE FUTURE OF OUR COASTAL
ECONOMY. AND AS WE APPROACH THIS
HEARING AND I THINK WE'VE GOT
TWO MORE SCHEDULED FOR THE FALL,
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN
A GOAL FOR ME IS FOR US TO DRILL
DOWN AND GET AS SPECIFIC AS WE
CAN ON SOLUTIONS, BECAUSE I
THINK WE, AT A HIGH LEVEL, ALL
UNDERSTAND THE FACT THAT, YOU
KNOW, WE GOT TO GET GOOD
PROJECTS ONLINE MORE QUICKLY. WE
NEED TO MOVE FASTER IF WE'RE
GOING TO ACTUALLY TACKLE THESE
REALLY EXISTENTIAL PRIORITIES.
WE THEN CANDIDLY, AS
POLICYMAKERS, THEN CONNECTING
THE DOTS FROM, YOU KNOW, HIGH
LEVEL, WE NEED, YOU KNOW, AND
SOME OF YOU WERE STARTING TO GET
SPECIFIC. SO AND I APPRECIATE
THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, GOING FROM
FOR EXAMPLE, WE NEED TO
RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF
RESILIENCE TO WHAT DOES THAT
ACTUALLY TRANSLATE INTO INTO A
CHANGE IN STATE POLICY. SO JUST
AS A STARTING QUESTION, I WOULD
LOVE IF YOU ALL COULD JUST GET
SUPER SPECIFIC ON ONE THING THAT
YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE CHANGE AT
THE STATE LEVEL, YOU KNOW, AND
ONE THING THAT YOU'D LIKE US AS
STATE POLICYMAKERS TO TAKE AWAY
FROM TODAY'S CONVERSATION. ONE
THING. THERE'S SO MUCH I WAS
TAKING. I WAS TAKING NOTES. I'M
TAKING AWAY MORE THAN JUST THE
ONE THING. BUT IF WE CAN GET
SUPER SPECIFIC ON ONE THING,
THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE A
SUCCESS FOR ME. YEAH. SO THE
VALLEY, WHAT I MEANT WHEN I SAID
PERMIT SHOULD RECOGNIZE THE
VALUE OF PROJECTS THAT BUILD
CLIMATE RESILIENCE IS THAT AND
JOHN MENTIONED THIS WHEN HE WAS
TALKING ABOUT HE WAS BUILDING A
WETLAND, NOT A PARKING LOT, IS
WHEN WE BUILD WHEN WE PROPOSE TO
BUILD A LEVEE, A FLOOD WALL. IF
NEEDED, A WETLAND. ALL OF THE
THINGS THAT ARE IN SERVICE TO
RESILIENCE FOR DEVELOPED NATURAL
AND TRAILS. THAT PROPOSAL, AS
JOHN SAID, IS TREATED AS IF WE
WERE NO OFFENSE TO THE STRIP
MALL COMMUNITY, BUT AS IF WE
WERE BUILDING A STRIP MALL RIGHT
ON THE SHORELINE. IT'S NOT
DIFFERENT. AND I THINK THAT THE
INHERENT SOCIETAL VALUE OF
BUILDING CLIMATE RESILIENCE
SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY IN
OUR PERMITTING PROCESS SO THAT
WOULD BE, I HOPE, A SPECIFIC WE
ALMOST NEED TO THEN ASK OUR
STATE AGENCIES TO DEVELOP A
PERMITTING PROCESS, FRAMEWORK
AND APPROACH THAT IS SPECIFIC TO
RESILIENCE PROJECTS AND
DIFFERENTIATED FROM A TYPICAL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. YEAH, AND
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE'RE
THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE
DIFFERENT. THERE ARE PROBABLY
OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT
HAVE GREATER SOCIETAL VALUE THAN
OTHERS. OUR OUR AREA OF
KNOWLEDGE BASE AND ACTIVITY IS
ON CLIMATE RESILIENCE. I THINK
THAT HAS A LOT OF VALUE. SO I
SUGGEST OURS. BUT THE STATE, THE
STATE PERMITTING REGIME SHOULD
LOOK CLOSELY AT WHAT IS BEING
PROPOSED AND NOT TREAT
EVERYTHING THE SAME. YEAH. THANK
YOU. CAN Ó AS A SCIENCE
ORGANIZATION, I'M NOT GOING TO
ADVOCATE FOR POLICY OUTCOMES,
BUT I WILL OFFER TWO THINGS INTO
THE CONVERSATION. ONE OF WHICH
IS THAT I WOULD SUBMIT THAT
WORKFORCE TRAINING AND TRAINING
OF PROFESSIONALS CURRENTLY IN
THE POSITIONS, TRYING TO
EVALUATE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF
THEM AS TO WHAT IT MEANS TO
EMBRACE CLIMATE RESILIENCE AS
PART OF PERMITTING SHOULD BE, I
THINK, PART OF THE CONVERSATION.
MANY OF THESE FOLKS ARE IN JOBS
THAT WERE NOT WRITTEN JOB
DESCRIPTIONS NOT WRITTEN TO
ACCOMMODATE THE KINDS OF
DECISIONS THAT THEY NOW FACE IN
THEIR DAY TO DAY JOBS. AND I
THINK WE CAN LEAN ON OUR
UNIVERSITY AND EDUCATION SYSTEMS
TO PROVIDE TRAINING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR WORKFORCE
PROFESSIONALS. SO THAT'S ONE
SPECIFIC. THE OTHER IS, I HEAR,
AN AWFUL LOT ABOUT HOW, YOU
KNOW, YOU END UP IN THESE
CONVERSATIONS WHERE IT'S NATURE
PITTED AGAINST X, Y OR Z OR Z.
AND I THINK WE CAN WE CAN AGAIN
LEAN ON OUR SCIENCE COLLEAGUES
TO BRING COMMON CURRENCY INTO
THE WAY IN WHICH WE'RE
EVALUATING TRADE OFFS IN MAKING
THESE PERMITTING DECISIONS, SO
THAT WE THINK ABOUT AND WE
QUANTIFY IN DOLLAR VALUES THE
FLOOD RISK REDUCTION THAT A
MARSH PROVIDES. AND WE PUT THAT
ALONGSIDE OTHER DOLLAR VALUES OF
THINGS. AND THERE ARE WAYS TO DO
THAT, THAT I THINK COULD THEN
PROVIDE INFORMATION IN A COMMON
CURRENCY THAT WOULD HELP THE
STAFF, PEOPLE TRYING TO APPROACH
THESE PERMITS. SO THAT'S MY
SCIENCE ANSWER. I'M NOT GOING TO
BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU ONE, BUT
I'LL GO QUICK, I PROMISE. I WANT
TO ECHO LYNN'S COMMENTS. I THINK
HAVING PROJECTS IN DIFFERENT
BUCKETS MAKES IT, AND THAT'S WHY
I'M GLAD THE BRIT IS HERE,
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT TRIES TO
DO. BUT IT'S A VERY NARROW
RIGHT. YOU HAVE TO. IT'S A VERY
NARROW, YOU KNOW, TYPE OF
PROJECT. BUT MAYBE THAT THAT
MODEL NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT FOR,
FOR BROADENING, YOU KNOW, INTO A
SECONDARY PATHWAY POTENTIALLY OF
THINGS THAT HAVE GREATER
SOCIETAL VALUE. I KNOW THAT'S
GOING TO BE HARD TO WRAP
LANGUAGE AROUND. I WOULD SAY
STAFFING, LIKE, LET'S GET MORE
FUNDING TO THESE AGENCIES. LET'S
GET MORE, MORE. ALL THE
REGULATORS I KNOW ARE SUPER
OVERWORKED AND UNDERPAID. SO I
THINK THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW,
ATTRACT MORE. THEY WOULD STAY
LONGER. I THINK THAT WOULD BE
IMPORTANT. I KNOW THAT'S
PROBABLY NOT A POPULAR
SUGGESTION. I THINK MAYBE HAVING
THE NUMBER OF BITES AT THE APPLE
ON AN APPLICATION, YOU GET TWO
REVIEWS AND THEN EITHER SAY IT'S
INADEQUATE, GO BACK TO THE
DRAWING BOARD OR YEAH, WE'RE
GOOD. LIKE I THINK JUST HAVING
SOME SORT OF TIME FRAME AROUND,
YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF TIMES
THEY'RE ASKING FOR MORE AND MORE
INFORMATION WOULD, WOULD SPEED
UP THE PROCESS. AND I HAD ONE
MORE. OH YEAH. AND THIS IS ALSO
WHAT THE BRIT IS HAVING WORKING,
HAVING THESE AGENCIES WORKING IN
CONCERT INSTEAD OF IN SEQUENCE.
YEAH. RIGHT. IT'S THIS COMPLEX
DOMINO EFFECT. RIGHT. YOU GOT TO
HAVE THIS ONE BEFORE YOU GET
THIS ONE AND THIS ONE BEFORE YOU
GET THIS ONE. AND THIS ONE HAS
TO COME IN FROM THE OUTSIDE OVER
HERE. RIGHT. LIKE, CAN WE. AND
AGAIN, THE BRIT IS KIND OF A
LITTLE BIT OF A MODEL FOR THAT.
SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE SOME
SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS. SO I THINK
THAT ON MY WISH LIST WE CAN
CERTAINLY AS REGULATORY AND
PERMITTING AGENCIES ACCEPT MORE
RISK AND UNCERTAINTY. BUT WITH
THAT COMES MAYBE ON THE BACK END
THE NEED FOR FUNDING ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING. SO IF
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE SOME OF
THESE INNOVATIVE PROJECTS THAT
HAVE NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS THAT
HAVEN'T BEEN TRIED IN
CALIFORNIA, WE'RE GOING TO DO
THOSE. BUT THERE'S SOME REAL
SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES HERE.
THERE'S ENDANGERED SPECIES
LISTED SPECIES, AND SOMETIMES
WE'RE NOT 100% SURE WHAT'S GOING
TO HAPPEN TO THOSE. SO WE NEED
TO ADEQUATELY FUND THESE
PROJECTS. AND I THINK MOST LARGE
PROJECTS HAVE A LOT OF
CHALLENGES. IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE
TO GET WORK DONE. AND THEY'RE
NOT DOING THAT. ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING ON THE
BACK END. AND SO PROVIDING MORE
FUNDING AND RECOGNIZING THAT AS
A SITUATION, IF YOU GET IT IN
THE GROUND QUICKER, THEN WE NEED
TO BE ABLE TO FIX THINGS THAT
MIGHT NOT BE WORKING. AND THEN
ALSO WE FOUND THROUGH THE BRIT
THAT EVEN WHEN WE WORKED
TOGETHER AS STATE AND FEDERAL
PERMITTING AGENCIES, WE'RE
FINDING THAT THERE'S SO MUCH
INFRASTRUCTURE, THERE'S
RAILROADS, THERE'S UTILITY
DISTRICTS, NOT ONLY WATER BUT
OTHER FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICTS,
YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S
UNDER THE GROUND ALREADY THERE.
AND SOMETIMES THOSE AGENCIES ARE
REALLY HARD TO CONTACT AND GET
TO WORK WITH THE PROJECTS. AND
SO BEING ABLE TO GET THEM TO THE
TABLE IS REALLY CRITICAL. I
WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY THE
ACCEPTANCE OF RISK. I THINK ON
BOTH SIDES IS REALLY A HARD ONE
TO GET OVER. I'VE HAD REGULATORS
TELL ME POINT BLANK THAT THEY
DON'T TRUST THE ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT PROCESS. AND SO, YOU
KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE
COMMITTED TO IT AND WE'VE FUNDED
IT AND WE'VE GOT THE DOLLARS IN
OUR CIP PROGRAM FOR IT, THEY'RE
LIKE, WE DON'T TRUST IT. SO LIKE
I THINK THE COMPROMISE IS ON
BOTH SIDES. GOT IT. THANK YOU,
MR. WARD. AND THEN WE'LL GO TO
MR. WARD AND WE'LL SEE IF ANYONE
ELSE WANTS TO ASK QUESTIONS.
THANKS. MISS COHEN. I WANTED TO
SORT OF MAYBE DIG IN A LITTLE
BIT DEEPER, SINCE IT SEEMS TO BE
THAT YOU'RE MAYBE A POTENTIAL
PILOT MODEL THAT OTHERS ARE
LOOKING TOWARD FOR THE KIND OF
EFFICIENCIES THAT WE'RE LOOKING
FOR. AS YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT,
TO KIND OF GET UP AND RUNNING,
YOU NEEDED ABOUT A MILLION AND A
HALF DOLLARS OVER FIVE YEARS TO
BE ABLE TO, I GUESS, HAVE STAFF
SUPPORT TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME OF
THE PERMITTING ACTIVITY. BUT
WOULD THAT WAS THERE? HAVE YOU
ANALYZED WHAT THE ALTERNATIVE
WOULD HAVE BEEN LIKE? WHAT WOULD
YOU WHAT MIGHT YOU HAVE NEEDED?
YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE STILL
ACTING INDEPENDENTLY AS ALL
THESE DIFFERENT AGENCIES IN THE
FORM OF STAFF SUPPORT, TO BE
ABLE TO FORM THE SAME OUTCOMES,
IS IT MORE EFFICIENT, I GUESS.
WELL, FOR THIS, FOR THIS LEVEL
OF STAFF. SO WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS TO KIND OF
COMPARE. IF WE WERE WORKING WITH
REGULAR STAFF AND THESE PROJECTS
WERE DISPERSED AMONG DIFFERENT
STAFF AT DIFFERENT REGULATORY
AGENCIES, HOW LONG THAT WOULD
HAVE WOULD TAKE VERSUS AND HOW
MUCH IT WOULD COST. THE REASON
WE SETTLED ON THIS MODEL IS
BECAUSE THERE WERE ALREADY
EXAMPLES FOR BOTH STATE AND FEDS
OF, FOR INSTANCE, VALLEY WATER
OR OTHER NONFEDERAL ENTITIES
PAYING FOR EXPEDITED PERMIT
REVIEW. AND SO THAT'S REALLY
KIND OF THE MODEL THAT WE USED
IN ORDER TO FORM THIS GROUP. SO
WE DID LOOK AT DATA BEFORE WE
STARTED, BUT IT'S ONLY AS GOOD
AS IT WAS ENTERED. AND SO FOR
RESTORATION PROJECTS WE FOUND
ANYWHERE FROM 27 TO 2000 DAYS.
SO IT'S BEEN REALLY HARD TO
COMPARE THAT. AND TO QUANTIFY
IT. OKAY. AND THEN SINCE YOU'RE
KIND OF DEFINE YOURSELF AS
COLLABORATIVE PERMITTING AND YOU
KNOW, BEING AN INTEGRATED TEAM,
HOW ARE YOU APPROACHING SOME OF
THE DECISIONS? SO IF YOU'RE A
COLLECTION OF CERTAIN AGENCIES
ABOUT MAYBE WHO GETS TO ANALYZE
IT FIRST, HOW ARE YOU REDUCING
MAYBE ANY REDUNDANT ANALYSIS
THAT IS MAYBE SHARED BETWEEN ANY
OF THESE INDIVIDUAL AGENCIES
THAT OTHERWISE WOULD LOOK AT IT
SORT OF INDEPENDENTLY AND
SUCCESSIVELY? AND WHEN THE
CONFLICT ARISES, MAYBE BETWEEN,
YOU KNOW, COMPETING GOAL BETWEEN
TWO DIFFERENT AGENCIES, YOU
KNOW, HOW DOES THAT GET
RESOLVED? SO THE ENTIRE POINT OF
THE BRIT IS THAT THE MEETINGS
ARE HELD TOGETHER. SO THE
PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS ARE
HELD TOGETHER. THE PERMITTING
TEAM MEETS EVERY WEEK TOGETHER
TO TALK ABOUT THE PROJECTS AND
WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES. THERE
IS SOME INFORMATION THAT DOES
NEED TO BE REPRESENTED TO
DIFFERENT AGENCIES DIFFERENTLY,
AND THE TEAM IS STILL WORKING
THROUGH THAT. WE HAVE TWO OF THE
STAFF HERE RIGHT NOW WHO ARE
WORKING ON THAT. WE ALSO HAVE A
MONTHLY MEETING FOR THE POLICY
AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE FOR ALL
THE AGENCIES, BOTH STAFF AND
MANAGERS. AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE
RAISE ISSUES BOTH ON A PROJECT
LEVEL AND A POLICY LEVEL TO WORK
THROUGH THEM. AND WE REALLY RELY
ON THE STAFF TO ELEVATE THOSE
ISSUES TO THE MANAGERS. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN I
ANSWER THAT FROM THE PROJECT
PROPONENT SIDE? BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, I'VE I'VE TAKEN PROJECTS
THROUGH THE PROCESS BOTH PRE PRE
BRIT AND POST BRIT. AND I MEAN I
SEE ALI AND AGNES IN THE
AUDIENCE. I KNOW IF THEY'RE ON
MY PROJECT, I KNOW THEY KNOW
WHAT THE ISSUES ARE AND SOME OF
THE, SOME OF THE IT'S NOT
QUANTIFIABLE. THE BENEFIT OF
THAT. RIGHT. BECAUSE THEY'VE
WORKED TOGETHER, THEY KNOW THE
ISSUES ARE IN THE BAY. I'M NOT
STARTING FROM SCRATCH WHEN I
KNOW I GET THE BRIT TEAM RIGHT,
BECAUSE THEY'VE GONE THROUGH
THIS MULTIPLE TIMES IN SAN
FRANCISCO BAY TO THE BAY
SPECIFIC ISSUE. SO SOME OF THE
BENEFIT IS NOT REALLY THAT
QUANTIFIABLE, BUT IT IS TANGIBLE
FOR THOSE OF US THAT ARE COMING
IN WITH AN APPLICATION BECAUSE
WE KNOW THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO WE'RE
NOT WE'RE NOT STARTING FROM
ZERO. AND THAT'S HARD TO
QUANTIFY. IF I COULD JUST ADD
ALSO THAT CERTAINLY THE GOALS OF
THE BRIT ARE WORTHY, AND GETTING
THEM IN THE SAME ROOM ADDS
VALUE. BUT AT THE END OF THE
DAY, THEY HAVE TO GO BACK. THEY
MEANING EACH AGENCY REP HAS TO
GO BACK TO THEIR DESK, WRITE
THEIR PERMIT BASED ON THEIR
AGENCY'S REQUIREMENTS. SO I
WOULD I WOULD REALLY HESITATE
THIS COMMITTEE TO FOCUS IN ON.
WELL, IF WE DO THE BRIT AND WE
INSTITUTIONALIZE IT AROUND THE
STATE, WE'RE GOING TO COVER THIS
ISSUE THAT IS GOING TO HELP, BUT
IT'S NOT GOING TO HELP ENOUGH,
BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY,
WE STILL HAVE TO GO TO THE
REGIONAL BOARD BASED ON THEIR
REQUIREMENTS. WE HAVE TO GO TO
THE CDFW, THE FEDERAL, THE FEDS,
ALL OF THAT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE
GET TRIPPED UP. THANK YOU. OTHER
QUESTIONS, MR. TING? THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. SO JUST TO KIND OF
SUMMARIZE, I MEAN, I HEARD THIS.
SO YOU GOT ONE PROCESS WHERE YOU
GET EVERYONE TOGETHER, THEY TALK
AND YOU TRY TO HAVE A PLAN AHEAD
OF TIME. WHAT? I HEARD A COUPLE
OF YOU ALSO SAY WAS, IT'D BE
GREAT IF YOU COULD SOMEHOW SAY
THIS IS A CLIMATE PROJECT AND WE
CAN EXPEDITE THAT. BUT WHAT I
DIDN'T HEAR IS WHAT IS
EXPEDITING OR ADDING, YOU KNOW,
SAYING, HEY, THIS IS A CLIMATE
PROJECT VERSUS THIS IS A STRIP
MALL. WHAT IS WHAT IS GIVING IT
THAT WEIGHT. DO, LIKE, AND HOW
WOULD YOU ACTUALLY MAKE IT GO
FASTER? BECAUSE WHAT IT SOUNDS
LIKE THE FEEDBACK IS WE HAVE TOO
MANY AGENCIES WITH PERMITTING
AUTHORITY, YOU KNOW, AND AS YOU
ALL KNOW, CONSOLIDATING ALL
THESE AGENCIES OR CONSOLIDATING
THESE TASKS IS VERY CHALLENGING.
AND SO WHAT I WHAT I HAVEN'T
HEARD IS I'VE HEARD WORDS, I
HAVEN'T HEARD A SOLUTION THAT WE
COULD ACTUALLY GO DO SOMETHING
WITH. AND PERHAPS THERE IS NOT
SOLUTION. I DON'T KNOW, I'M JUST
I JUST PUT IT OUT THERE. IT'S
DIFFICULT. BUT I MEAN HAVING AND
LYNN'S RIGHT I MEAN THE IT'S NOT
A PANACEA, BUT IT DOES HAVE I
THINK IT'S A GOOD STARTING POINT
AS A MODEL TO LOOK AND JUST
HAVING A DEDICATED TEAM. RIGHT.
SO YOU'RE NOT GOING THE NORMAL
PATHWAY. YOU GET WHATEVER, YOU
KNOW, STAFF YOU GET. YOU'RE ON
THIS OTHER PATHWAY THAT'S
SUPPOSED TO BE AND THE BRIT
ACTUALLY HAS SOME METRICS FOR
PERFORMANCE, RIGHT. BECAUSE IT'S
FUNDED THROUGH PUBLIC DOLLARS.
SO YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE NOT
MEETING THEIR DEADLINES, YOU
KNOW, VALLEY WATER IS A FUNDER.
WE COULD WE COULD STOP PAYING
FOR THE SERVICE. THE OTHER THING
AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, IS
THE SOUTH BAY SALT POND
RESTORATION PROJECT. THE FIRST
SUITE OF PROJECTS WE SENT
THROUGH, WE WERE HAVING. THIS IS
A VOLUNTARY WETLAND RESTORATION
PROJECT. THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF
THIS PROJECT IS HABITAT
RESTORATION AND ENDANGERED
SPECIES HABITAT. WE WERE HAVING
TO MITIGATE FOR THAT PROJECT.
MITIGATING FOR VOLUNTARY
RESTORATION PROJECT. JUST WANTED
TO MAKE MY HEAD EXPLODE. RIGHT.
AND SO. BUT ISN'T THE
RESTORATION MITIGATION WE HAD TO
DO SOME VERY CREATIVE
WORKAROUNDS TO MAKE IT PENCIL
OUT BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, TO
RESTORE THE BAY, TO RESTORE THE
TIDES, YOU HAVE TO BUILD SOME
SORT OF FLOOD PROTECTION ON THE
INLAND SITE. RIGHT? YOU CAN'T
JUST YOU CAN'T JUST LET THE
TIDAL WATERS COME IN AND, AND
FLOOD THE NEIGHBORING
COMMUNITIES. RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO
YOU HAVE TO BUILD SOME FEATURES.
AND THOSE FEATURES REQUIRE FILL
IN WATERS OF THE STATE AND
WATERS OF THE US. AND THE NO NET
LOSS POLICY SAYS YOU CAN'T YOU
HAVE TO HAVE A NET GAIN. WELL,
CONVERTING A SALT POND TO A
MARSH, THAT'S A TYPE CONVERSION.
YOU'RE JUST CONVERTING ONE TYPE
OF WATER TO ANOTHER. THERE'S NO
NET GAIN IN WATERS OF THE US. SO
YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALL THESE I
MEAN I'M SORRY TO GET SUPER
NUANCED HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR
A RESTORATION PROJECT TO HAVE TO
MITIGATE IT WAS JUST, YOU KNOW,
IT WAS IT WAS TOUGH TO SWALLOW.
AND WE HAD TO GET PRETTY
CREATIVE WITH HOW TO DO THAT,
BECAUSE YOU HAD TO SHOW NO NET.
YOU HAD TO SHOW NO NET LOSS OF
WETLANDS, OF WATERS OF THE US.
AND SO THOSE SORTS OF THINGS
SEEMS LIKE THERE COULD BE AN
EXCEPTION FOR THOSE SORTS OF
THINGS. AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE
BALANCE GOALS JUST UPDATED IN
2015. AND I WAS COAUTHOR ON TWO
OF THE SCIENCE CHAPTERS. WE'RE
LOOKING AT AT, AT AT ECOTONES
SLOPED LEVEES SO THAT WE DON'T
JUST BUILD WALLS, WE BUILD
GRADUAL TRANSITIONS OF HABITAT.
SO AS SEA LEVELS RISE, THE
MARSHES CAN MIGRATE UP. THESE
GRADUAL SLOPES. THAT REQUIRES A
LOT OF FILL IN THE BAY. AND ALL
OF OUR POLICIES WERE DEVELOPED
TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM FILLING
THE BAY. BUT NOW WE'RE TRYING TO
FILL THE BAY FOR HABITAT
PURPOSES. IT'S STILL A LOSS OF
WATERS. AND SO WE HAVE TO
MITIGATE, EVEN THOUGH ALL THE
SCIENCE DOCUMENTS SAY THIS IS
HOW YOU SHOULD BUILD A MARSH, WE
HAVE TO MITIGATE FOR IT. WE HAVE
TO FIND MITIGATION WITHIN THE
PROJECT THROUGH SOME CREATIVE
NUANCE. AND IT SEEMS LIKE THINGS
LIKE UPLAND TRANSITION ZONES,
WHICH ARE A DIRECT SEA LEVEL
RISE ADAPTATION APPROACH TO
RESTORATION, BUT GOING BACK TO
SO, SO WE YOUR SECOND POINT. SO
WE CAN'T REALLY SAY I GUESS HOW
DO YOU BECAUSE THE WHOLE POINT
LIKE YOU SAID, WE ESTABLISH ALL
THIS LAW TO NOT FILL IN THE BAY
AND SO DO WE. ARE YOU SAYING
THAT WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, AMEND
THE ACT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THE
PETRAS ACT AND SAY, HEY, YOU
KNOW, BUT YOU CAN FILL THE BAY
UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES OR,
AND BCDC IS LOOKING AT THAT.
THEY ARE, THEY ARE LOOKING AT,
YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S
A SLOW IT'S A PROCESS. RIGHT. SO
BUT BUT WE COULD DO THAT TOO.
YES. YOU COULD. RIGHT. SO, SO I
THINK I THINK THAT WOULD BE I
THINK WHAT WE YOU KNOW, I THINK
WHAT WE WOULD LOOK FOR FROM YOU
IS YOU KNOW, MOST OF WHAT YOU
SAID IS NOT FOR US. I THINK WE
COULD TAKE AND GO DO SOMETHING
WITH. SO THE MORE SPECIFIC GOING
GOING BACK TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM
ORANGE COUNTY'S QUESTION, THE
MORE SPECIFIC YOU CAN BE WITH
MORE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF
SITUATIONS THAT NEED TO BE
ADDRESSED AND OBVIOUSLY THE,
THE, THE BETTER, THE BIGGER THE
SITUATION OR THE MORE THE
SITUATION COVERS MORE THAN ONE
CIRCUMSTANCE. THAT WOULD BE, I
THINK, HELPFUL BECAUSE THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GO ADDRESS
WITH LEGISLATION. ALL THE OTHER
THINGS THAT YOU ALL RAISED, NONE
OF IT WAS, YOU KNOW, NONE OF IT.
I COULD TAKE INTO OR PUT INTO
LEGISLATION OR WE COULD PUT INTO
THE BUDGET. IT WAS JUST SORT OF
KIND OF BROAD, BROAD LANGUAGE.
RIGHT. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT
WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS. YEAH,
YEAH, YEAH. AND THE BETTER THING
IS, IF THERE ARE BIGGER, YOU
KNOW, THIS HAPPENS UP AND DOWN
THE STATE, YOU KNOW, OR THIS
HAPPENS OR WE SEE THIS HAPPEN
OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AND MAYBE
YOU DON'T SEE THAT, BUT THAT
WOULD JUST BE THAT'S SORT OF
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO LOOK FOR
BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE WE FEEL
YOUR PAIN AND WE WANT TO ADDRESS
IT. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF
WHY EVERYONE'S HERE TODAY. SO
SORRY. GO AHEAD. I WAS JUST
GOING TO SAY I THINK ONE THING
THOUGH, I THINK THAT I NOTED, I
THINK A COUPLE OF US IS HOW THE
CLOCK GETS TO STOP. I THINK THAT
IS SOMETHING WE COULD WORK ON
ABSOLUTELY SLIGHTLY. BUT YES,
THE MORE SPECIFICITY THE BETTER,
BECAUSE WE ARE LAWMAKERS HUNGRY
TO DO BILLS. YES, TO BE A PART
OF THE SOLUTION. BUT BUT I WANT
TO LET ANYONE REACT TO MR.
TING'S COMMENTS. YEAH, I THINK
LEN WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.
SORRY. JUST THANK YOU. I THINK
THERE ARE SOME OTHER SPECIFIC
THINGS HERE. HABITAT. RIGHT NOW,
THE PERMITTING PERMITTING REGIME
IS ABOUT RESTORING HISTORIC
CONDITIONS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT
WE'RE LOOKING AT A PRE-DEVELOPED
BAY. WE'RE LOOKING AT DEVELOP
THESE MARSHLANDS. BUT AS JOHN
SAID, A LOT OF THOSE HISTORIC
CONDITIONS ARE JUST GOING TO BE
UNDERWATER. AND SO I THINK WE AS
A SOCIETY NEED TO BE BUILDING A
HABITAT FOR 2015 ON A HABITAT
FOR 1975. AND I THINK THAT THERE
ARE WAYS TO DO SPECIFIC
LEGISLATION THAT TALKS ABOUT THE
GOALS OF OUR PERMITTING PROCESS
IN TERMS OF HABITAT, AND THAT'S
A PRETTY IMPORTANT SHIFT. AND AS
CHAIR WICKS MENTIONED, THESE
LAWS WERE DEVELOPED IN THE EARLY
1970S. WE SHOULDN'T EXPECT THEM
TO UNDERSTAND CLIMATE BACK THEN.
BUT NOW THINGS ARE DIFFERENT AND
THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES NOW.
THIS COULD BE A PANDORA'S BOX.
YOU WANT TO OPEN IT SUPER
CAREFULLY ABOUT THESE IMPORTANT
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS. BUT IF NOT
NOW, WHEN TO THINK ABOUT THESE
QUESTIONS, RIGHT. BUT EVEN EVEN
THE FOLKS WHO CHAMPIONED THE
LEGISLATION IN THE 70S, I THINK
NONE OF THEM WOULD BE OPPOSED TO
HABITAT RESTORATION. RIGHT? I
MEAN, SO I THINK THAT'S THE, YOU
KNOW, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WE
HAVE ISSUES THAT THERE IS
GENERAL AGREEMENT ABOUT, BUT HOW
DO WE ACTUALLY CARVE THAT OUT
AND HOW DO WE IMPLEMENT THAT? I
THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED YOUR
GUIDANCE, BECAUSE YOU'RE IN THE
WEEDS ON THESE ISSUES AND YOU
SEE WHERE THE BARRIERS ARE AND
THE HURDLES ARE BECAUSE IT
DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK TO,
YOU KNOW, JOHN'S POINT, LOOK,
HABITAT RESTORATION IS THE
MITIGATION. YOU'RE MITIGATING
FOR ALL THE DAMAGE THAT WAS DONE
FROM TAKING AWAY THE HABITAT. SO
TO ME, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE
LIKE THAT. THAT IS WHAT THE
MITIGATION IS. SO THANK YOU. AND
I THINK WE HAVE MISS
PETRIE-NORRIS HAD ONE OTHER
FOLLOW UP QUESTION, AS DID MISS
PAPAN. AND THEN WE'LL WRAP UP
THIS SESSION. OKAY. JUST A QUICK
FOLLOW UP. SO ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT SECRETARY CROWFOOT HAD
FRAMED AS ONE OF HIS STRATEGIC
PRIORITIES WHEN HE WAS
APPOINTED, I THINK BACK LIKE
WHEN HE WAS FIRST APPOINTED IN
2018, WAS CUTTING GREEN TAPE.
AND HE HAS HAD A NUMBER OF
INITIATIVES. I THINK SOME TASK
FORCES. HOW MUCH HAS THAT
CHANGED OR IMPROVED THE
SITUATION FOR FOLKS WORKING IN
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE YOURS? AND
IT'S OKAY IF THE ANSWER IS NOT
AT ALL. I'M JUST CURIOUS. I'LL
SAY I HAVEN'T SEEN A BENEFIT
FROM IT. IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S
NOT A WORTHY EFFORT, BUT I
HAVEN'T SEEN A BENEFIT. OKAY.
YEAH. IT HASN'T AFFECTED MY DAY
TO DAY AT ALL. OKAY, SO ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT WE'VE ASKED THE
STAFF TO TRACK IS PROGRAMMATIC
EFFORTS. SO THAT INCLUDES
PROJECTS THAT INTERSECT WITH
CUTTING THE GREEN TAPE OR OTHER
PROGRAMMATIC EFFORTS ON THE
FEDERAL SIDE, LIKE PROGRAMMATIC
BIOLOGICAL OPINIONS OR THE
STATEWIDE RESTORATION ORDER FOR
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATIONS IN
WDCS. AND SO I THINK ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN IS THAT
THERE ARE QUITE A FEW PROJECTS
THAT ARE ABLE TO USE KIND OF
THESE PROGRAMMATIC EFFORTS. ONE
OF THE OTHER THINGS I THINK
WE'VE SEEN IS THAT PERHAPS LESS
COMPLEX PROJECTS ARE MORE EASILY
ABLE TO USE THESE PROGRAMMATIC
EFFORTS. AND SO THE BAY IS VERY
COMPLICATED. WE FOCUS ON THAT.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MIGHT
BE A POSSIBILITY IS THAT THERE'S
STAFFING THAT'S ABLE TO FOCUS ON
MORE COMPLEX PROJECTS BECAUSE OF
THESE PROGRAMMATIC EFFORTS ARE
MAKING IT POSSIBLY EASIER TO
REVIEW AND PERMIT SOME OF THE
SIMPLER PROJECTS. THAT IS A
QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE TESTED,
BUT IT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
WE'RE TRACKING IN THE BRITAIN IS
IN OUR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE SF
BAY AREA. THANKS, MR. LAST
COMMENT OR QUESTION, JUST TO
FOLLOW UP ON MISS WIGHTMAN'S
SUGGESTION. SO I AGREE WITH YOU
THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT
OF CURRENCY, AND I WOULD, FROM A
LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE, LIKE TO
LOOK AT THAT MORE BECAUSE SINCE
75, WE BUILT A LOT AROUND THE
BAY, AND PART OF WHY ONE
SHORELINE WAS CREATED WAS
BECAUSE THE VULNERABILITY OF NOT
ONLY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF CORPORATIONS,
BIG TIME CORPORATIONS THAT KEEP
NOT ONLY THE STATE GOING, BUT
KEEP THE NATION GOING. AND SO I
AM VERY CONCERNED THAT NOT ONLY
ARE WE LOOKING AT IT FROM A,
HEY, LET'S GET BACK TO WETLANDS.
SURE, I'M WITH YOU 110%, BUT
NONETHELESS, THERE THERE ARE SO
MANY VULNERABILITIES THAT DO
NEED SORT OF THAT CURRENCY. IN
OTHER WORDS, HOW MUCH DOES IT
MEAN DOLLARS WISE? WHO IS GOING
TO BE EXPOSED? WHO HAS TO PAY X
NUMBER OF DOLLARS? AS I
MENTIONED IN FLOOD INSURANCE,
YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE,
I THINK THERE MAY BE SOMETHING
LEGISLATIVELY THAT NOT ONLY
LOOKS AT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO
ACHIEVE PERHAPS THE BEST
ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTION TO
PROTECTING AGAINST SEA LEVEL
RISE, BUT ALSO WHAT'S GOING TO
BE THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE TO
SAVE, WHETHER IT'S RESIDENCES,
WHETHER IT'S IMPORTANT
CORPORATIONS, WHETHER IT'S
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS, ALL
OF THOSE THINGS. SO IF YOU HAVE
SOME SUGGESTION ABOUT HOW WE
COULD LEGISLATE TO LOOK AT
CURRENCY, I WOULD BE VERY
INTERESTED IN THAT BECAUSE IT'S
A WAY OF EVALUATING THESE
THINGS, PERHAPS. AND ONCE YOU
HAVE A GOOD METRIC, THEN PERHAPS
THE EVALUATION GOES A LOT
FASTER. SURFACING THE TRADE OFFS
IN A WAY THAT THEY CAN BE
ACTUALLY LOOKED AT TOGETHER.
WHAT I'D LOVE TO DO IS TO BE
ABLE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU
COLLEAGUES AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ ARE
ACTUALLY LEADERS IN THIS EFFORT
IN THE NEW CLIMATE RESILIENCE
INSTITUTE, HEADED BY DOCTOR MIKE
BECK AND I THINK HE I'D LOVE TO
SORT OF REGROUP WITH HIM AND
CONVENE AND SEE IF WE COULD
BRING SOME IDEAS BACK TO YOU.
OKAY. IF I COULD ADD ONE POINT
TO THAT, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF
TALKING TODAY ABOUT PERMITTING
AS A AS SOMETHING THAT PROMOTES
OUR ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES. AND
THAT'S APPROPRIATE. WE SHOULD
ALSO THINK ABOUT PERMITTING AS
SOMETHING THAT PROMOTES OUR
ECONOMIC VALUES. AND THIS IS, I
THINK, GETTING TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CATHERINE'S
POINT AND THAT PERMITS ARE
PROVIDED TO FACILITIES THAT ARE
ECONOMIC ENGINES AS THEY
INTERSECT WITH WATER OR THE
SHORELINE. AND RIGHT NOW, THE
STATE DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY
TO ENFORCE RESILIENCE TOWARDS
ECONOMIC VALUES, ONLY TOWARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES. AND SO
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS
RIPE FOR LEGISLATION. AND I'M
HAPPY TO WORK WITH CHAIR WICKS
AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER PAPIN AND
OTHERS TO FORMULATE THE IDEAS
AROUND THAT. BUT WE NEED TO
THINK OF OUR PERMITTING AS AS
SOCIETAL AND ECONOMIC VALUE IN
ADDITION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS THAT THAT IT ACCRUES.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WELL,
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
TO OUR PANEL. APPRECIATE YOUR
PARTICIPATION TODAY. AND FROM
THE QUESTIONS FROM MY
COLLEAGUES, WE WILL OH YEAH, WE
CAN CLAP. THAT'S FINE. WE'RE
ALLOWED TO CLAP. IT'S YEAH. ON
THE FLOOR. WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO
CLAP. SO WE'RE ALL TRAINED NOT
TO CLAP. OUR NEXT PANEL WILL BE
PERMITTING REFORM NEEDED TO
PREPARE FOR DROUGHT CONDITIONS.
AND WE WILL ALLOW OUR GUESTS A
COUPLE OF MINUTES FOR THEIR
OPENING REMARKS, AND THEY WILL
SELF INTRODUCE IF THEY COULD GO
IN ORDER OF THE AGENDA, THAT
WOULD BE GREAT.
IF WE WANT TO START WITH MISS
ELLEN HANAK. HI. GOOD AFTERNOON.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. YES.
THANK YOU. I'M ELLEN HANAK, I'M
A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE PC WATER
POLICY CENTER, PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA. MY
COLLEAGUE, BRIAN GRAY SAYS HELLO
TO ASSEMBLYMEMBER POPPIN, HIS
NEIGHBOR. AND IT'S A REAL HONOR
TO BE HERE WITH ALL OF YOU.
THANKS FOR THE INVITATION. SO
YOU PROBABLY KNOW, PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA IS A
NONPARTISAN, RESEARCH, POLICY
ORIENTED RESEARCH GROUP. THE
WATER POLICY CENTER DOES WORK
LOOKING AT A RANGE OF WATER
RELATED TOPICS, AND THAT
INCLUDES ALSO LAND USE AND AIR
AS IT AS IT IMPACTS WATER. WHAT
I WANT TO MY CHARGE TODAY IS TO
KIND OF GIVE YOU REALLY QUICK
BIG PICTURE OVERVIEW OF SORT OF
THE CLIMATE CHALLENGE FOR OUR
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM. THE TOPIC
IS DROUGHT. BUT, YOU KNOW,
DROUGHT IS ALSO ABOUT HAVING
WATER FROM WET YEARS TO, TO USE
DURING, DURING DRY YEARS. SO
LET'S JUST THINK ABOUT IT AS
WATER SUPPLY A LITTLE BIT ON
SOME OF THE PERMITTING THINGS
THAT CHALLENGES THAT HANG THINGS
UP IN THIS SYSTEM. AND THEN SOME
SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM. I'M
GOING TO TRY TO BE AS CONCRETE
AS I CAN FOR YOU ALL, BUT IT
MIGHT BE TOO SMALL BALL FOR YOU,
BECAUSE SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GET
REALLY CONCRETE, IT TENDS TO GET
SMALL BALL. SO OKAY, SO BIG, BIG
PICTURE. OUR WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
IS VAST, BIG STATE. IT'S CHARGED
WITH DELIVERING SAFE DRINKING
WATER TO 40 MILLION
CALIFORNIANS. IT IS ALSO
SUPPOSED TO SUPPORT A DYNAMIC
AND DIVERSE ECONOMY THAT
INCLUDES IRRIGATION FOR
IRRIGATION, SUPPLIES FOR THE
NATION'S LARGEST AGRICULTURAL
SECTOR. SO BIG SYSTEM AND HOW IT
WORKS MIX OF MANY, MANY, MANY
LOCAL AGENCIES, STATE AND
FEDERAL AGENCIES OWN AND OPERATE
INFRASTRUCTURE AND THIS RANGES
FROM ABOVE GROUND RESERVOIRS,
GROUNDWATER BASINS THAT ARE
ACTIVELY MANAGED, A LOT OF
CONVEYANCE MOVING TO MOVE WATER
AROUND LOCALLY, REGIONALLY
ACROSS THE STATE. AND THEN JUST
LIKE HUGE MILES AND MILES AND
MILES OF UNDERGROUND PIPES TO
DELIVER WATER TO, IF WE HAVE
DRINKING TAP WATER ANYWHERE SO
THAT ALL IS SOMETHING THAT HAS
TO BE MAINTAINED AND KEPT, KEPT
GOING, AND IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY
DESIGNED IF YOU THINK ABOUT SORT
OF HOW OUR WATER SYSTEM WORKS
FOR, FOR SUPPLY BASED ON A
COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT OUR
CLIMATE, SORT OF LONG STANDING
THINGS. ONE IS THAT IT'S DRY
EVERY SUMMER. SO YOU HAVE TO
HAVE WATER SOCKED AWAY FOR THE
DRY SEASON, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE
THE PEAK DEMAND SEASON BECAUSE
THAT'S ALSO THE PEAK GROWING
SEASON. AND WHEN WE NEED WATER
FOR LANDSCAPES, THE OTHER THING
IS THAT WE HAVE THE MOST
VARIABLE PRECIPITATION IN THE
COUNTRY. OFF THE CHARTS. YOU'VE
PROBABLY SEEN MAPS OF THIS JUST
BECAUSE OF WHERE WE ARE AND
GETTING HIT BY DIFFERENT KINDS
OF STORM SYSTEMS FROM NORTH
SOUTH, COMING AT US. AND WHAT
THAT MEANS IS WE'VE GOT TO BE
READY FOR FLOODS EVERY YEAR. AND
DROUGHT EVERY YEAR. AND SO WE
HAVE TO HAVE MULTIPLE YEAR
STORAGE AVAILABLE TO MANAGE
THAT. IN ADDITION TO THE
SEASONAL STORAGE. NOW, SEASONAL
STORAGE IS ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH
RESERVOIRS ABOVE GROUND, THROUGH
GROUNDWATER BASINS AND THROUGH
SNOWPACK. THAT'S BEEN A REALLY
IMPORTANT PART OF THE SYSTEM.
THE YEAR OVER YEAR STORAGE IS
OBVIOUSLY NOT SNOWPACK BECAUSE
WE DON'T HAVE GLACIERS, BUT IT
IS SURFACE RESERVOIRS TO SOME
EXTENT, KEEPING WATER FOR THAT.
BUT THEN GROUNDWATER IS LIKE A
REALLY HUGE DROUGHT RESERVE. SO
THIS IS THE BASIC SYSTEM. AND
THEN WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT
CLIMATE CHANGE AND WHAT'S
HAPPENING, IT'S KIND OF AMPING
IT UP. SO WE ARE YOU KNOW YOU
MENTIONED CHAIR WICKS IN YOUR
INTRODUCTION, SORT OF A LOT OF
THE ASPECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
THAT ARE HITTING US. IF YOU
THINK ABOUT THE WATER SUPPLY
SYSTEM, THE HEAT AND THE
INCREASING VOLATILITY ARE Kò
FACTORS. HEAT IS GETTING RID OF
OUR SNOWPACK. IT'S ALREADY
DISAPPEARING IN DRIER YEARS.
IT'S YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT
THE PROJECTIONS, WE CANNOT RELY
ON THAT NEARLY TO THE EXTENT WE
USED TO. IT'S CHANGING THE
PATTERNS OF RUNOFF. AND THEN
WE'RE ALSO GETTING BIGGER STORMS
AND DRYER DRIES. SO WE KIND OF
NEED TO FIGURE OUT BETTER HOW TO
MANAGE OUR SEASONAL STORAGE WHEN
WE'RE NOT HAVING THAT SNOWPACK.
AND THEN ALSO JUST THE INCREASED
VOLATILITY IS MEANS THAT WE'RE
KIND OF GROWING FLOOD RISK. SO
OUR SURFACE RESERVOIRS ARE ARE
BEING TAXED TO BOTH STORE MORE
WATER FOR SUPPLY BUT ALSO NOT
HARM PEOPLE DOWNSTREAM. SO WHAT
IT ALL MEANS IF YOU THINK ABOUT
THAT TOGETHER IS AND I SHOULD
ADD SEA LEVEL RISE. WE HEARD
ABOUT ALL THE KINDS OF THINGS
THAT ARE HAPPENING IN TERMS OF
RISK TO THE BAY. IT'S A RISK FOR
WATER SUPPLY TOO, BECAUSE THE
DELTA IS A MAJOR HUB FOR SEA
LEVEL RISE, IS GOING TO REDUCE
WATER USABLE SUPPLIES IN
ADDITION TO IMPACTING COASTAL
AQUIFERS, MAKING THAT WATER
SALTIER. ALL OF THIS MEANS WE
HAVE TO MANAGE OUR WATER
DIFFERENTLY TO SOME EXTENT TO
ADAPT, AND THAT INCLUDES ALSO
SOME MAJOR INVESTMENTS TO
IMPROVE OUR STORAGE AND OUR
CONVEYANCE INFRASTRUCTURE. SO,
YOU KNOW, AND WHEN I SAY STORAGE
ABOVE GROUND IMPROVEMENTS BELOW
GROUND BIG TIME, THERE'S JUST A
LOT OF COST EFFECTIVE
OPPORTUNITIES TO USE OUR
GROUNDWATER BASINS BETTER, BUT
ALSO CONVEYANCE TO MOVE IT
AROUND AND SUCH. AND THEN JUST
DEALING WITH ALL OF THE ADDED
NEEDS TO KEEP OUR, OUR OUR
PIPES, EVERYTHING, THE WHOLE
SYSTEM WORKING IN THE CONTEXT OF
BIGGER STORMS, FLASHIER FLOODS,
THOSE KIND OF THINGS. THIS ALL
IS ON BACKGROUND OF SORT OF AN
OVERLAY ON CURRENT CHALLENGES
THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT
WATER MANAGERS ARE DEALING WITH
ALL THE TIME. AND ONE OF THEM IS
UPGRADING AGING INFRASTRUCTURE.
YOU PROBABLY ARE AWARE OF DAM
SAFETY ISSUES. THOSE ARE
WIDESPREAD. VALLEY WATER IS
WORKING ON ONE RIGHT NOW. AND SO
THAT HAS TO BE DEALING WITH
CLIMATE RESILIENCE IN ADDITION
TO JUST KIND OF FIXING FOR THE
HISTORICAL CLIMATE. THERE'S JUST
A LOT OF PIPES THAT NEED TO BE
UPGRADED TO KEEP WATER SAFE.
THERE ARE NEW WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS AS WE'RE AS SCIENCE IS
IMPROVING ON THIS. SO THINGS
LIKE PFAS THAT HAVE BEEN ALL
OVER THE NEWS, NEW STANDARDS ON
THAT, THAT MEANS NEW TREATMENT
REQUIREMENTS AND THEN THERE'S
GETTING GROUNDWATER BASINS INTO
BALANCE. SO TEN YEARS
ANNIVERSARY NOW OF THE
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT, WHICH I DON'T
KNOW IF ANYBODY, ANY OF YOU ON
THIS PANEL WERE, WERE, WERE WERE
ABLE TO VOTE FOR THAT. BUT BUT
IT'S A IT'S A BIG DEAL TO, TO BE
TEN YEARS OUT ON THAT. THAT IS
ABOUT CLIMATE RESILIENCE. IF
YOU, YOU KNOW, WANT TO THINK
ABOUT SORT OF ONE THING TO
MANAGE OUR WATER SYSTEMS FOR,
FOR THE LONG, LONG TERM IS
HAVING GROUNDWATER BASINS THAT
ARE NOT JUST BEING DEPLETED,
DEPLETED, DEPLETED, SO THAT WE
HAVE THAT AVAILABLE FOR THE LONG
TERM AND IT'S A HEAVY, HEAVY
LIFT IN ESPECIALLY YOU'RE GOING
TO HEAR FROM SARAH WOLF IN A
MINUTE IN PLACES LIKE THE
CENTRAL COAST, WHICH HAVE
HEAVILY OVERDRAFTED GROUNDWATER
BASINS, AND ESPECIALLY IN THE
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, WHICH IS OUR
BY FAR LARGEST AG REGION. SO
THAT MEANS A LOT OF INVESTMENTS,
A LOT OF COSTS ACROSS THE BOARD
IN CALIFORNIA BY LOCAL AGENCIES
AND BY BY STATE, STATE AND
FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE OPERATORS
AND OWNERS. WHEN WE DO RESEARCH
AT PC, WE TALK A LOT WITH
STAKEHOLDERS, AND I CAN TELL YOU
THAT IN THE 20 PLUS YEARS THAT
I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THESE
ISSUES, WATER SYSTEM ISSUES, THE
RECURRING CONSISTENT THEME THAT
WE HEAR FROM EVERYBODY IS
PERMITTING CHALLENGES. SO I WAS
EXCITED TO SEE TO SEE THE
PREAMBLE AND THE SORT OF THE
CHARGE OF THIS COMMITTEE,
BECAUSE I THINK IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT. AND YOU'VE, I'M SURE,
HEARD A LOT OF IMPORTANT THINGS,
GOTTEN FEEDBACK ALREADY. I'M
ENCOURAGING YOU TO GET MORE.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE BASIC ISSUE
IS IT'S PREVENTING US FROM DOING
THINGS IN A TIMELY ENOUGH WAY.
AND IT'S ALSO INCREASING
AFFORDABILITY CHALLENGES IN A,
IN A CONTEXT WHERE THIS IS
ALREADY A BIG DEAL IN, IN OUR
WATER SYSTEM. SO I'M JUST GOING
TO GIVE YOU A FEW QUICK EXAMPLES
FROM SOME RECENT RESEARCH. ONE
IS GROUNDWATER RECHARGE. THIS IS
A STATE PRIORITY. IT'S A LOCAL
PRIORITY. IT'S Kò FOR
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY. IT'S
KEY FOR CLIMATE ADAPTATION. AND
WE DID A RECENT SURVEY IN THE
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, WHICH IS
KIND OF, YOU KNOW, RECHARGE
CENTRAL IN A WAY. AND WHAT WE
FOUND WAS THAT WHILE THERE HAVE
BEEN SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN THE
PERMITTING PROCESS OR IN THE
PROCESS FOR GETTING PERMISSIONS,
LET'S SAY SOMETIMES IT'S NOT AN
OFFICIAL PERMIT IN ORDER TO BE
ABLE TO DIVERT FLOOD WATERS. SO
2023, BIG WET YEAR FOLKS SAW
SOME SOME IMPROVEMENTS. THERE.
THE BIG COMPLAINT THE BIGGER
COMPLAINT ON THE PERMITTING SIDE
WAS JUST GETTING PERMISSION TO
BUILD AND THEN TO OPERATE
PROJECTS. SO THIS IS OTHER KINDS
OF PERMITS, YOU KNOW, ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN ALTER A
STREAM BED, THAT KIND OF THING.
SECOND, REPURPOSING FARMLAND, WE
ESTIMATE THAT BETWEEN HALF A
MILLION AND 900,000 ACRES OF
IRRIGATED LAND IS GOING TO HAVE
TO COME OUT OF PRODUCTION, YOU
KNOW, LESS IF WE DO MORE ON
RECHARGE. BUT STILL A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT IF YOU DON'T
MANAGE THAT WELL, IT'S A HUGE
PUBLIC HEALTH RISK IN ADDITION
TO BEING, YOU KNOW, A REALLY BIG
ECONOMIC HIT FOR THAT REGION. SO
THERE'S A LOT OF CREATIVE ENERGY
GOING INTO NOW LOOKING AT HOW TO
REPURPOSE IT IN WAYS INVOLVING
SOLAR, INVOLVING DIFFERENT KINDS
OF, OF LAND MANAGEMENT, THAT
THAT MAY BE NOT GOING TO BE
BRINGING IN AS MUCH MONEY AS
CERTAIN CROPS, BUT BUT CAN AT
LEAST BE BE PRODUCTIVE IN SOME
WAYS. AND RIGHT NOW THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF PREEXISTING
REGULATIONS AND LAWS THAT KIND
OF ARE AT CROSS-PURPOSES WITH
THAT, BECAUSE THEY THINK IT'S
BAD TO TAKE ANY FARMLAND OUT OF
PRODUCTION. I'LL HAVE SOME
CONCRETE SUGGESTIONS LATER IF
YOU WANT THEM DELIVERING SAFE
DRINKING WATER. WE'VE HEARD FROM
A NUMBER OF URBAN WATER
PROVIDERS THAT GETTING THE STATE
AND THE LOCAL PERMISSIONS TO DO
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO DEAL
WITH PFAS TO DEAL WITH CHROME
SIX AND JUST TO KEEP THEIR PIPES
HEALTHY BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING
OLD, CAN BE A NIGHTMARE. AND I
THINK THAT THE MEMBER WHO
MENTIONED ADD ONS MIGHT, MIGHT
HAVE LEFT. BUT YEAH. MEMBER
GRAYSON, THAT'S A HUGE ISSUE AT
THE LOCAL LEVEL FOR THINGS LIKE
THIS. YOU FIX YOUR WATER PIPE
AND YOU MIGHT BE ASKED TO, YOU
KNOW, BUILD TREES SOMEWHERE ELSE
IN TOWN. YOU KNOW, SO MAYBE
REASONABLE MITIGATION
REQUIREMENTS. WE HAVE WE HAD A
DEEP DIVE STUDY ON THAT, LOOKED
AT ADVANCING RESTORATION
PROJECTS, A FEW YEARS AGO AND MY
WRITTEN TESTIMONY, WHICH WHICH
YOU HAVE AND WHICH IS AVAILABLE
ONLINE ON THE, ON THE PC WEBSITE
GETS INTO THAT MORE THAT WAS LED
BY THE CENTER'S DIRECTOR, DOCTOR
LETICIA GUINIER, THAT WAS
LOOKING AT EXACTLY SOME OF THE
TOPICS THAT YOU HEARD FROM THE
PRIOR PANEL ABOUT HOW EVEN
RESTORATION PROJECTS ARE HARD,
WHAT LETICIA AND HER TEAM FOUND
WAS THAT THERE ARE SOME BRIGHT
SIGNS THERE IN TERMS OF POSSIBLE
MODELS, BRITT WAS ONE OF THEM.
SORT OF THIS IDEA OF
COORDINATING TEAMS THAT HAVE TO
DO DIFFERENT PERMITS. I WOULD
SAY THAT THE GOVERNOR'S STRIKE
TEAMS THAT HE'S SET UP FOR THE
STORAGE PROJECTS, THAT SEEMS TO
BE WORKING IN THAT SAME WAY OF
LIKE GETTING THE DIFFERENT
AGENCIES TOGETHER SO THAT THEY
CAN WORK IT OUT. ALSO, FOLKS
TALKED ABOUT PROGRAMMATIC
PERMITTING AND SORT OF SOME
SPECIFIC WAYS, ESPECIALLY FOR
SIMPLER PROJECTS TO GET DONE,
HAS BEEN HELPFUL ON ON
ECOSYSTEMS. SOMEBODY FROM
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION IS
HERE. THEY'VE BEEN WORKING A LOT
ON THAT. I THINK THERE'S ROOM
FOR DOING THAT KIND OF THING,
FOR THINGS LIKE ABILITY TO DO
LOCAL RECHARGE PROJECTS, TO KIND
OF MAKE SOME OF THAT STUFF
SIMPLE. IT SHOULDN'T BE SO HARD.
AND THEN PERMITTING AT SCALE TO
DO BIG THINGS. IF YOU HAVEN'T
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY YET TO GET
INPUT FROM HEATHER DYER, WHO'S
THE GENERAL MANAGER AT THE SAN
BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL SAN
BERNARDINO VALLEY MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT. SHE'S BEEN
LEADING A MULTI-AGENCY EFFORT TO
DO A HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
DOWN IN THE UPPER SANTA ANA
RIVER AREA. AND THIS IS
SIMULTANEOUSLY TO DO RESTORATION
UNDER UNDER THE FEDERAL LAW.
IT'S NOT AN NP, IT'S NOT A IT'S
NOT UNDER STATE LAW, BUT UNDER
FEDERAL. BUT THEN ALLOWING LIKE
I THINK 100 DIFFERENT WATER
SUPPLY PROJECTS TO HAPPEN AT THE
SAME TIME, SHE WOULD HAVE
INSIGHTS FOR YOU ON HOW YOU
COULD MAKE THAT EASIER ON THE
STATE SIDE TO I THINK,
VOLUNTEERING HER WITHOUT HAVING
ASKED HER, BUT SHE ALWAYS LOVES
TO TALK ABOUT THAT STUFF. SO
OKAY, SO WHAT CAN THE
LEGISLATURE DO? SOME OF THIS IS
CLEARLY ABOUT MAKING AGENCIES
WORK BETTER. AND SO I JUST WANT
TO SAY THERE'S NO SUBSTITUTE FOR
STRONG EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP ON
THIS. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW,
THAT'S WHY IT'S GOOD THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN FOCUSED
ON, ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
AND, YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED THE
STRIKE TEAM IS ONE THING.
SOMETIMES THE ADMINISTRATION HAS
BEEN ABLE TO DO SOME THINGS THAT
HAVE BEEN HARD FOR YOU ALL TO
DO, AND IT'S BEEN HAPPENING
THROUGH EXECUTIVE ORDER
INITIALLY. BUT THERE ARE, YOU
KNOW, WAYS WHEN THAT STUFF IS
GOOD TO THEN TURN IT INTO
LEGISLATION. AND, YOU KNOW, ONE
EXAMPLE OF THAT RIGHT NOW THAT'S
HELPING WITH GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY IMPLEMENTATION IS
THERE'S AN EXEMPTION FOR CEQA,
CEQA EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN KINDS
OF PROJECTS. YOU KNOW, WHY
SHOULD HAPHAZARD FALLOWING ON A
FARM NOT REQUIRE A PERMIT? BUT
IF THERE'S SMART, ORGANIZED
FALLOWING TO DO SOMETHING GOOD
THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH CEQA, YOU
KNOW, SO THOSE ARE THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT IS WORTH WORKING
ON. I WANT TO ALSO JUST
HIGHLIGHT, YOU KNOW, THE
SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL PASSED
LAST YEAR THAT THE GOVERNOR
SIGNED SB 149, WHICH WAS
BASICALLY STREAMLINING JUDICIAL
REVIEW OF CEQA CHALLENGES. THE
SITES PROJECT, WHICH IS THE
LARGEST PROJECT FOR STORAGE
THAT'S STILL ON THE TABLE, IS
RECENTLY BENEFITED FROM THAT.
AND THAT'S SHAVED YEARS OFF OF
THAT. AND I'M SURE IT'S SHAPED A
LOT OF COST BECAUSE OF THE
UNCERTAINTY. SO THOSE ARE THE
KINDS OF THINGS THAT CAN BE BIG
IN OUR SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY WORK.
WE HAVE A LOT OF SMALL BALL
THINGS TO SUGGESTIONS, BECAUSE I
DON'T THINK THERE'S LIKE THERE'S
NOT ONE LIKE BIG FIX. THERE'S
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DIFFERENT
STATUTES. AND SO WE MIGHT SOME
OF THEM HAVE TO KIND OF JUST BE
DEALT WITH ONE BY ONE. BUT THAT
CAN ADD UP TO MAKING SOMETHING
WORK. AND SO YOU KNOW, I HAVE
TAKEN A LOT OF TIME, BUT I CAN
GIVE YOU I CAN GIVE YOU SOME
MORE EXAMPLES IF YOU WANT LATER.
AND IT'S ALSO LINKED IN OUR IN
THE TESTIMONY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. OKAY. OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR
ME. HI. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME
HERE TODAY, SARAH WOLF. I'M A
FARMER IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
AND ALSO A WATER CONSULTANT. I
WORK PRIMARILY WITH AGRICULTURAL
WATER USERS AND REALLY, MY
BUSINESS DEVELOPED AROUND STIGMA
AND THE NEED THAT WE ALL HAD TO
DO NEW PROJECTS AND DO THINGS
WITH OUR LAND THAT WE HAD NOT
DONE BEFORE OR CONTEMPLATED AS
OUR ROLE. AND SO THERE'S A LOT
OF EXCITEMENT, HAS BEEN A LOT OF
EXCITEMENT AND INTEREST IN DOING
MANY OF THESE PROJECTS, WHETHER
IT'S LAND REPURPOSING FOR
PURPOSES OF HABITAT OR RECHARGE
PROJECTS OR FLOODPLAIN
EXPANSION, FARMERS ARE VERY,
VERY INTERESTED IN DOING THIS TO
CAPTURE FLOOD FLOWS WHENEVER
THEY ARE AVAILABLE AND GET THEM
INTO THE GROUND TO BENEFIT THEM
BEFORE THEY HAVE BEEN SINCE
2019, EASILY SUBMITTING
APPLICATIONS FOR HALF MILLION
DOLLAR APPLICATIONS FOR
APPROPRIATIVE WATER RIGHTS. TO
BE ABLE TO DIVERT THESE FLOOD
FLOWS, ONLY TO LEARN QUICKLY
THAT THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD REALLY WAS NOT
READY FOR US TO DO ALL OF THAT
BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE A
PROCESS FOR GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
APPLICATIONS. AND SO WE'VE BEEN
WORKING THROUGH A MYRIAD OF
PROBLEMS THAT HAVE ARISEN
THROUGH THIS THAT I THINK WERE
NOT ON ANYONE'S SPECIFIC AGENDA,
BUT JUST LEARNING THAT AS WE'RE
LOOKING AT OUR WATER SUPPLY
SYSTEM IN A MUCH DIFFERENT WAY
TODAY WITH RESPECT TO CLIMATE
CHANGE AND HOW WE MANAGE THE
OVERALL SUPPLY, IT'S NOT JUST IN
STORAGE, IT'S NOT JUST IN
SNOWPACK. IT'S ALSO IN RECHARGE
AND OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT WE
HAVE TO DO ALL OF THESE THINGS
DIFFERENTLY. AND I THINK IT WAS
SAID EARLIER, OUR LAWS ARE NOT
WRITTEN TO LOOK FORWARD THINKING
ON THIS AND HOW THINGS MAY LOOK
INTO THE FUTURE. SO THERE'S A
LOT TO BE DONE. AND I'M GOING TO
TOUCH ON JUST A FEW OF THOSE
ITEMS THAT I'VE PERSONALLY HAD
TO DEAL WITH. WITH SOME OF THESE
PROJECTS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON
ON FARM. AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF
THESE ARE HAPPENING THROUGH
GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS LIKE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
MULTI-BENEFIT LAND REPURPOSING
PROGRAM. YOU KNOW, PROGRAMS THAT
ARE INITIATED BY THE STATE ARE
STILL BEING HINDERED BY THESE
PERMITTING PROCESSES THAT HAVE
HELD US UP. AND I THINK ONE, YOU
KNOW, I MENTIONED THAT WE DO A
LOT OF FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION,
EXPANSION OF FLOODPLAINS IN SOME
OF THESE HISTORICALLY DRY CREEKS
THAT GET FLASH FLOOD EVENTS THAT
YOU CAN EASILY SPREAD OUT, MAKE
WIDER TO SLOW THE WATER DOWN,
ALLOW MORE WATER PENETRATION TO
OCCUR AS IT'S COMING THROUGH IN
A STORM EVENT, AND YOU NEED
STREAM BED ALTERATION PERMITS
FOR ALL OF THOSE. AND TO GET A
STREAM BED ALTERATION PERMIT
TAKES YEARS, AND THEN YOU HAVE
TO GO AND GET ONE EVERY YEAR
AFTER. AND SO THERE, I MEAN,
THAT IS A SPECIFIC THING THAT I
THINK LEGISLATIVELY WE COULD
CHANGE FLOODPLAIN EXPANSION IN
CREEKS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW,
TYPICALLY ONLY FILLED DURING
FLASH FLOOD EVENTS. THAT IS
UTILIZING OUR SYSTEM BETTER THAN
WE HAVE BEFORE. AND WE NEED TO
FIX THAT. SO I THINK THAT IS A
MAJOR ONE THAT COULD EASILY BE
FIXED. SB 122 THAT WAS PASSED
DUE TO THE EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT
THE GOVERNOR DID IN 2023, WAS
EXTREMELY HELPFUL. WE WOULD NOT
HAVE RECHARGE THE NUMBER OF ACRE
FEET THAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO IN
THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY THAT YEAR
WITHOUT THAT LEGISLATION,
WITHOUT THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER,
HOWEVER, THE LEGISLATION PASSED
AND THERE'S SOME CONCERNS AROUND
THE CLARITY OF WHAT WE CAN AND
CAN'T DO WITHIN THAT
LEGISLATION. ONE OF WHICH THAT'S
A MAJOR CONCERN IS FISH SCREENS.
A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS ARE
HAPPENING ON FLOOD DIVERSION
INFRASTRUCTURE, SO NOT OFF THE
NATURAL CREEK IN MANY PLACES.
SOME PLACES OFF THE NATURAL
CREEK. BUT FISH SCREENS ARE
REQUIRED FOR ANY DIVERSION. AND
WHAT FISH AND WILDLIFE WANTS IN
A FISH SCREEN IS VERY NEBULOUS
AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO
CLARIFY WHAT THAT IS. SO THAT IS
SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE
MAJOR INVESTMENTS FOR THE
LANDOWNERS TO PREPARE FOR THESE
FLOOD EVENTS. THEY DON'T KNOW
WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAPPEN,
BUT THEY NEED TO PREPARE AHEAD
OF TIME AND HAVE THAT ALL IN
PLACE. BUT WE NEED CLARITY ON
WHAT WILL BE REQUIRED OF US, AND
WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT AT THIS
POINT IN TIME. IT WAS SAID
EARLIER AND IT'S TRUE IN ALL OF
THESE PERMITS ON AGRICULTURAL AS
WELL. WE SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR
PERMITS AND HEAR NOTHING.
THERE'S NO TIME FRAME, THERE'S
NO RESPONSE TIME. WE HAVE
SUBMITTED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
AND IN FEES, AND YET WE DON'T
KNOW IF OUR APPLICATION IS EVEN
ACCEPTABLE TO BE SUBMITTED. FOR
MANY YEARS IN MANY CASES. AND SO
WE ARE SITTING ON THESE PERMITS,
UNSURE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THEM.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S AT THE
BEQUEST OF THE AGENCIES WHEN
THEY DECIDE TO ENGAGE WITH US.
AND THAT IS VERY, VERY
CHALLENGING. AND IT DETERS
PEOPLE FROM DOING THE PROJECTS
BECAUSE THEY JUST SIMPLY DON'T
HAVE THE TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE WE HAVE A TIMELINE TO MEET
ON GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT, AND
WE WILL NOT MEET THOSE TIMELINES
IF WE'RE WAITING ON PERMITS. SO
AGAIN, I HEARKEN BACK TO SB 122.
WE WERE ABLE TO DO A LOT WITH
OUR AQUIFERS BECAUSE OF THAT. WE
HAD ALL PUT IN APPLICATIONS FOR
APPROPRIATIVE WATER RIGHTS, BUT
COULDN'T ACT UPON THEM BECAUSE
NOTHING HAS HAPPENED WITH THEM.
SO IT'S JUST A REAL LIVE EXAMPLE
OF WE'RE MISSING OPPORTUNITIES
IF WE DON'T MOVE THESE PERMITS
ALONG. ALSO, ON THE
APPROPRIATIVE WATER RIGHTS,
WHICH I DO A LOT OF WORK IN THE
90 OVER 20 RULE, WHICH IS ONE OF
THE OPTIONS THAT THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD HAS PUT
FORTH AS PART OF THEIR
STREAMLINED PROCESS IS NOT
APPLICABLE. AND IMPLEMENTABLE IN
MOST CASES ON FLOOD DIVERSIONS,
BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE
GAGING STATIONS THAT YOU DO ON
MOST STREAMS. SO THERE'S A LOT
OF LOCATIONS THAT THAT JUST
DOESN'T WORK IN BECAUSE YOU
CAN'T REGULATE THE WATER, THE
WATER FLOW THAT'S HAPPENING IN
THAT PARTICULAR STREAM OR, OR
INFRASTRUCTURE. ALSO, THE
DIVERSION WINDOWS ARE ASKEW AND
NOT IN LINE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE.
WE'RE HAVING A LOT LATER FLOOD
EVENTS AND THE WINDOW OF
OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSIONS IS
JANUARY THROUGH MARCH. SO I
MEAN, EVEN AS GRANULAR AS THAT,
GETTING DOWN INTO OPENING UP HOW
WE OPERATE THE SYSTEM AND WHEN
WE'RE ABLE TO TAKE SOME OF THOSE
DIVERSIONS IS IMPORTANT. AND
THEN LASTLY, I'LL JUST TOUCH ON
THE INCREASE IN FEES, WHICH IS
TO BE EXPECTED. BUT WE HAVE HAD
INCREASE IN FEES OF PERMITTING
OF 1,800% OVER THE LAST FEW
YEARS. SO IT'S SIGNIFICANT. AND
AS I MENTIONED, THE
APPROPRIATIVE WATER RIGHTS
APPLICATIONS THAT WE HAVE
APPLIED FOR HAVE BEEN EACH
APPLICATION HAS BEEN A HALF
MILLION DOLLARS EACH BECAUSE OF
THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WE'RE
WE TYPICALLY GO AFTER AN
APPLICATION FOR AN ENTIRE REGION
SO THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE
SYSTEM AS A WHOLE, BECAUSE
THERE'S A LOT OF EXPENSE IN
COMPLETING THAT APPROPRIATIVE
WATER. RIGHT? AND JUST THE
ENGINEERING WORK THAT HAS TO BE
DONE ALONG WITH IT. SO WE'VE
DONE THEM AS GROUPS, BUT THOSE
FEES HAVE GONE UP EXPONENTIALLY
IN IN JUST THIS YEAR. SO WITH
THAT, I WILL STOP AND WELCOME
QUESTIONS LATER. THANK YOU. WELL
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MATT
DIAZ. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA FORESTRY ASSOCIATION,
AND I DO APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. AND I DO
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK ABOUT FORESTS. IT'S A
REALLY IMPORTANT ISSUE TO ME,
AND I'M GLAD TO BE HERE, BECAUSE
IT APPEARS TO BE AN IMPORTANT
ISSUE TO YOU AS WELL. I HAVE
CHANGED MY TESTIMONY HERE BASED
ON WHAT I'VE HEARD TO DATE OR
THIS AFTERNOON, BECAUSE IT'S
CLEAR THAT YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING
FOR VERY TARGETED MEASURES, VERY
TARGETED OUTCOMES THAT COULD BE
CONTEMPLATED. RIGHT. BUT TO GET
THERE, I GOT A COUPLE OF
DIFFERENT THINGS I WANTED TO
COVER. FIRST OF ALL, I JUST
WANTED TO SET THE TABLE IN TERMS
OF CONTEXT, BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A
STATE THAT'S 104 MILLION ACRES.
WE TALK FORESTRY, WE ALWAYS TALK
ACRES, AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IS 104 MILLION ACRES.
AND APPROXIMATELY 31% OF THE
STATE IS COVERED BY FORESTS. AND
IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS TESTIMONY
AND THIS PANEL, DROUGHT HAS BEEN
VERY HARD ON FORESTS IN
CALIFORNIA. AND, CHAIR WICKS,
YOU MADE THE MENTION OF THE
INCREASED WILDFIRE 250% OVER THE
COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL
YEARS. THAT IS THE OUTCOME OF
DROUGHT. AND I'M NOT GOING TO
GET INTO THE LIFE HISTORY OF
FOREST. AND THIS IS NOT A
SCIENCE CLASS, BUT NONETHELESS,
THE RELATIONSHIP EXISTS. DROUGHT
IS STRESSING FORESTS. FORCE IN
MANY CASES ARE OVERSTOCKED, AND
WE HAVE TREMENDOUS IMPACTS FROM
WILDFIRE ON NOT ONLY THE NATURAL
RESOURCES OF OUR FORESTS, BUT
THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE AROUND
THOSE FORESTS. AND SO THE OTHER
PIECE THAT I THINK IS REALLY
CRITICAL IS THE FACT THAT WE
HAVE SO MUCH FEDERAL LAND IN
CALIFORNIA. SO OF THE FOREST AND
LANDSCAPES IN CALIFORNIA, I'M
NOT GOING TO SPEAK IN BROAD
CONTEXT HERE, BUT JUST OVER 50%
IS FEDERAL AND 50% IS
NONFEDERAL. THAT NONFEDERAL IS A
MIX. IF YOU WILL, OF INDUSTRY,
WHOM I REPRESENT NON-INDUSTRIAL
SMALL MOM AND POPS, IF YOU WILL.
STATE PARKS, SOME OTHER STATE
LANDS, LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
GENERALLY SPEAKING. SO WHEN WE
THINK ABOUT PERMITTING IN
CALIFORNIA, WE CAN'T SET ASIDE
THE FEDERAL PERMITTING NEXUS
BECAUSE EVERY PROJECT THAT
HAPPENS ON FEDERAL LANDS IS
MOVING THROUGH A DIFFERENT
PERMITTING PROCESS IN THEIR
WORLD, THEY'RE OPERATING UNDER
NEPA, AND OUR NONFEDERAL LANDS.
WE'RE OPERATING UNDER SOME
PERMITTING REGIME THAT IS
GENERALLY PREDICATED ON CEQA.
OKAY. SO IN AND AMONGST THAT,
WHEN WE HAVE COMMERCIAL TYPES OF
OPERATIONS, WHEN WE HAVE FUEL
HAZARD REDUCTION WORK OR FOREST
MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT HAVE
A COMMERCIAL NEXUS, WE HAVE A
FOREST PRACTICE ACT. WE HAVE A
FOREST PRACTICE RULES. THAT IS
YOUR NEXUS TO SEQUA. ON THE FLIP
SIDE OF THAT, WE HAVE
NONCOMMERCIAL PROJECTS THAT ARE
HAPPENING THROUGHOUT THE STATE
AS WELL. AND STATE OF CALIFORNIA
HAS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB, IN MY
OPINION, OVER THE COURSE OF THE
LAST SEVERAL YEARS OF INVESTING
IN NONCOMMERCIAL PROJECTS. BUT
THE PATHWAYS TO GET THOSE DONE
IS DIFFERENT. SO I THINK ABOUT
WHEN I THINK ABOUT FOREST AS A
WHOLE AND PROJECTS AS A WHOLE,
YOU CANNOT SET ASIDE ONE
PERMITTING PATHWAY TO THE OTHER,
BECAUSE IN CALIFORNIA WE HAVE 7
TO 10,000 MILES OF SHARED
PROPERTY LINES. IF YOU WILL,
JURISDICTIONS. AND EVERYBODY IS
MOVING UNDER THE PREMISE OF THE
MILLION ACRE STRATEGY, WHICH WAS
SET FORTH BY JERRY BROWN AT THE
END OF HIS AT THE END OF HIS
TERM AND NOW CARRIED FORTH WHERE
THE FEDERAL AND STATE PARTNERS
AND PRIVATE PARTNERS AND
INDIGENOUS VOICES, EVERYBODY IS
WORKING TO TRY TO HIT THIS
MILLION ACRE MARK. SO WE'RE
WE'RE PUTTING PROJECTS TOGETHER.
WE HAVE THIS ISSUE OF
JURISDICTION AND YOU HAVE SO
MANY ACRES THAT YOU WANT TO GET
TREATED, AND YOU HIT A PROPERTY
LINE AND THINGS CHANGE. THE
TIDES CHANGE THE PERMITTING,
TIMELINES CHANGE, THE CULTURE
CHANGES. AND YOU COULD COME TO A
STOP, OR YOU COULD TRY TO
NEGOTIATE AND BUILD SOMETHING,
BUILD A COALITION THAT'S GOING
TO CONTINUE THAT PROJECT BEYOND
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. IF YOU
ARE IN THE UNENVIABLE POSITION
OF TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER A
NONCOMMERCIAL FUEL HAZARD
PROJECT IN THE COASTAL ZONE,
YOUR PERMITTING NEEDS BECOME ALL
THAT MORE CHALLENGING, RIGHT? SO
I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF GIVE
YOU GUYS SOME IDEAS. THAT'S A
VERY BROAD ENTREE INTO THE
FOREST WORLD. RIGHT. BUT BUT YOU
GUYS CLEARLY HAVE AN APPETITE
FOR TARGETED IDEAS THAT YOU
COULD THINK ABOUT. SO I'M GOING
TO GIVE YOU GUYS SOME TARGETS TO
THINK ABOUT. AND I'M NOT
SUGGESTING IN TERMS OF PRIORITY
THAT ONE IS BETTER THAN THE
OTHER. BUT I THINK THAT THESE
ARE ALL OPPORTUNITIES THAT YOU
AS A BODY CAN THINK ABOUT. CHAIR
WICKS YOU CAN THINK ABOUT
AMONGST YOUR COLLEAGUES, AND ONE
OF THEM IS NOT FOCUSED ON
CALIFORNIA PERMITTING SO MUCH.
BUT FALLING BACK ON THAT ISSUE
OF WE HAVE SO MANY FEDERAL ACRES
IN CALIFORNIA AND WE'RE ALL
TRYING TO ACHIEVE A BENCHMARK OF
A MILLION ACRES. WE'RE TRYING TO
MOTIVATE THE FOREST SERVICE TO
DO MORE ON THEIR LANDSCAPES TO A
CERTAIN EXTENT, AND THERE MIGHT
BE SOME OPPORTUNITY, NOT THAT
YOU CAN CHANGE THE FEDERAL
LANDSCAPE PER SAY, BUT AS
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE OR
YOUR COLLEAGUES, I THINK IT
WOULD BE FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU
COULD REACH OUT AND EXPRESS
CONCERN AMONGST YOUR FEDERAL
PARTNERS AND SAY, WE ACTUALLY DO
HAVE A CONCERN IN CALIFORNIA,
THAT WE WANT TO MOBILIZE AND
HAVE MORE ACRES TREATED IN
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE
THE PROBLEM IS SO DIRE. OKAY. SO
THERE IS THAT THERE ARE
EMERGENCY AUTHORITIES THAT THE
FEDERAL PARTNERS HAVE AND YOU
COULD REACH OUT AND SAY, WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FOREST
SERVICE USE MORE EMERGENCY
AUTHORITIES AND WORK WITH
PRIVATE LANDOWNERS OUT THERE TO
HAVE MORE NATURE BASED TACTICAL
OPTIONS FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION
BUILT ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE I.E,
FUEL BREAKS DON'T HIT A PROPERTY
LINE AND STOP, KEEP GOING. AND
SO YOU COULD MOTIVATE, I
SUPPOSE, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I
THINK ABOUT PROGRAMMATIC
APPROACHES, AND I WAS TOUCHED BY
THE FIRST PANEL BECAUSE I HEARD
I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT
PANELIST NAME NOW, BUT I HEARD
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NATURE
BASED, AND WE'RE BUILDING
RESILIENCY THROUGH PROJECTS, AND
WE'RE HAVING TO PULL PERMITS AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL. AND THE
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARDS THAT WE HEARD ABOUT.
GREEN TAPE WITH SECRETARY
CROWFOOT. AND SO THERE'S ALL
THESE CROSS JURISDICTIONAL
ISSUES THERE AS WELL. THAT IS A
CHALLENGE. AND THAT CHALLENGE
RESIDES WITHIN FORESTRY AS WELL,
WHERE IF YOU'RE DOING COMMERCIAL
WORK OR NONCOMMERCIAL WORK ON
NONFEDERAL LANDS, YOU DO HAVE
PERMITTING THROUGH THE RESOURCES
AGENCY, STREAM BED ALTERATIONS
PERMITS BEING ONE OF THEM. YOU
DO HAVE WDR THROUGH EPA, AND YOU
DO HAVE PERMITTING THROUGH CAL
FIRE. THOSE TIMELINES DO NOT ALL
COALESCE. THE INFORMATION NEEDS
ARE NOT EXACTLY THE SAME, BUT
THEY'RE VERY CLOSE. AND SO I
THINK THAT THERE'S A WAY TO LOOK
AT THAT PROCESS AND COME OUT AT
THE END WITH SOMETHING THAT'S
MORE COALESCED, TIMELY AND
EFFICIENT. SO THERE'S A PIECE
FOR YOU TO CONTEMPLATE. WE ALSO
HAVE THIS ISSUE OF, AGAIN, KIND
OF FALLING BACK TO REGIONAL
APPROACHES. THERE'S CERTAIN
AGENCIES THAT HAVE REGIONS
WITHIN THEM AND HAVE DIFFERENT
PERMITTING UNDER SAME
AUTHORITIES FOR THE SAME TYPES
OF PROJECTS, BUT AT THE SAME
TIME, WE HAVE STATEWIDE AGENCIES
THAT HAVE OVERSIGHT OF THOSE
AGENCIES THAT HAVE PROGRAMMATIC
STATEWIDE PERMITTING MECHANISMS.
WHY COULD WE NOT THINK ABOUT
LOOKING AT STATEWIDE
PROGRAMMATIC COVERAGE FOR
PERMITTING THAT MEETS ALL THE
NEEDS ACROSS THE BOARD AND KIND
OF NOT NOT USURP THE REGIONAL
AUTHORITIES FOR INSPECTION AND
COMPLIANCE, BUT BUILD A
STATEWIDE UMBRELLA PROGRAM THAT
INSPECTION AND COMPLIANCE IS
WORKING UNDERNEATH. THERE'S A
THOUGHT FOR YOU, I SUPPOSE I DID
MAKE MENTION OF THE COASTAL
ZONE. THAT'S A VERY CONTENTIOUS.
IT'S A VERY EASY, NUANCED CHANGE
IN STATUTE, BUT VERY CONTENTIOUS
ISSUE. AS I CAN IMAGINE, MANY OF
MY PARTNERS HERE ARE WORKING ON
SEA ROUTE, SEA LEVEL RISE AND SO
ON AND SO FORTH. VERY
CHALLENGING. SO I BRING UP THESE
ISSUES. I REALLY THINK THAT THE
I REALLY THINK THAT THIS
COALESCING OF PERMITTING IS
REALLY SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF THE PAUSE
THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER. NOT
NOT HAVING THIS ITERATIVE NATURE
BRING ME ANOTHER ROCK SCENARIO.
BE REASONABLE ABOUT IT. BE
THOUGHTFUL. BUT THAT'S THAT
RESONATES WITH ME TO A CERTAIN
EXTENT. AND I REALLY THINK THAT
THE STATE NEEDS TO LEAN IN HARD
TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, AND AN
APPROPRIATE AND DIPLOMATIC WAY,
AND TRY TO INCENTIVIZE OUR
FEDERAL PARTNERS IN THE FOREST
SPACE TO GET MORE DONE WITHIN
THE CONTEXT THAT THEY CAN OR
INVEST IN PROJECTS. AND THAT
INVESTMENT FOR THE STATE IS
CONTINGENT UPON CERTAIN ACTIONS
AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. THAT'S
GOING TO INCENTIVIZE ACTION. SO
I'M GOING TO STOP THERE. AND IF
THERE'S QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AFTER MY
NEXT COLLEAGUE HERE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. EXCUSE ME. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. SELECT
COMMITTEE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR HAVING ME. I'M JOANNA LAZARD,
I'M THE WATERSHED MANAGER AT THE
YUBA WATER AGENCY. YUBA WATER
AGENCY HAS FIVE PRIMARY MISSION
AREAS WHERE, FIRST AND FOREMOST,
A FLOOD RISK REDUCTION AGENCY.
WE ALSO PROVIDE SUSTAINABLE
WATER SUPPLY, HYDROPOWER
GENERATION, A FISHERIES
PROTECTION ENHANCEMENT TO THE
LOWER YUBA RIVER, AND RECREATION
AT NEW BULLARDS BAR RESERVOIR.
SO YUBA COUNTY IS A SMALL RURAL
COUNTY, AND THE YUBA DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT RUNS RIGHT THROUGH IT.
BUT LIKE MOST OF CALIFORNIANS,
OUR WATER SUPPLY IS UPSTREAM AND
OUTSIDE OF OUR JURISDICTION. OUR
WATER SUPPLY COMES FROM THE
NORTH YUBA RIVER. IT'S PRIMARILY
IN FEDERAL OWNERSHIP. IT'S
UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS ONE OF THE
LAST LARGE WATERSHEDS IN
CALIFORNIA THAT HAS YET TO HAVE
A MEGA-FIRE. SO WE ARE VERY
FOCUSED ON PACE AND SCALE OF
RESTORATION. AND WHAT THAT
RESTORATION WILL ENTAIL IS
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF THINNING
OF THE FOREST TO UNDO WHAT 150
YEARS OF FIRE SUPPRESSION HAS
DONE. THE WE GOT INVOLVED IN
THIS WORK THROUGH IT'S REALLY
KIND OF AN INTERESTING ORIGIN
STORY THROUGH FINANCING A SINGLE
PROJECT IN OUR UPPER WATERSHED.
AGAIN, IT'S IN FEDERAL OWNERSHIP.
BLUE FOREST CONSERVATION
DEVELOPED A TOOL CALLED THE
FOREST RESILIENCE BOND, AND THE
IDEA WAS TO HAVE STATE AND
FEDERAL FUNDING AGENCIES COME
TOGETHER WITH A DOWNSTREAM
BENEFICIARY TO PAY BACK IMPACT
INVESTORS WHO WOULD PAY FOR THE
MONEY TO GET ON THE GROUND, WORK
QUICKLY. THIS PROJECT WAS
COMPLETED IN JUST OVER FOUR
YEARS. SO IN THAT SENSE, THE
FOREST RESILIENCE FUND WORKED.
THAT PROJECT WOULD HAVE TAKEN
TEN PLUS YEARS TO COMPLETE
NORMALLY. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE
FOREST RESILIENCE BOND DEVELOPED
THE RELATIONSHIPS THAT LED TO
THE CREATION OF THE NORTH YUBA
FOREST PARTNERSHIP. THOSE
RELATIONSHIPS LED TO US AGREEING
TO WORK AT THE LANDSCAPE SCALE
TO GET THE ENTIRE 275,000 ACRE
NORTH YUBA RIVER WATERSHED INTO
RESILIENCE. WE NOW HAVE TWO
FOREST RESILIENCE BONDS IN THAT
WATERSHED. THERE ARE ACTUALLY
OTHERS IN THE STATE NOW, EAST
BAY MUD AND METROPOLITAN WATER
ARE NOW INVESTED IN SIMILAR
TYPES OF BONDS TO INCREASE PACE
AND SCALE. WE'RE DOING PLANNING
AT THE LANDSCAPE SCALE UP THERE.
THERE'S A THERE WAS A RECENT
NEPA DOCUMENT THAT COVERS
210,000 ACRES. THERE'LL BE
MULTIPLE RECORDS OF DECISIONS.
SO USING PLANNING TOOLS TO
INCREASE PACE AND SCALE WITH OUR
FEDERAL PARTNERS HAS BEEN A PART
OF THE NORTH FOREST PARTNERSHIP.
ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THAT SEQUA
HAS SUPPORTED THAT EFFORT IS SB
901, AND THAT THAT'S A CEQA
EXEMPTION. SO IF YOU'VE ALREADY
DONE NEPA, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO
CEQA. SO THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF
A CEQA AMENDMENT REALLY
SUPPORTING THAT WORK. WHEN YOU
MOVE DOWN INTO YUBA COUNTY.
WE'RE ALSO WORKING WITH PRIVATE
PARTNERS MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL,
NON-INDUSTRIAL TIMBER COMPANIES,
TO DO SIMILAR TYPES OF FOREST
HEALTH WORK. UPPER YUBA COUNTY
IS A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD ZONE FOR
FIRE, AND WE NEED THE SIMILAR
KIND OF WORK IN THE STATE
RESPONSIBILITY AREA. WE'VE USED.
WE WERE THE FIRST PROJECT TO USE
THE CALIFORNIA VEGETATION
TREATMENT PROGRAM PROJECT
SPECIFIC ANALYSIS AS OUR SEQUA
DOCUMENT THAT CAME FROM A
PROGRAMMATIC, EIR FOCUSED ON
FOREST HEALTH PROJECTS. AND WE
DID FIND THAT THAT WAS
DEFINITELY AN AVENUE TOWARD
INCREASING ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPLIANCE SO THAT WE COULD
START IMPLEMENTATION WORK
QUICKLY. IN FACT, IT WORKED SO
WELL THAT WE JUST RECEIVED A NEW
CAL FIRE GRANT. AND IN THAT
GRANT, WE'RE INCLUDING A
LANDSCAPE SCALE CAL BTP DOCUMENT
TO COVER ALL FORESTED ACRES IN
YUBA COUNTY. SO THIS WILL
SUPERSEDE THOSE OTHER PREVIOUS
PROJECT SPECIFIC CAL. AND NEW
PROJECTS WILL BE ABLE TO USE
THAT DOCUMENT TO GET SHOVEL
READY MORE QUICKLY AND MORE
AFFORDABLY. SO IN THOSE WAYS,
WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO USE KIND
OF CREATIVE PLANNING TO INCREASE
PACE AND SCALE. WE'VE BEEN VERY
SUCCESSFUL BOTH IN OUR UPPER
WATERSHED AND IN THE COUNTY, FOR
ATTRACTING NEW PARTNERS,
ATTRACTING NEW PROJECTS, AND
SPECIFICALLY ATTRACTING
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF
IMPLEMENTATION. FUNDING. THE
NORTH YUBA LANDSCAPE WAS
SELECTED AS ONE OF THE WILDFIRE
CRISIS WATERSHEDS, AND IT
RECEIVED 130 MILLION IN
IMPLEMENTATION FUNDING FROM THE
BILL INFLATION REDUCTION ACT. SO
A LOT OF MONEY FOR
IMPLEMENTATION. BUT NOW WE'RE UP
AGAINST BOTTLENECKS THAT I WANT
TO SPEND THE REST OF MY TIME
TALKING ABOUT THE
IMPLEMENTATION. FUNDING ALONE
DOESN'T SOLVE. AND ACTUALLY
THERE'S AN AVENUE FOR POLICY AND
PERMITTING TO SUPPORT THESE
BOTTLENECKS. SO THESE
BOTTLENECKS COULD BE DESCRIBED
AS THE THREE W'S. IT'S WOOD
WORKDAYS AND WORKFORCE. WOOD IS
BIOMASS UTILIZATION. WHEN WE'RE
DOING THESE FOREST HEALTH
TREATMENTS, MOST OF IT IS NOT
MERCHANTABLE TIMBER. MOST OF
IT'S SMALL TREES, BRANCHES,
SCRUB MATERIAL. WHEN YOU WORK AT
THE LANDSCAPE SCALE, YOU'RE
CREATING MOUNTAINS OF IT, WHICH
IS ESSENTIALLY A WASTE PRODUCT.
THERE ARE VERY FEW BIOMASS
UTILIZATION PROJECTS IN THE
STATE. THERE ARE VERY FEW PLACES
TO TAKE THIS MATERIAL FOR ONE
PROJECT IN ONE SEASON. IT'S
EASILY $2 MILLION IN TRUCKING
FEES TO GET THAT MATERIAL TO A
PLACE, EVEN IF THEY'LL TAKE IT
EVERY TIME THERE'S A FIRE,
THERE'S A GLUT OF THIS MATERIAL.
AND SO WE OFTEN RUN UP WHERE NOT
ONLY IS IT VERY FAR AWAY, BUT
THEY'RE NOT EVEN TAKING NEW
CHIPS. SO THIS IS A HUGE
PROBLEM. WE NEED INVESTMENT IN
BIOMASS UTILIZATION
INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMBUSTION
BASED BIOMASS INFRASTRUCTURE IS
ONE OF THE ONLY COMMERCIAL READY
BIOENERGY TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT
EXIST. THERE'S A LOT OF PILOT
LEVEL PROJECTS WORKING ON OTHER
TYPES OF END PRODUCTS. SYNGAS,
OTHER BIOCHAR, OTHER END
PRODUCTS, BUT USING BIOMASS TO
BIOENERGY WITH COMBUSTION BASED
TECHNOLOGY IS THE ONLY
COMMERCIAL READY TYPE OF
TECHNOLOGY, AND IT'S ACTUALLY
VERY HARD TO PERMIT A LARGE
COMBUSTION BASED BIOMASS PROJECT
IN CALIFORNIA. SO THAT'S ONE
HUGE BOTTLENECK. THE NEXT ONE IS
WORK DAYS. OUR IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERS ARE STUCK BETWEEN
WAITING FOR THE LAND TO DRY OUT
ENOUGH SO THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO
GO OUT AND START USING HEAVY
MACHINERY ON THE LAND. AND
THAT'S MANAGED THROUGH STATE
WATER BOARD, SOIL RUNOFF AND
COMPACTION RULES. THEN YOU START
YOUR IMPLEMENTATION TREATMENTS
AND YOU QUICKLY RUN UP AGAINST
THE IT'S TOO HOT AND TOO DRY AND
THAT'S CALLED AN E DAY. I
BELIEVE IT'S A IT'S AN ALPHABET
TYPE SYSTEM A THROUGH E E BEING
IT'S TOO HOT AND TOO DRY. DOWNED
TOOLS, NO MECHANICAL THINNING
WHATSOEVER. SO IN SOME YEARS
WHEN WE HAVE AN EXTREME WINTER
AND AN EXTREME SUMMER, THAT
IMPLEMENTATION TIME IS LIKE 18
DAYS. YOU CANNOT INCREASE PACE
AND SCALE, AND YOU'RE NOT GOING
TO BE ABLE TO SPEND THE MONEY
QUICKLY ENOUGH. WITH JUST A FEW
WEEKS OF IMPLEMENTATION TIME.
THAT BRINGS US TO OUR THIRD
BOTTLENECK, WHICH IS WORKFORCE.
WORKFORCE IS HEAVILY IMPACTED BY
WORK DAYS. WE'RE NOT RECRUITING
ENOUGH PEOPLE INTO THE
RESTORATION ECONOMY THAT WE
ACTUALLY NEED TO BUILD. IF WE'RE
GOING TO ACHIEVE A MILLION ACRES
PER YEAR AND THE WORKFORCE THAT
WE DO HAVE ARE SPREAD PRETTY
THIN, THEY OFTEN GET PULLED INTO
FIRES WITH THEIR MACHINERY WHEN
THERE'S A FIRE TO HELP WORK ON
THOSE FIRES. THERE'S A LOT OF
WATERSHED GROUPS NOW WITH HUGE
AMOUNTS OF IMPLEMENTATION MONEY,
TRYING TO GET THOSE PEOPLE TO
COME TO THEIR WATERSHED AND HELP
WORK ON THESE TREATMENTS. AND
WHEN YOU HAVE THEM MOBILIZED IN
YOUR WATERSHED, AND THEN YOU
HAVE AN E DAY, THEY'RE OUT THERE
MOBILIZED WITH CREWS, THEY'RE IN
TENTS OR THEY'RE IN HOTELS.
THEY'RE THEY HAVE LABOR COSTS,
FOOD COSTS, HOUSING COSTS. AND
THEY DON'T GET PAID WHEN THEY'RE
NOT GETTING WHEN THEY'RE NOT
WORKING ON THE TREATMENTS. SO
THEY HAVE TO DECIDE IF THEY'RE
GOING TO STAY THERE AND WAIT FOR
THE CONDITIONS TO IMPROVE OR
DEMOBILIZE AND GO WHERE THEY CAN
WORK. THEY'RE INCREASINGLY
TALKING ABOUT LEAVING THE STATE
ENTIRELY. WE CAN'T GO FASTER IF
WE LOSE OUR WORKFORCE. SO THERE
ARE POLICY AND PERMITTING
DISCUSSIONS TO BE HAD ON ALL OF
THESE BOTTLENECKS THAT WOULD
REALLY HELP US. WE STILL NEED
THE IMPLEMENTATION FUNDING TO
KEEP COMING, BUT WITHOUT THESE
BOTTLENECKS BEING ADDRESSED, WE
ARE NOT GOING TO ACHIEVE OUR
GOALS. SO I WOULD SORRY, I'M I'M
DONE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
WE'LL NOW TURN IT OVER TO
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. YEAH, I
KNEW YOU'D HAVE ONE COTTAGE.
OKAY. CAN YOU FOR THOSE OF US
NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE WORLD
OF FORESTRY, CAN YOU HELP US
UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT THE
LOGIC BEHIND THE CONSTRAINTS FOR
WET PERIOD? DRY PERIOD. AND YOU
SAID, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE FOLKS
THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT LEAVING
THE STATE. ARE THOSE CONSTRAINTS
VERY UNIQUE TO CALIFORNIA OR ARE
THEY SIMILAR IN OTHER
GEOGRAPHIES? SO MY UNDERSTANDING
IS THAT THE Â DE PROTOCOL IS A
FEDERAL RULE. SO THAT WOULD BE
SIMILAR ACROSS FEDERAL
LANDSCAPE. BUT OUR CONDITIONS, I
THINK ARE A BIT MORE EXTREME IN
SOME YEARS. SO WE TEND TO HAVE
MORE Â DAYS. AND THAT'S
OBVIOUSLY INCREASING WITH THE
INCREASING SUMMERS. THE BUT
THERE WOULD BE MITIGATIONS. THE
WHOLE THING WITH THE, THE ED IS
THAT YOU IN ORDER TO PROCEED,
YOU WOULD NEED TO GET A VARIANCE
THAT VARIANCES ARE ONLY ALLOWED
IN VERY SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
SPECIFIC HUMIDITY LEVELS. AND
THOSE ARE BASED ON WEATHER
STATIONS. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE
FOREST SERVICE TO TRY TO LOOK AT
MORE LOCALIZED WEATHER TO REDUCE
SORT OF REGIONAL Â DAYS WHEN
YOU COULD ACTUALLY KEEP WORKING
BECAUSE CONDITIONS AREN'T THE
SAME, WHERE YOU'RE ACTUALLY AT.
BUT EVEN THEN, WITH THE
INCREASING CLIMATE CHANGE AND
INCREASING HOT, DRY CONDITIONS
LIKE WE ARE GOING TO RUN UP
AGAINST THIS TIME WHERE WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE
MITIGATIONS TO KEEP WORKING,
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE
OUT HOW TO WORK ALL YEAR WHEN
IT'S NOT SNOW COVERED. AND THAT
IS ACHIEVABLE WITH TRAINING BY
CREWS AND ON THE WATER AS PART
OF THE PROJECT, AND WETTING THE
AREA BEFORE YOU START TREATMENT.
LIKE THERE WOULD BE MITIGATIONS
THAT I MEAN, THIS ISN'T
INSURMOUNTABLE, IT'S JUST
CURRENTLY NOT ALLOWED WITH THE
WET PERIOD. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT A
FORESTER, SO I'M NOT AN EXPERT.
THIS IS WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING
FROM MY TEAMS. THIS IS MANAGED
THROUGH THE REGIONAL BOARD AND
AGAIN THERE WOULD BE MITIGATIONS
WITH PERMITTING CHANGES. YOU
COULD COMPLETE YOUR TREATMENTS
AND GO BACK AND DO YOU KNOW SOME
SORT OF SOIL AMENDMENTS AND
EROSION CONTROL. THIS IS ALSO
SOLVABLE. OKAY. BUT THE DOWN
TOOLS ARE WAITING. AND THEN
AGAIN WAITING. THAT'S NOT THAT'S
NOT REALLY PART OF THE SOLUTION
IN THE LONG RUN, A FIRE WILL
COME BEFORE WE GET DONE. AND
THEN A COUPLE OF OTHER
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. AS LONG AS
I HAVE THE HAVE THE STAGE ON. I
THINK YOU SAID THAT YOU SAID I
THINK YOU SAID IT'S VERY
DIFFICULT TO GET A BIOMASS
FACILITY PERMITTED IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. I THINK THAT'S
QUITE AN UNDERSTATEMENT. AND I
THINK SOMETIMES THERE'S A LOT OF
REASONS THAT THOSE PROJECTS, I
THINK, RUN INTO DIFFICULTIES.
BUT I DO THINK ONE OF THE
REASONS IS THAT MANY PEOPLE
THINK THAT, OH MY GOSH, THAT'S
GOING TO SOMEHOW ENCOURAGE
DEFORESTATION AND, YOU KNOW,
INCENTIVIZE CORPORATIONS TO
CLEAR THE FOREST. SO CAN YOU
HELP US UNDERSTAND JUST, YOU
KNOW, IN ORDER TO MEET THE GOALS
THAT THE STATE HAS SET OVER THE
COURSE OF, SAY, THE NEXT 5 TO 10
YEARS, WHAT VOLUME OF BIOMASS IS
THAT GOING TO CREATE? IF WE'RE
JUST SORT OF ON A GLIDE PATH TO
HIT THE GOALS THAT WE NEED TO
HIT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE
FIRE MITIGATION STRATEGIES OR
SORT OF BALLPARK, I. YEAH,
PLEASE. BECAUSE I, I KNOW IT'S A
GIGANTIC MOUNTAIN. IT'S A BIG
NUMBER. YEAH, YEAH. BIG NUMBER.
GO AHEAD. OKAY. SO TWO THINGS I
THINK THE NEXT PANEL IS GOING TO
BE FOCUSING ON BIOMASS. SO. OH
GREAT. I THINK THAT'S TRUE
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT MY CLOSER IS
IN THE CROWD. BUT I WILL TELL
YOU REAL QUICK GENERAL NUMBERS
IS IF YOU'RE DOING A PROJECT
THIS IS A BROAD, BROAD NUMBER.
IF YOU'RE DOING A PROJECT IN THE
WOODS FOR THE PURPOSES OF FUEL
HAZARD REDUCTION, AND YOU'RE
TREATING AND CREATING BIOMASS
AND CREATING ABOUT 15,000 BONE
DRY TONS AND ACRES, THAT'S AN
AVERAGE. AND THAT WOULD EVEN
CALL THAT IF YOU WANT TO BE
FAIR, YOU'D CALL THAT ON THE
HIGH END. YOU'RE GENERALLY
GUARANTEED YOU'RE GOING TO BE
10,000 TO 15,000 TONS AN ACRE.
GIVEN THE VARIABILITY OF THE
STATE'S FORESTS RIGHT NOW,
BALANCE THAT AGAINST THE MILLION
ACRE STRATEGY, AND YOU CAN START
PUTTING NUMBERS TOGETHER THAT
GET TO BE VERY BIG. CAN YOU
SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MIC, PLEASE?
I'M SORRY. YOU COULD GET TO YOU
COULD GET TO NUMBERS VERY BIG
VERY QUICKLY. THERE WAS A STUDY
RECENTLY PUBLISHED BY THE STATE
BOARD OF FORESTRY AND FIRE
PROTECTION. THEY'RE TALKING
ABOUT A MILLION BONE DRY TONS
STORED ON THE LANDSCAPE AS WE
SPEAK, LIKE ACTUALLY STORED.
THAT'S NOT BEING CREATED, THAT'S
STORED. NOT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF
THOSE IS ACCESSIBLE, BUT THAT'S
STORED ON THE LANDSCAPE. SO THE
PROBLEM THAT MY COLLEAGUES, I'M
SURE WILL SPEAK TO IS DRAMATIC.
I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. GOT
IT. ALL RIGHT, ONE MORE
QUESTION. ONE MORE FOLLOW UP.
ALL RIGHT. SO, MISS, MISS HUNT,
IT SOUNDED LIKE AS YOU WERE
WRAPPING UP YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU
WERE SUGGESTING THAT THERE ARE
SOME REFORMS NEEDED TO THE
WILLIAMSON ACT. IS THAT WHAT YOU
WERE GETTING AT? AND BE
INTERESTED IN DIGGING A LITTLE
BIT INTO SOME OF THOSE
SPECIFICS, AND THEN ALSO HEARING
MISS WOLFF, YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON
ON THAT. RIGHT. SO THE
WILLIAMSON ACT IS KIND OF IT'S A
STATE COUNTY PARTNERSHIP. AND SO
THE SPECIFIC WAYS THAT IT GETS
IMPLEMENTED DEPEND TO SOME
EXTENT ON COUNTY POLICY. AND
SOME COUNTIES PROVIDE MORE
FLEXIBILITY, LET'S JUST SAY,
THAN OTHERS. THERE'S SOME
OVERALL CHALLENGES OF YOU KNOW,
THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THINKING
ABOUT. SO THAT'S YOU GET TAX
BREAKS IF YOU ARE KEEPING YOUR
LAND IN AG, RIGHT. AND SOMETIMES
IN OPEN SPACE, IF YOU ARE, YOU
KNOW, AS, AS SARAH'S NEIGHBORS
AND MAYBE EVEN YOU YOURSELF ARE
EXPERIENCING, IF YOU ARE REALLY
NOW IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU'RE
FORCED TO RATCHET DOWN THE
AMOUNT OF IRRIGABLE ACREAGE, THE
IRRIGATED ACREAGE THAT YOU'VE
GOT, YOU IDEALLY WANT TO
REPURPOSE IT IN SOME WAY THAT IS
GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL, AND YOU
AT LEAST DON'T WANT TO GET
PENALIZED FOR NOT DOING NOT
USING WATER ON IT. AND SO, YOU
KNOW, SOME FOLKS SAY INVOLVED IN
SOLAR DEVELOPMENT HAVE BEEN
HOPING TO BE ABLE TO RETAIN
THAT. AND SOME COUNTIES ALLOW
IT. AND SO THERE MAY BE WAYS TO
SORT OF STANDARDIZE THAT,
ALTHOUGH I KNOW SOME COUNTIES
WON'T LIKE THAT. BUT THERE'S
ALSO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE WAYS
OF SORT OF MAKING SURE PEOPLE,
IF THEY'RE GOING INTO SORT OF
MORE HABITAT RECHARGE BASIN KIND
OF THING, THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY QUALIFY FOR THE OPEN SPACE
PROVISIONS OF IT. THOSE THOSE
ARE NOT STANDARD ACROSS
COUNTIES, BUT THEN ANOTHER
REALLY BIG THING IS THAT IF YOU
WANT TO OPT OUT OF WILLIAMSON
ACT, YOU HAVE TEN YEARS WHERE
YOU GOT TO WAIT. AND I DON'T
THINK EVERYBODY WHO'S GOING TO
HAVE TO TAKE LAND OUT OF
PRODUCTION IS GOING TO HAVE TEN
YEARS TO WAIT. SO NOT CHANGING
THE PENALTY STRUCTURE, THAT'S
SOMETHING I THINK THAT THE STATE
COULD PROVIDE SOME ACROSS THE
BOARD HELP ON AND MAYBE HELP
COUNTIES AT LEAST WITH SORT OF
RATIONALIZING A FRAMEWORK SO
THAT NOT EVERY COUNTY HAS TO GO
AND GO THROUGH THEIR OWN LOCAL,
LOCAL LEGISLATIVE PROCESS,
BECAUSE THAT'S HARD. I
COMPLETELY AGREE WITH ELLEN.
THOSE ARE ALL GREAT POINTS. AND
I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ARE WE ARE
ALL TRYING TO BE AS CREATIVE AS
POSSIBLE WITH THE LAND THAT WE
NEED TO TAKE OUT OF PRODUCTION
TO ENSURE WE CAN STILL FARM A
PORTION OF IT. SOLAR IS A BIG
COMPONENT OF THAT MANY WATER
DISTRICTS HAVE DEEMED THAT AS AN
AGRICULTURAL USE AT THIS POINT
IN TIME TO TRY TO HELP WITH THAT
TRANSITION. SO, WILLIAMSON ACT
IN SOME COUNTIES, I THINK IS
RECOGNIZING IT IN THAT WAY. THAT
WOULD BE HELPFUL. I THINK THE
PENALTIES THE EARLY EXIT OR
WOULD BE GETTING THOSE ADDRESSED
WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. BUT THESE
RECHARGE PONDS OR EVEN FALLOWING
FOR PURPOSES OF RECHARGE WHEN
AND IF IT'S AVAILABLE, IS STILL
ACTIVE FARMING. AND SO, YOU
KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT WE
BROADEN WHAT THE USE OF THAT
LAND IS, THAT IT'S NOT JUST SO
LIMITING BECAUSE IT IN MANY
CASES, IT MAY JUST BE FOLLOWED
IN A ROTATIONAL SYSTEM. IT MAY
NOT BE THAT FIELD IS FOLLOWED
FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS, BUT IT
IS FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS. AND
THEN ANOTHER SECTION OF YOUR
PROPERTY, MAYBE WILL BE. SO JUST
ALLOWING FOR THAT TYPE OF
BROADER FLEXIBILITY. AND I THINK
ALSO ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION
EARLIER, BUT PLAYS INTO THE
SOLAR, YOU KNOW, THE PERMITTING
FOR ALL OF THE TRANSMISSION
LINES THAT ARE NECESSARY THAT
NEED TO BE PUT IN PLACE IF WE'RE
ACTUALLY GOING TO MEET THOSE
GREEN ENERGY GOALS AND PUT IN
ALL THE SOLAR AS A CONVERSION
FROM AG PRODUCTION, THERE,
THERE'S REALLY A STANDSTILL AT
THIS MOMENT IN TIME THAT WITHOUT
TRANSMISSION, THERE'S NO NO
ABILITY TO PUT IN MORE SOLAR. SO
WE ARE GOING TO DO A WHOLE
HEARING ON THAT ACTUALLY NEXT.
SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I DO
YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE
ONE QUESTION. IF YOU'RE NO YOU
GO AHEAD. SO I JUST I WANT TO
TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FEES
AND THEM GOING UP 18%, 1,800%.
EXCUSE ME. SO I THINK I MIGHT
HAVE COVERED THIS BEFORE, BUT IS
IT THAT ALL THOSE FEES MUST BE
PAID ON THE FRONT END OF AN
APPLICATION? IS THAT RIGHT? THEY
ARE ON THE APPLICATION. THE ONES
I'M EXPERIENCING. YOU PAY AT
APPLICATION. SO THAT MONEY JUST
SITS THERE AND YOU WAIT AND YOU
WAIT AND YOU WAIT. YES, THAT
MIGHT BE A BIT OF A PROBLEM. I
KIND OF FEEL LIKE YOU MIGHT. IT
MIGHT BE FAIR TO CHARGE AS ONE
GOES ALONG. THE PROCESS. NOW,
THE SECOND THING THAT I WANTED
TO MAYBE MAKE A COMMENT SLASH
QUESTION IS, AS IT RELATES TO
CAPTURING WATER, BECAUSE A LOT
OF WHAT THE CHAIRPERSON HAS HAS
TRIED TO ACCOMPLISH HERE IS DO
WE ENOUGH WATER TO AFFORD TO
SERVICE THE HOUSING WE MIGHT
CONTEMPLATE? AND I, I, LIKE
YOURSELF, AM VERY PLEASED WITH
THE GOVERNOR'S EMERGENCY ORDER
BECOMING AN ACTUAL STATUTE SO
THAT SHORT OF TEN YEARS AND A
HALF $1 MILLION, THERE IS AN
ABILITY TO DIVERT IN THE GOOD
TIMES, IF YOU WILL, AND SO THAT
WE HAVE ENOUGH WATER, PERHAPS,
TO EITHER RECHARGE GROUNDWATER
OR THERE'S WATER ON STOCK.
SHOULD WE HAVE HOUSING THAT
NEEDS TO BE BUILT. AND SO THAT'S
MORE OF A COMMENT THAN A
QUESTION, BUT I GUESS I'M
WONDERING, HAVE YOU SEEN A BIG
INCREASE IN PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO
MEET THEIR GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OF THE
EMERGENCY ORDER THAT ALLOWS YOU
TO DIVERT WITH WITH GREATER
EASE, IF YOU WILL, WHEN WE HAVE
THESE ATMOSPHERIC RIVERS AND ALL
THAT GOOD STUFF, YOU KNOW, 2023
WAS REALLY OUR FIRST
OPPORTUNITY. YEAH. AND I WILL
SAY, BECAUSE WE HAD NOT BEEN
GRANTED ANY OF THOSE PERMITS
THAT WE WERE GOING AFTER A LOT
OF THE MONEY THAT SHOULD HAVE
BEEN SPENT TO INSTALL THE
INFRASTRUCTURE TO GET THOSE UP.
AND GOING WERE EITHER NOT IN
PLACE OR NOT EVEN ACCESSIBLE,
BECAUSE THERE JUST WAS SUCH A
BIG NEED, AND THERE JUST WEREN'T
THE PUMPS AND THE FACILITIES
AVAILABLE TO, TO BRING THAT ALL
TO BEAR. SO WE COULD BE DOING A
LOT MORE, A LOT MORE THAN WHAT
WE DID IN 2023. BUT IT TAKES
THAT PREP BECAUSE IT LIKE I
SAID, IT'S A MOTOR THAT YOU HAVE
TO HAVE SITTING THERE. IT'S A
FISH SCREEN. IT'S A PIPING
INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU KNOW, IN
SOME CASES WE'RE CONNECTING
VARIOUS NON LIKE ENTITIES
TOGETHER SO THAT WHEN THOSE
FLOOD EVENTS HAPPEN WE CAN PUSH
IT OUT FURTHER INTO THE
LANDSCAPE THAN JUST THOSE
ADJACENT. AND WE NEED TO DO THAT
AHEAD OF TIME. AND SO I THINK
THERE I DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE
CLOSE TO MEETING OUR GOALS AT
THIS POINT IN TIME, I THINK WAS
YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION WITH
RESPECT TO SIGMA, WE DID A LOT
IN 2023, BUT IT'S NOWHERE NEAR
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. IT IS
IT'S INSURMOUNTABLE ALMOST. AND
I THINK I THINK ELLEN WOULD EVEN
AGREE. THE AMOUNT OF FLOOD FLOWS
AVAILABLE IN ALL LIKELIHOOD WILL
NOT FIX OUR PROBLEM. WE WILL
STILL HAVE HALF A MILLION ACRES
OF FARM GROUND OR MORE GOING OUT
OF PRODUCTION, AND IT ALREADY
IS. I MEAN, THERE JUST ARE NOT
SOLUTIONS IN PLACE FOR MANY OF
THESE, THESE LANDS. AND SO THERE
IS A LOT OF LAND ALREADY OUT OF
PRODUCTION ON A PERMANENT BASIS
THAT WILL NOT BE FARMED. SO, YOU
KNOW, THOSE ARE MAJOR ECONOMIC
IMPACTS TO THE COMMUNITIES, TO
THE COUNTIES, TO THE STATE. AND,
YOU KNOW, I THINK WE ARE BEHIND
ON SUPPORTING THE LEGISLATION
FOR THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
ACT. WE YOU KNOW, WE PASSED IT,
BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE
IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT FROM THE
AGENCIES TO PUT ALL THE THINGS
IN PLACE. I MEAN, I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT WE COULD HAVE, BUT
THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT FASTER
MOVEMENT TOWARDS SUPPORTING
THOSE ACTIVITIES THAN THERE HAS
BEEN TO DATE. AND JUST ONE MORE
THING. IF I MAY, ON THE FOREST,
MATT, I WILL GET TO YOU FOR A
SECOND. YOU YOU MENTIONED
SOMETHING THAT REALLY CAUGHT MY
ATTENTION AND THAT WAS PERHAPS
STATE INCENTIVES TO GET THE FEDS
TO ACT. YOU WANT TO ELABORATE?
JUST A LITTLE OF WHAT MIGHT BE
IN OUR WHEELHOUSE. IN OTHER
WORDS, DON'T INVEST UNTIL YOU
GET THAT COMMITMENT FROM THE
FEDS. BECAUSE I HAVE GONE AND
SEEN, YOU KNOW, THE THINNING OF
FORESTS AND HOW THAT REALLY
CREATES A MUCH HEALTHIER FOREST.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT EDUCATION.
BUT THE FEDS AREN'T PARTICULARLY
GREAT ACTORS. AND SO WHAT CAN
THE STATE DO? WHAT IS THIS
INCENTIVE THING THAT YOU TOUCHED
ON? SO I HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS
THAT WORK IN THE IN THE FEDERAL
SYSTEM, AND THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE
THAT ARE IN A, IN A TOUGH SPOT.
IF YOU WILL, AND, AND CALIFORNIA
HAS INVESTED IN PROJECTS IN THE
SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY
THROUGH CAL FIRE DEVELOPING
PARTNERSHIPS TO TRY TO SUPPORT
THE FOREST SERVICE, TO GET
MOVING FORWARD ON PROJECTS THAT
ARE CONNECTIVE IN NATURE OR
NECESSARY IF YOU AS IT RELATES
TO RESILIENCY, SO ON AND SO
FORTH. I THINK THAT THERE'S A
REAL CAPACITY ISSUE WITHIN THE
FOREST SERVICE, AND RIGHT NOW
THERE'S NOT GOOD OPPORTUNITIES
FOR RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
PRIVATE ENTITIES AND THE FOREST
SERVICE. IT'S ALWAYS A
GOVERNMENT TO GOVERNMENT TYPE OF
RELATIONSHIP IN MANY INSTANCES,
THAT NOW LENDS ITSELF TO HAVING
LIKE BUILDING THE TRIANGLE AND
HAVING A PRIVATE PARTNER IN
THERE HELPING. AND I THINK THAT
WE COULD BREAK THAT MODEL TO A
CERTAIN EXTENT AND BE MORE
EFFICIENT. THE FOREST SERVICE
DOES HAVE NEW AUTHORITIES THAT
HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO THEM, AND I
BELIEVE THAT THE FOREST SERVICE
COULD RELY UPON THOSE THOSE
AUTHORITIES MORE BRIGHTLY. BUT
THEY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH
RECOGNIZING AT TIMES THAT THOSE
AUTHORITIES EXIST. RIGHT. AND SO
IT'S A VERY LARGE ORGANIZATION
IN CALIFORNIA ALONE, THERE'S 18
NATIONAL FORESTS ACROSS THE
NATION. THERE'S HUNDREDS OF
THEM. AND SO TO HAVE THAT THAT
MESSAGE RESONATE ACROSS THE
ENTIRE NATION OR EVEN THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA IS TOUGH. BUT IF WE
DON'T HAVE LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT
FOR THOSE TYPES OF INITIATIVES
FROM LEADERS LIKE YOURSELVES,
ALONG WITH FOLKS LIKE MYSELF, IF
YOU WILL, AND OTHERS, NOT THAT
I'M TOOTING MY OWN HORN, BUT
BUILDING A COALITION WITH THAT
KIND OF MESSAGING. WE'RE NOT
GOING TO CHANGE THE CULTURE. SO
I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S AN
OPPORTUNITY TO THINK ABOUT HOW
DO WE REACH OUT TO THE FEDERAL
PARTNERS THROUGH THE AND LET
THEM KNOW CALIFORNIA WANTS TO
INVEST, BUT WE NEED TO SEE
OUTCOMES. AND WHAT DOES THAT
MEAN? I THINK THAT THAT MEANS
RELYING UPON YOUR EMERGENCY
AUTHORITIES AND BUILDING NEW
PARTNERSHIPS WITH BETTER
OUTCOMES. AND THAT'S KIND OF
WHERE I AT THE BROAD LEVEL.
THAT'S THE WAY I THINK ABOUT IT.
THANK YOU. I HAD ONE LAST
QUESTION AS WE WRAP UP THIS
PANEL TO FOR MISS HANCOCK, YOU
SAID IN YOUR TESTIMONY THAT
YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 20
YEARS AND PERMITTING PERMITTING
ISSUES AND PERMITTING CHALLENGES
IS CONSTANTLY AND CONSISTENTLY
COMING UP. CAN YOU GIVE MAYBE
SOME OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS
EXAMPLES OF BECAUSE OF
PERMITTING, THERE'S BEEN
INACTION ON SOMETHING AND MAYBE
WHAT THE COST OF THAT INACTION
HAS BEEN? YEAH. PUT ME ON THE
SPOT. I'M PUTTING YOU ON THE
SPOT. PICK A WINNER. OR EVEN
SOME EXAMPLES OF, LIKE HOW HOW
THAT MANIFESTS ITSELF IN OUR
INABILITY TO ACTUALLY SOLVE
PROBLEMS. YOU KNOW, I THINK I'LL
GIVE AN EXAMPLE JUST FROM, FROM
THE RESTORATION WORLD, WHICH IS
KIND OF, YOU KNOW, DOING
RESTORATION IS KEY TO HAVING OUR
WATER SUPPLY ALSO BE HEALTHY,
RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT TO, YOU KNOW,
DO DO WORK IN THE, IN THE DELTA
WATERSHED TO, TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE
EXAMPLES OF CASES WHERE
EVERYBODY AGREES PRETTY MUCH
PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY AGREES
THAT THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOME
LAND THAT SHOULD BE RESTORED.
AND YOU STILL CAN HAVE TEN, 15
PLUS YEARS OF JUST IT NOT MOVING
WATER, TREADING WATER. AND, YOU
KNOW, AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE THAT
FOR SOMETHING, THAT'S WHERE
EVERYBODY AGREES, YOU KNOW, IT
MAKES IT SO MUCH HARDER FOR
STUFF WHERE YOU'VE GOT FOLKS
WHO, YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE,
GRAY INFRASTRUCTURE, WHERE, YOU
KNOW, IT'S NOT NOT EVERYBODY
AGREES, EVEN IF WE KIND OF DO
NEED IT. SO, YOU KNOW, I YEAH,
I'M ENCOURAGED BY SOME OF THE
THINGS. YOU KNOW, WHAT WE HEARD
ON THE ON THE FIRST PANEL, I
THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN
SOME GREAT, SOME GREAT PROGRESS
IN, IN RECENT YEARS ON TRYING TO
SIMPLIFY AND GO MORE
PROGRAMMATIC. BUT THERE ARE JUST
WAYS IN WHICH WE STILL HAVE A
LOT TO DO. AND I THINK WE SHOULD
DO THAT, NOT JUST ON RESTORATION
PROJECTS, BUT ALSO SOMETHING
LIKE THE STREAM BED ALTERATION
AGREEMENTS. IF IT'S IF IT'S NOT
A MEGA, MEGA PROJECTS, OKAY,
THEY NEED BIGGER LOOKS, RIGHT?
BUT IF IT'S NOT, IF IT'S A LOT
OF DISTRIBUTED GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE, LET'S FIND A WAY TO
SIMPLIFY THAT. GREAT. THANK YOU.
WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO
PANEL TWO. WE'RE ALLOWED TO
APPLAUD. OKAY. OUR LAST PANEL
WILL BE ON PERMITTING REFORM
NEEDED TO FACILITATE THE
REDUCTION AND REMOVAL OF
ATMOSPHERIC CARBON. AND IF WE
COULD ASK OUR PANELISTS TO KEEP
THEIR REMARKS CONCISE, BECAUSE
WE WILL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU
ALL AFTER, AND WE'LL LET YOU ALL
SELF INTRODUCE. AND IF YOU COULD
GO IN ORDER OF THE AGENDA, THAT
WOULD BE GREAT.
THUMBS UP. MY NAME IS MIKE. HIT
THE BUTTON. I DON'T KNOW IF THE
MIC IS ON. CAN YOU? THERE WE GO.
OKAY, THERE WE GO. PERFECT.
THANK YOU. CHAIR WICKS AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
CASPER DAWSON. I'M A SCIENTIST
FROM LAWRENCE LIVERMORE,
NATIONAL LABORATORY, AND MY AREA
OF EXPERTISE IS IN CARBON
DIOXIDE REMOVAL AND MANAGEMENT.
AND I'M GOING TO BE SETTING THE
CONTEXT FOR THE NEED TO WITHDRAW
CARBON FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. AND
DRAWING ON OUR REPORT, GETTING
TO NEUTRAL, WHICH YOU ALL HAVE
ON YOUR DESKS. AND IF I CAN ASK
YOU JUST TO JOIN ME SEVERAL
PAGES IN PAGE ONE OF THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHOWS A LOVELY
FIGURE WITH SOME BAR CHARTS ON
IT, AND THIS WILL HELP US
UNDERSTAND THE SCALE OF THE NEED
FOR CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL. SO
TO ACHIEVE THE 2045 CARBON
NEUTRAL TARGET, WE NEED
AGGRESSIVE EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
IN CALIFORNIA THAT INVOLVES
THINGS LIKE ELECTRIFYING
TRANSPORT, RENEWABLE ENERGY
SOURCES FOR ELECTRICITY. BUT
THEY WILL ONLY GET US SO FAR AND
THE REST OF THE JOB NEEDS TO BE
DONE BY CO2 REMOVAL. AND IN THE
REPORT, WE ESTIMATE AROUND 100
MILLION TONS OF CO2 REMOVAL IS
NEEDED TO ACHIEVE THAT TARGET
PER YEAR BY 2045. AND TO PUT
THAT INTO CONTEXT, THAT'S
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN A QUARTER AND
A THIRD OF CALIFORNIA'S
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TO
DATE. SO THE SCALE IS LARGE. AND
THE STARTING POINT, WE'RE
STARTING FROM A PRETTY LOW BASE.
THE THREE PILLARS THAT WE'VE PUT
FORWARD IN THE REPORT OF HOW TO
ACHIEVE THAT 100 MILLION TON
TARGET. I'LL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF
THOSE THREE. THE FIRST ONE IS
AROUND THE STRATEGIES ON NATURAL
AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND I
WON'T GIVE TOO MUCH DETAIL
BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS PANELS HAVE
PUT FORWARD SOME OF THESE
PROJECTS. ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,
FARM ACTIVITIES, FOR EXAMPLE,
CROP ROTATIONS, COVER CROPPING,
BIOCHAR APPLICATIONS, AND ALSO
GOING OUT INTO THE FORESTS,
THOSE FORESTS AT RISK OF FIRE
AND DOING SOME MANAGEMENT
TREATMENTS THERE. I'LL JUST SAY
ON THIS PILLAR, THESE ARE
MEASURES WE CAN TAKE TODAY.
THERE ISN'T A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT
OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO
DELIVER THEM. THEY'RE RELATIVELY
CHEAP. IN THE REPORT, WE
ESTIMATE THEY AVERAGE AROUND $11
PER TON OF CARBON DIOXIDE
REMOVED. AND THAT'S GREAT. BUT
THEY WILL ONLY GET US SO FAR
TOWARDS THAT 100 MILLION TON
TARGET. AND SO THE SECOND PILLAR
THIS HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED.
THIS IS BIOMASS UTILIZATION.
THIS IS REALLY THE BIG ENCHILADA
IN CALIFORNIA OF CO2 REMOVAL.
AND THIS GETS A LOT OF FOCUS IN
OUR RESEARCH. THESE STRATEGIES
INVOLVE COLLECTING BIOMASS
RESOURCES FROM OUR VAST FORESTS,
FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES,
FROM CITIES. SO IT DOESN'T
MATTER WHAT DISTRICT THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS REPRESENT,
THEY'LL BE BIOMASS OPPORTUNITIES
IN YOUR DISTRICT. AND IN FACT,
JUST IF YOU JOIN ME A FEW PAGES
FURTHER, PAGE FOUR OF THE REPORT
GIVES A MAP OF CALIFORNIA, AND
YOU CAN SEE THOSE BARS THERE
REPRESENTING THE BIOMASS
RESOURCE AVAILABILITY AND THE
DIFFERENT ORIGINS THAT COME FROM
THEM. SO WHAT CAN WE DO WITH
THOSE RESOURCES? YOU'VE ALREADY
HEARD THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING
WELL USED TODAY. AND IN FACT,
THEIR DECAY IS ALSO LEADING TO
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. BUT IF
WE USE THEM WELL, WE CAN GET
BOTH USEFUL ENERGY SOURCES AND
CO2 WITHDRAWAL. SO THAT'S A REAL
GOOD DOUBLE NGUYEN THE PROCESS
THAT WE CAN DO THAT BY, WE CAN
COLLECT THOSE AND TURN THEM INTO
ELECTRICITY, HYDROGEN FUELS. SO
THERE'S A RANGE OF OPTIONS WE
CAN USE TO DELIVER THAT. THE
COST IS GREATER THAN THE FIRST
PILLAR. THE NATURAL APPROACHES
BETWEEN 30 TO $90 PER TON OF CO2
REMOVED. WE'RE GETTING THAT
USEFUL ENERGY RESOURCE. WE CAN
ALSO GET INVESTMENT AND JOBS
CREATION ACROSS CALIFORNIA AND
COMMUNITIES WHERE THAT SECTOR
WOULD SCALE UP, AND THAT WILL
REQUIRE MUCH MORE INFRASTRUCTURE
THAN THE FIRST PILLAR. WE'RE
LOOKING AT DEVELOPING THE SUPPLY
CHAIN. WE ESTIMATE BUILDING
BETWEEN 50 AND 100 BIOMASS
UTILIZATION FACILITIES. YOU
HEARD IN THE PREVIOUS PANEL HOW
IT'S CHALLENGING TO GET THOSE
PERMITTED. AND THIS IS A LARGE
NUMBER OF FACILITIES THAT NEED
TO GET BUILT TO REACH THAT
POTENTIAL. THESE TECHNOLOGIES
ARE ALSO RELATIVELY MATURE, SO
THEY CAN BE USED SOON AS WELL.
THE THIRD PILLAR THAT WE LOOK AT
TO HELP ACHIEVE THAT 100 MILLION
TON TARGET, THIS IS THE DIRECT
CAPTURE OF CO2 FROM THE AIR AND
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMITTEE
MAY ALREADY BE FAMILIAR WITH A
PROJECT IN TRACY THAT DOES THIS
TECHNOLOGY. THIS APPROACH IS THE
LEAST MATURE TECHNOLOGY, ALSO
THE MOST EXPENSIVE. WE ESTIMATE
SOMEWHERE OVER $200 PER TON OF
CO2 REMOVED, BUT IT COULD BE AN
IMPORTANT BACKSTOP IF THE OTHER
TWO PILLARS DON'T GET US TO THAT
100 MILLION TON TARGET. AND
THAT'S WHY IT'S WORTH EXPLORING
THE SECOND AND THIRD PILLARS
BOTH REQUIRE MUCH MORE
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THEY BOTH
REQUIRE PERMITTING FOR CO2
STORAGE, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN
TOUCHED ON SO FAR. AND I WILL
TRY AND LIMIT MY REMARKS TO SOME
MEASURES. YOU COULD CONSIDER
THAT COULD BE HELPFUL TO SPUR
THAT ON. THERE ARE GREAT
OPPORTUNITIES IN CALIFORNIA
AMONGST THE BEST IN THE WESTERN
UNITED STATES FOR THE STORAGE OF
CO2 PUMPED IN LIQUID FORM DEEP
UNDERGROUND, PERMANENTLY,
SAFELY. THE TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN
PROVEN AND USED ELSEWHERE, AND
THE CHALLENGE IS GETTING THESE
THESE PERMITS THROUGH. THERE ARE
SEVERAL PROJECTS IN CALIFORNIA
THAT HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR SOME
YEARS TO GET A PERMIT THROUGH.
THEY HAVEN'T YET ACHIEVED THAT.
AND THE BIG PICTURE IS WE NEED
TENS OF THESE PROJECTS WORKING
TO GET THAT 2045 TARGET. AND
THESE PROJECTS TAKE YEARS TO
DELIVER. SO THERE IS A DEGREE OF
URGENCY GETTING THESE DONE.
WE'VE WE'VE CONDUCTED SEPARATE
RESEARCH TO THE REPORT THAT YOU
HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU
SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THE
PERMITTING FOR THESE PROJECTS.
AND SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT
COULD BE LOOKED AT IN THERE
INCLUDE GIVING GREATER CLARITY
ON THE LEAD ROLE OF AGENCY
INVOLVED IN THE PERMIT
APPLICATION PROCESS, INCLUDING
CEQA. SO THERE'S GREATER CLARITY
ON THE ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES AND THAT FOCAL
POINT FOR THAT AGENCY THAT IS IN
CHARGE. A GREAT CHALLENGE IS
THAT CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE
PROJECTS ARE CROSS-CUTTING, AND
THEY INVOLVE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT
AGENCIES, AND YOU'VE GOT ABOVE
GROUND AND BELOW GROUND
RESPONSIBILITIES. A SECOND THING
YOU COULD CONSIDER IS THE
CLARIFYING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE
UNDERGROUND STORAGE WITH ABOVE
GROUND LAND. THAT ISN'T ALWAYS
CLEAR, AND THAT COULD BE
CLARIFIED TO GIVE GREATER
CERTAINTY TO PROJECTS. THERE ARE
SEVERAL OTHER MEASURES WE LOOK
AT IN OUR RESEARCH. ANOTHER
ANOTHER THING WOULD BE THE
LEGISLATURE COULD COULD ISSUE A
STATEMENT JUST JUST GIVING THE
SENSE OF URGENCY FOR THESE
PERMITS TO BE ISSUED MORE
QUICKLY AND TO BE REVIEWED MORE
QUICKLY. SO THOSE ARE A COUPLE
OF THINGS TO CONSIDER. THERE
WITH, WITH NOVEL TECHNOLOGIES
WHICH THESE ARE, IT'S IMPORTANT
TO ALSO CONSIDER THE COMMUNITIES
WHERE THEY'LL BE IMPLEMENTED.
THEY'LL BE VERY NEW TO
COMMUNITIES. MANY PEOPLE DO NOT
HAVE MUCH KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CARBON
CAPTURE AND STORAGE, CARBON
DIOXIDE REMOVAL. AND THERE'S A
CHALLENGE THERE WITH BRINGING
COMMUNITIES WITH YOU, GETTING
ACCEPTANCE, GETTING
UNDERSTANDING, GETTING INPUT
FROM THE COMMUNITIES WHERE THESE
PROJECTS ARE BEING BUILT.
THERE'S A REAL POTENTIAL THAT
THEY COULD ALLEVIATE
ENVIRONMENTALLY BURDENED
COMMUNITIES, IMPROVING AIR
QUALITY, REDUCING WILDFIRE RISK.
BUT THERE HAS TO BE A
SENSITIVITY TO HOW THE POLICY
DEVELOPS TO CONSIDER HOW THEY
COULD ALSO BE SOME NEGATIVE
IMPACTS. AND THAT WILL OBVIOUSLY
SET BACK THE ROLLOUT OF THE
INDUSTRY. A COUPLE OF COMMENTS
ON THE FINANCING, THE
PARTICULARLY THE SECOND AND
THIRD PILLARS THAT I MENTIONED
ARE PARTICULARLY CAPITAL
INTENSIVE TO INITIATE, AND
THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A BIG CHALLENGE
FOR THE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE
LOOKING TO DEVELOP THESE
PROJECTS. ALSO, THE MARKETS
AREN'T CLEARLY DEFINED. WE HAVE
A CLEAR CAP AND TRADE SYSTEM IN
CALIFORNIA FOR EMISSIONS
REDUCTIONS. WE DON'T HAVE A
CLEAR MARKET FOR CARBON DIOXIDE
REMOVAL. THERE'S A VOLUNTARY
CARBON MARKET, BUT THERE ISN'T A
COMPLIANT ONE. AND THAT'S A
CHALLENGE BECAUSE DEVELOPERS
NEED TO KNOW WHERE THE DEMAND IS
GOING TO COME FROM, AND THEY
HAVE TO HAVE SUFFICIENT
CERTAINTY OF PRICE FOR THEM TO
BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE
INVESTMENTS INTO THE PROJECTS,
WHICH I MENTIONED, A CAPITAL
INTENSIVE. SO THAT'S A QUICK
OVERVIEW ON THE FINANCE AND
FINALLY, JUST TO EMPHASIZE THIS
TIMELINE POINT, THESE PROJECTS
TAKE YEARS. THESE ARE
TECHNOLOGIES WHICH WE STILL HAVE
SOME AMOUNT TO LEARN FROM THE
FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE
EARLY STAGE PROJECTS. SO REALLY
TWO DECADES UNTIL 2045, WE
REALLY HAVE A RACE ON OUR HANDS
TO DELIVER THIS INDUSTRY TO THIS
SCALE OF 100 MILLION TONS.
ALONGSIDE, AS I SAID, THE
AGGRESSIVE REDUCTIONS IN
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. AND TO
WRAP UP, THE PRIZE IS NOT JUST
MEETING THE 2045 TARGET. IT'S
ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE
INVESTMENT AND JOBS IN
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITIES, AND ALSO
TO HAVE A CLEANER AIR AND
HEALTHIER ECOSYSTEMS TO LIVE IN.
SO I'LL LEAVE MY REMARKS THERE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU
AND GOOD AFTERNOON. JULIA LEVIN
WITH THE BIOENERGY ASSOCIATION
OF CALIFORNIA. WE HAVE ABOUT 100
MEMBERS IN CALIFORNIA, INCLUDING
MANY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, TRIBAL
MEMBERS, NONPROFITS, LAWRENCE
BERKELEY NATIONAL LAB,
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
MANY PRIVATE COMPANIES THAT ARE
CONVERTING ORGANIC WASTE TO
ENERGY TO MEET THE STATE'S
CLIMATE GOALS, TO REDUCE
WILDFIRE, TO REDUCE POLLUTION
FROM DAIRIES, AND TO CREATE A
CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN CALIFORNIA
WHERE NOTHING GETS LANDFILLED OR
PILED AND BURNED AS A DISPOSAL
MECHANISM AND INSTEAD IS REUSED.
AND I WANT TO THANK CASPER FOR
GOING FIRST, BECAUSE HE COVERED
ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT
REASONS TO DO BIOENERGY, WHICH
IS IT'S THE ONLY FORM OF ENERGY
THAT CAN BE CARBON NEGATIVE,
WHICH IS GOING TO BE CRITICAL TO
REACH CARBON NEUTRALITY. BUT I
WOULD SAY AN EVEN MORE URGENT
REASON FOR BIOENERGY IS THAT IT
IS ALSO THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL
WE HAVE TO REDUCE SHORT LIVED
CLIMATE POLLUTANTS. AND AS
IMPORTANT AS IT IS TO GET TO
CARBON NEUTRALITY BY
MID-CENTURY, WE WILL HAVE LOST
THE WAR AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE.
BY THEN, WE HAVE TO DO MUCH
MORE, AND CLIMATE SCIENTISTS
AROUND THE GLOBE AGREE THAT THE
MOST URGENT THING WE CAN DO, THE
ONLY THING LEFT AT THIS POINT
THAT WILL STOP TOTALLY
CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE IS
THE REDUCTION OF SHORT LIVED
CLIMATE POLLUTANTS, BECAUSE THEY
DON'T STAY IN THE ATMOSPHERE
VERY LONG. BUT WHILE THEY'RE
THERE, THEY'RE TENS TO THOUSANDS
OF TIMES MORE DAMAGING THAN THE
CARBON DIOXIDE EMITTED FROM
FOSSIL FUELS. SO ON TOP OF
WRITING CARBON NEGATIVE
EMISSIONS, BIOENERGY FROM
ORGANIC WASTE CAN ALSO REDUCE
SHORT LIVED CLIMATE POLLUTANTS.
86% OF CALIFORNIA'S METHANE
EMISSIONS, ACCORDING TO THE AIR
BOARD, COME FROM ORGANIC WASTE,
AND MORE THAN 90% OF OUR BLACK
CARBON IS FROM BURNING EITHER
WILDFIRES OR PILE AND BURN OF
AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST WASTE.
SO IT IS HARD TO OVERSTATE HOW
CRITICAL THIS IS FROM A CLIMATE
STANDPOINT. IT'S ALSO REALLY
IMPORTANT FROM AN AIR QUALITY
STANDPOINT BECAUSE WE REDUCE THE
POLLUTION FROM BURNING OR
LANDFILLING, AND WE CAN PROVIDE
FIRM RENEWABLE POWER THAT WE
NEED FOR ENERGY RELIABILITY,
SUSTAINABLE AVIATION FUEL,
HYDROGEN FOR HARD TO ELECTRIFY
SECTORS LIKE CEMENT, GLASS AND
OTHER MANUFACTURING, ETC. AND SO
GIVEN ALL THESE BENEFITS, YOU'D
THINK WE WERE GOING REALLY,
REALLY FAST. AND I THINK MOST OF
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT PERMITTING
IS A HUGE BARRIER. AND I DO HAVE
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS I'LL
COME BACK TO, BUT I WOULD NOT BE
DOING MY JOB IF I DIDN'T SAY
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER HUGE
BARRIERS AND CHAIR
PETRIE-NORRIS, I THINK YOU'VE
HEARD THIS BEFORE, BUT WE HAVE
TO CRACK THE INTERCONNECTION
NUT. IT IS A HUGE BARRIER FOR
ALL CLEAN ENERGY. IT IS REALLY
IMPEDING OUR EFFORTS TO REDUCE
OUR CLIMATE EMISSIONS, TO REDUCE
FOSSIL FUEL USE, ETC. EITHER THE
UTILITIES HAVE TO BE PUT ON MUCH
TIGHTER TIMELINES, TIMELINES
WITH REAL CONSEQUENCES, AND I
THINK THIS IS SORT OF SIMILAR TO
THE PERMITTING CHALLENGE. WE
NEED HARD TIMELINES AND THERE
NEED TO BE CONSEQUENCES FOR
FAILING TO MEET THEM, OR WE NEED
AN INTERCONNECTION AGENCY AND
JUST TAKE IT AWAY FROM THE
UTILITIES BECAUSE IT IS NOT
WORKING FOR ANY OF THE
RENEWABLES AT THIS POINT.
ANOTHER PROBLEM IS THAT THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
DOESN'T PLACE ANY VALUE ON ALL
THE OTHER THINGS THAT BIOENERGY
CAN DO, EVEN WILDFIRE
MITIGATION. THE FORMER PRESIDENT
OF THE PUC SAID WILDFIRE IS NOT
A RATEPAYER ISSUE. DON'T COME TO
US WITH THESE EXPENSIVE FOREST
BIOMASS. I AM NOT KIDDING.
MICHAEL PICKER SAID THAT
PUBLICLY. SO WE NEED STATE
AGENCIES ALSO TO STEP UP AND
RECOGNIZE CLIMATE CHANGE IS A
DIFFERENT BEAST. AND WE'RE GOING
TO HAVE TO MOVE FASTER. WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO ACCEPT SOME
LEVEL OF RISK. YOU HOPEFULLY
HAVE A LAW JOURNAL ARTICLE BY
MICHAEL GERARD, WHO IS ONE OF
THE GODS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW,
ABOUT WE ARE IN TRIAGE MODE NOW,
AND THAT MEANS ACCEPTING SOME
RISK. IT MEANS WE'RE NOT GOING
TO BE ABLE TO SAVE EVERYTHING,
BUT WE HAVE TO DO THE BIG
THINGS. THERE WAS A
RECOMMENDATION ON THE FIRST
PANEL ABOUT PRIORITIZING CLIMATE
ADAPTATION OR CLIMATE
RESILIENCE. I WOULD ADD TO THAT
CLIMATE MITIGATION. WE CAN'T
ADAPT OUR WAY OUT OF CLIMATE
CHANGE. WE ALSO HAVE TO STOP IT
OR SLOW IT DOWN AND VERY QUICKLY
WE NEED TO REVERSE IT. AND I DO
THINK GETTING TO THE PERMITTING
PART, I HAVE A COUPLE OF
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS. AND
ONE DOES FOLLOW THAT
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE FIRST
PANEL. WE NEED SOME SORT OF
PERMITTING HIERARCHY. AND AGAIN,
I KNOW CHAIR PETRIE-NORRIS
PROBABLY OTHERS OF, YOU KNOW, IN
THE ENERGY WORLD, THERE'S A
LOADING ORDER. YOU DO EFFICIENCY
FIRST, THEN RENEWABLES, AND ONLY
FOSSIL FUELS TO THE EXTENT THAT
YOU HAVE TO WE'RE GOING TO NEED
A PRIORITIZATION OF PERMITTING
AS WELL. NOT ALL PERMITS ARE
EQUALLY URGENT. AND I THINK
ANYTHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW,
ESSENTIAL FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SAFETY AND ANYTHING THAT IS
ESSENTIAL FOR CLIMATE
MITIGATION, MEANING REDUCING
CLIMATE EMISSIONS OR CLIMATE
ADAPTATION, THOSE JUST HAVE TO
BE A HIGHER PRIORITY. WE HAVE TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE MORE
QUICKLY. AND THERE'S A LOT OF
TALK ABOUT PERMIT STREAMLINING.
AND THANK YOU. I THINK ALL OF
YOU VOTED FOR SENATOR
CABALLERO'S BILL, SB 1420, THAT
DID ALLOW CEQA STREAMLINING FOR
HYDROGEN AND NON COMBUSTION
BIOENERGY. THAT'S HELPFUL. BUT
WHAT'S EVEN MORE HELPFUL IS
PERMIT CONSOLIDATION. I THINK A
NUMBER OF THE PREVIOUS PANELISTS
HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED TO
HAVE PERMITS DONE CONCURRENTLY,
RATHER THAN CONSECUTIVELY. AND
ONE OF YOU ASKED FOR A HORROR
STORY. I WILL GIVE YOU ONE
ACROSS THE BAY. THERE'S A
PROJECT ACTUALLY IN THE CHAIR'S
DISTRICT TO CONVERT ORGANIC
WASTE THAT BY LAW, HAS TO BE
DIVERTED FROM THE LANDFILL INTO
RENEWABLE CARBON NEGATIVE
HYDROGEN. IT WILL BE USED IN
ZERO EMISSION TRUCKS IN PLACE OF
DIESEL AND THE PROCESS ENERGY
WILL BE LANDFILL GAS THAT'S
CURRENTLY BEING FLARED, WITH NO
ENERGY CAPTURE AND NO POLLUTION
CONTROL. IT'S A FANTASTIC
PROJECT, THE COUNTY'S HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT SAID. IT'S A WIN
WIN WIN FOR THE CLIMATE AND
PUBLIC HEALTH, BUT THE REGIONAL
AIR DISTRICT WOULD NOT START ITS
AIR PERMIT UNTIL THE CEQA PERMIT
WAS DONE, WHICH COST A YEAR.
IT'S NOW BEEN A YEAR AND A HALF
SINCE THE CEQA PERMIT WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY THE CITY
OF RICHMOND. THERE IS NO
OPPOSITION AND IT COULD EASILY
BE ANOTHER YEAR. THERE ARE
FREQUENTLY MULTIPLE MONTH DELAYS
WITHOUT ANY COMMUNICATION FROM
THE AIR DISTRICT. I MEAN, THIS
IS HAPPENING ACROSS A LOT OF
DIFFERENT PROJECTS, AND AIR
DISTRICTS ARE A FUNNY CREATURE
OF BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL LAW,
BUT I THINK THEY DO NEED MORE
RESOURCES. IT'S NOT ENTIRELY
THEIR FAULT, BUT THEY ALSO NEED
A SENSE OF URGENCY AND
PRIORITIZATION, WHICH WE ARE NOT
SEEING. THESE PROJECTS HAVE TO
HAPPEN A LOT MORE QUICKLY, AND
TO THINK THAT A PROJECT THAT
WOULD BE THIS BENEFICIAL IN A
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY, WHERE
LABOR SUPPORTS IT, THE LOCAL
COMMUNITY DESPERATELY WANTS IT,
AND IT WILL TAKE THREE YEARS OR
MORE FOR THE PERMITTING. IT'S
JUST INEXCUSABLE IN THIS DAY AND
AGE. SO SOLUTIONS STATE LAW
ALREADY AUTHORIZES A
CONSOLIDATED PERMIT. IT IS IN
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE. I WANT TO
GET THE NUMBER RIGHT 71020. SO
THE AUTHORITY IS ALREADY THERE,
BUT ALMOST NO ONE KNOWS ABOUT
IT. AND ALMOST NO ONE USES IT.
THE BEAUTY OF CONSOLIDATED
PERMIT. IT ADDRESSES A NUMBER OF
THE CHALLENGES RAISED TODAY. IT
MEANS PERMITS HAPPEN
SIMULTANEOUSLY INSTEAD OF ONE
AFTER THE OTHER. IT ALSO AVOIDS
WHAT HAPPENS FREQUENTLY IS NOT
JUST CONFLICTING, PERMITTING
REQUIREMENTS, BUT WHAT WILL
HAPPEN IN THE RICHMOND PROJECT
IS WHEN THE AIR DISTRICT IS
DONE. THE PROJECT WILL HAVE
CHANGED SO MUCH THAT THEY WILL
LIKELY HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDO
THE CEQA PERMIT. THIS IS
RIDICULOUS, AND THE WAY TO SOLVE
IT IS TO HAVE A CONSOLIDATED
PERMIT WITH ONE LEAD AGENCY, AND
EVERYONE HAS TO WORK ON THE SAME
TIMELINE, AND THEY HAVE TO
COORDINATE AMONGST THEMSELVES.
IT IS SORT OF A MANDATED VERSION
OF WHAT IN THE SEA LEVEL PANEL.
BRIT I THINK WAS THE ACRONYM.
THEY WERE USING THIS SORT OF
FORCES THAT TO HAPPEN EVERY
TIME. AND MAYBE WE START WITH
CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND
MITIGATION PROJECTS ALL HAVE TO
USE A CONSOLIDATED PERMIT. THAT
WOULD BE ENORMOUSLY HELPFUL. A
COUPLE OF THE OTHER SUGGESTIONS
THAT CAME OUT EARLIER, PANELS, I
JUST WANTED TO UNDERSCORE, WE DO
NEED TO GET PERMITTING AGENCIES
MORE RESOURCES, AND THEY DO ALSO
NEED TO BE HELD TO STRICTER
TIMELINES, AND THERE NEED TO BE
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT MEETING
THOSE TIMELINES. I AM, HOWEVER,
REALLY WORRIED ABOUT THE YOU
ONLY GET TWO BITES AT THE APPLE
BECAUSE AT LEAST IN OUR AREA,
SOME OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES ARE
RELATIVELY NEW OR AT LEAST THE
APPLICATION OF ORGANIC WASTE TO
HYDROGEN, SAY, IN FAIRNESS TO
THE BAY AREA AIR DISTRICT, IT'S
THE FIRST PROJECT OF THAT KIND
THAT IT'S SEEN. SO SOMETIMES
THERE DOES HAVE TO BE MORE BACK
AND FORTH. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS,
RATHER THAN HAVING A HARD AND
FAST NUMBER OF HOW MANY TIMES
THE AIR DISTRICT CAN ASK FOR
INFORMATION, AND THEN IT HAS TO
BE AN UP OR DOWN THAT MIGHT NOT
WORK OUT SO WELL. I WOULD SAY
LIMIT TO 12 MONTHS. THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT CAN BE ON
AN AGENCY'S DESK. IF THE
APPLICANT CAUSES MORE DELAYS
THAN THAT, THAT'S THEIR PROBLEM.
BUT THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR THE
AGENCY TO HAVE INFORMATION SET
ON THE AGENCY'S ADDRESS. FOR A
TOTAL OF MORE THAN 12 MONTHS. SO
IF AFTER THREE MONTHS THEY HAVE
QUESTIONS, FINE. THE APPLICANT
SHOULD ANSWER THEM AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE. THEN THEY GET ANOTHER,
HOWEVER MANY MONTHS. BUT BUT AT
THE END OF THE DAY, THERE HAS TO
BE A TIME LIMIT THAT IS REALLY,
REALLY CRITICAL. AND THEN JUST
TWO OTHER QUICK THINGS I WANT TO
SAY IN RESPONSE TO THE PREVIOUS
PANEL, COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGY IS
MATURE AND IT IS THE LEAST
EXPENSIVE, BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF
OTHER MATURE TECHNOLOGIES. SO
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LAB
REALLY HIGHLIGHTS CONVERTING
ORGANIC WASTE TO HYDROGEN. WE
ALREADY HAVE HUNDREDS OF
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
AND DAIRIES USING ANAEROBIC
DIGESTION, AND IT IS BETTER TO
USE NON CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES
EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE MORE
EXPENSIVE. THEY'RE ALSO A LOT
MORE EFFICIENT, LESS POLLUTING.
AND THEY PRODUCE A GAS THAT THEN
CAN BE USED IN A LINEAR
GENERATOR. THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHAPMAN FOR AB 1921 SO
THAT YOU CAN HAVE NON NON
COMBUSTION THE WHOLE WAY. BUT WE
ALSO NEED THAT GAS FOR
DISPATCHABLE POWER AND ENERGY
STORAGE. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF
REASONS WHY WE SHOULD BE MOVING
TO NON COMBUSTION CONVERSION
TECHNOLOGIES. ALTHOUGH THEY ARE
STILL CHEAPER. ANYWAY THANK YOU.
I'M PROBABLY GOING OVER. I'LL
LEAVE IT THERE. WE'RE GOING
DOWN. WE'RE GOING DOWN THE.
YEAH. YES. GOT IT. OKAY. YOU
GUYS ARE SO ORGANIZED I LOVE IT.
MUSICAL CHAIRS HERE GUYS I KNOW
IT'S 415 AFTER A LONG DAY AND A
LONG LEGISLATIVE SESSION. REALLY
APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME
FOR THIS SERIOUS EXPLORATION OF
THE PERMITTING REFORM PROCESS.
AND THANK YOU, CHAIR WICKS, FOR
YOUR YOUR COMMITMENT ON THIS
ISSUE. AND IN TERMS OF BUILDING
THINGS IN CALIFORNIA AND DOING
IT SO IN A WAY THAT PRESERVES
THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE AND THE
WELL-BEING OF STATE'S RESIDENTS,
WE SHARE THAT ETHOS COMPLETELY
IN SCALING UP A SOLUTION THAT,
AS CASPER OUTLINED, WE KNOW
WE'RE GOING TO NEED. MY NAME IS
CHRISTIAN TOIA. I'M WITH
HEIRLOOM CARBON. WE'RE A CARBON
REMOVAL COMPANY, CALIFORNIA
FOUNDED. OUR HEADQUARTERS IS 20
MINUTES SOUTH OF HERE IN
BRISBANE. WE HAVE A FACILITY IN
OUR EAST OF HERE IN TRACY, AND
WE'RE EXCITED TO CONTINUE
BUILDING IN CALIFORNIA. WHAT WE
DO IS PERMANENTLY AND DURABLY
REMOVE EXISTING CARBON DIOXIDE
FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. WHY ARE WE
DOING THAT? THE UN'S CHIEF
CLIMATE SCIENCE BODY, AS CASPER
HAS ALREADY LAID OUT. I WON'T GO
TOO DETAILED HERE. THE IPCC HAS
FOUND THAT WE NEED TO DO TWO
THINGS IN ORDER TO MEET OUR
GLOBAL CLIMATE GOALS. ONE IS
IMMEDIATELY REDUCE OUR
DEPENDANCE ON CARBON EMISSIONS
AND OIL AND GAS, AND TWO, IN
ADDITION TO THAT, WE NEED TO
START REMOVING BILLIONS OF TONS
OF EXISTING CARBON DIOXIDE FROM
THE ATMOSPHERE. AND ONE CANNOT
WAIT FOR THE OTHER. HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, YOUR VOTES HELPED
SET A 2045 NET ZERO TARGET. THE
GOVERNOR SIGNED IT TO ADD ONE
MORE DATA POINT TO WHAT CASPER
WAS OUTLINING. ARB HAS SCOPED
OUT AT LEAST 75 MILLION TONS OF
CARBON REMOVAL NEEDED ANNUALLY
TO MEET THAT GOAL. THAT IS WHAT
WE DO. WE'RE NOT POINT SOURCE
CARBON CAPTURE WHERE WE'RE
STOPPING EMISSIONS FROM A
POLLUTING POINT SOURCE, FROM
ENTERING THE ATMOSPHERE. WE'RE
REMOVING CO2 THAT'S ALREADY
PRESENT IN THE ATMOSPHERE. THAT
WOULD STAY THERE FOR UP TO A
THOUSAND YEARS, CONTINUING TO
WARM THE PLANET UNLESS WE START
CLEANING IT UP. HOW DO WE DO
THAT? HEIRLOOM USES A NATURAL
INPUT OF LIMESTONE. IT'S 4% OF
THE PLANET'S CRUST. IT CAN
NATURALLY BIND TO CO2 IN NATURE.
THAT PROCESS IN NATURE TAKES
YEARS. OUR TECHNOLOGY SPEEDS IT
UP TO HAPPEN IN JUST THREE DAYS.
WE DO THAT BY USING RENEWABLE
ENERGY TO BREAK DOWN LIMESTONE,
BASICALLY TURN IT INTO A SPONGE
FOR ATMOSPHERIC, ATMOSPHERIC
CO2. IT REFORMS, IT DRAWS DOWN
CO2 FROM THE ATMOSPHERE, AND WE
LOOP LIMESTONE CONTINUOUSLY
THROUGH THIS PROCESS AT SCALE TO
PULL DOWN CO2 THAT WOULD
OTHERWISE CONTINUE TRAPPING HEAT
AND EXACERBATING THE CLIMATE
CRISIS. WE KNOW THERE'S ALREADY
TOO MUCH CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE.
WE'VE SEEN THE SOIL EROSION
TODAY. YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT THE
IMPACTS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN
THIS REGION AND GLOBALLY. WE
HAVE TO WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY
THAT CAN CLEAN THIS UP. AND IT'S
A MATTER OF SCALING THAT UP. WE
HAVE A FACILITY IN TRACY. IT'S
THE FIRST COMMERCIAL DIRECT AIR
CAPTURE FACILITY IN THE COUNTRY
WE OPENED THAT LAST YEAR. SOME
OF YOU HAVE HAD THE CHANCE TO
SEE IT IN PERSON. YOU'RE ALL
WELCOME TO COME OUT THERE AND
TRACY AND SEE THIS TECHNOLOGY.
SEE, IT'S NOT SCIENCE FICTION
THAT IT'S REALLY HAPPENING RIGHT
NOW. THE CO2 THAT WE'RE
CAPTURING IS BEING MINERALIZED
IN CONCRETE. THAT'S GOING INTO
BAY AREA INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT
CO2 HAS GONE FROM A GAS IN THE
ATMOSPHERE TO A SOLID PRODUCT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO EMIT. EVEN IF
YOU DEMOLISH THAT
INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT CO2 STAYS
EMBEDDED AMID THE RUBBLE. SO
YOU'RE CREATING A TRUE PERMANENT
CARBON REMOVAL AS A RESULT OF
THAT. IN TRACY, YOU'LL SEE THAT
WE'RE A POSTER CHILD FOR HOW
CALIFORNIA IS POISED TO SCALE UP
THIS NEW INDUSTRY, POWERED BY
THE PROWESS OF U.S.
MANUFACTURING. THIS IS SOMETHING
THE COUNTRY USED TO BE VERY GOOD
AT, AND WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO
BE VERY GOOD AT AGAIN, WE'VE
BEEN ENABLED BY THE FEDERAL
FUNDING FROM THE IRA, FROM THE
INFRASTRUCTURE LAW, AND BY THE
LEADERSHIP IN THIS ROOM,
ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO SUPPORTED
THE $56 BILLION PACKAGE SIGNED
BY GOVERNOR NEWSOM. OUR
TECHNOLOGY HAS SCALED FROM A
PETRI DISH 27 MONTHS LATER TO A
FULL COMMERCIAL FACILITY,
REMOVING IT VERY QUICKLY. AND WE
FEEL WE'VE BUILT THAT FACILITY
EXACTLY THE WAY IT SHOULD BE
DONE. WE BUILT IT WITH LOCAL
UNION LABOR. WE'RE POWERING IT
WITH 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY.
WE'VE STOOD UP A MODEL OF
COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE TO PROVIDE
OVERSIGHT, INCLUDING FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUPS,
INTO THE FACILITY'S OPERATIONS
AND A MULTI-YEAR COMMUNITY
BENEFITS FUND. AND IT IS
DECOUPLED FROM ANY USE CASE FOR
OIL AND GAS. TO REVIEW PRO-LABOR,
PRO RENEWABLE, PRO CLIMATE, PRO
COMMUNITY, THAT'S HOW WE'RE
DEFINING THE HIGH ROAD OF CARBON
REMOVAL FOR MARYLAND STANDPOINT.
BUT ALL THAT SAID, WE HAVE FACED
CHALLENGES IN BUILDING
CHALLENGES. I KNOW THIS
COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDS VERY WELL
THAT FIRST FACILITY IS OPERATING
SUCCESSFULLY HERE, BUT AS YOU
KNOW, A LOT OF FEDERAL FUNDING
FROM THE IRA AND THE BIPARTISAN
INFRASTRUCTURE LAW IS FLOWING TO
RED STATES AND WE'RE FOLLOWING
THE PULL OF A FEDERAL FUNDING
FACILITY OPPORTUNITY TO
NORTHWEST LOUISIANA TO BUILD A
MILLION TON REMOVAL FACILITY.
THAT'S ALL TO SAY. A LOT OF
LEADERSHIP HAS GONE INTO GETTING
US TO THIS POINT. BUT OUR
PROGRESS ALSO, THERE'S A THERE'S
A CAUTIONARY TALE HERE, BECAUSE
ALL OF THIS STILL IS NOT ENOUGH
TO GET US BETWEEN NOW AND NET
ZERO, WHERE WE NEED 9 BILLION
TONS. AS YOU POINTED OUT, CHAIR
WICKS OF CO2 REMOVED ANNUALLY IN
ORDER TO MEET OUR TEMPERATURE
GOALS. AND THE COMPANIES,
INCLUDING HEIRLOOM AND THE
OTHERS BEFORE YOU TODAY, WERE
ONLY MOVING A TINY, TINY
FRACTION OF THAT TODAY. ONE WAY
WE GET THERE IS THROUGH DEMAND.
WE'VE ACTIVELY SUPPORTED
LEGISLATION HERE IN CALIFORNIA,
WHERE THE STATE'S UNIQUELY
POSITIONED TO LEAD, INCLUDING SB
308 FROM STATE SENATOR JOSH
BECKER. CHAIR WICKS, WE THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT THERE. THE
OTHER IS PERMITTING REFORM. SO
LET'S LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.
ONE. IS THE COST OF CLEAN ENERGY.
AS WE LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE AND
GET EXCITED ABOUT BUILDING MORE
OF THIS KIND OF TECHNOLOGY IN
CALIFORNIA, OUR FACILITY IN
TRACY IS POWERED BY WIND AND
SOLAR. WE NEED CLEAN ENERGY,
CLEAN ENERGY TO POWER CARBON
REMOVAL BECAUSE WE REMOVE ALL OF
THE EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH
OUR PROCESS, INCLUDING THE
ENERGY. SO WE'RE HIGHLY
INCENTIVIZED TO USE NO CARBON
ENERGY WHEREVER POSSIBLE. IT'S
NOT IDEAL FOR US THAT STATES
LIKE TEXAS THAT DON'T EXACTLY
SHARE HEIRLOOMS VALUES HAVE MORE
ABUNDANT, CHEAPER CLEAN ENERGY
THAN CALIFORNIA TO BUILD LARGE
SCALE PROJECTS. DOING CARBON
REMOVAL IN THE STATE, YOU'RE
GOING TO NEED LARGE SCALE
UTILITY RENEWABLES ON RED. IF
YOU PERMIT CLEAN ENERGY, IF YOU
BUILD CLEAN ENERGY, IF YOU
CONNECT PROJECTS TO CLEAN
ENERGY, YOU ARE GOING TO HELP
BUILD CARBON REMOVAL. TO SUM
THAT UP, THE NEXT IS ON
PERMITTING. MORE GENERALLY, WE
WERE ABLE TO BUILD OUR FACILITY
IN TRACY IN JUST EIGHT MONTHS.
ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IS WE
WERE BUILDING ON A SITE THAT HAD
ALREADY DONE AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT, SO WE WERE ABLE
TO AVOID ANY ADDITIONAL CEQA
REVIEW. EVEN THEN, WE STILL
FACED ADDITIONAL PERMITTING
CHALLENGES. AS ASSEMBLY MEMBER
GRAYSON POINTED OUT, ADD ONS
AGAIN, THE NOT AGAIN THESE THESE
DELAYS COULD HAVE KILLED THE
PROJECT AND THE COMPANY. WE'RE
WE'RE A STARTUP, A CLIMATE
STARTUP, BUT WE'RE BUILDING
INFRASTRUCTURE AND THESE SORT OF
DELAYS CAN BE ABSOLUTELY
DEVASTATING. AND THESE FITS AND
STARTS FROM THE PERMITTING SIDE
SHOULDN'T BE DETERMINED,
SHOULDN'T DETERMINE WHETHER OR
NOT WE GET TO NET ZERO AND TWO.
THAT SET OF HAPPY CIRCUMSTANCES
IN TRACY. WE ALSO HAD SOME
SUPPORT VERY MUCH APPRECIATED
FROM GÓMEZ TO OVERCOME THOSE
PERMITTING CHALLENGES AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL. BUT THAT DOESN'T
CREATE THE KIND OF CERTAINTY
THAT MOVES HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS BEHIND LARGER CARBON
DIOXIDE REMOVAL PROJECTS, JUST
LIKE SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE TO BE MORE SPECIFIC,
SUPPORTED AN INFRASTRUCTURE
PACKAGE IN 2023 THAT STREAMLINED
SOLAR AND OFFSHORE ENERGY
PROJECTS. WE WOULD URGE THIS
COMMITTEE TO ALSO CONSIDER
DIRECT AIR CAPTURE AND CARBON
REMOVAL AS A CLIMATE CRITICAL
TECHNOLOGY. AT TO STREAMLINE THE
CEQA PROCESS ACCORDINGLY, SO
THAT THESE BUREAUCRATIC BLOCKERS
DON'T ACTUALLY PREVENT PROJECTS.
AND THE COMPANIES THAT ARE
TRYING TO STAND THEM UP FROM NOT
MOVING FORWARD. MORE
SPECIFICALLY, TIED TO PERMITTING
IS PERMITTING TIED TO FUNDING.
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION
HAS FUNDING ALLOCATED TO SUPPORT
CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL. WE'RE
FORTUNATE AND LUCKY TO BE A
RECIPIENT OF SOME OF THAT. WE
HAVE BEEN TENTATIVELY,
TENTATIVELY SELECTED FOR SOME OF
THAT FUNDING, WHICH SOME OF THAT
IS ALSO GATED BY ADDITIONAL CEQA
RECOMMENDATIONS. IF WE WERE TO
EXPAND OUR FOOTPRINT IN THE
STATE, OUR ASK IS THAT IF AND
WHEN THE STATE DOLES OUT CAPITAL
FOR A PUBLIC GOOD, LIKE CARBON
REMOVAL, FOR A CLIMATE
INVESTMENT LIKE CARBON REMOVAL,
WE STREAMLINE GRANTS TO BE
AWARDED AND PREDEVELOPMENT AT
THE AT THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT STAGE
SO THAT WE CAN MOVE AHEAD WITH
LAND PRE-DEVELOPMENT COSTS AND
ADDITIONAL PERMITS, THEN USE THE
PUBLIC CAPITAL APPROPRIATELY FOR
PROJECTS THAT DON'T FACE THESE
ARTIFICIAL BOTTLENECKS TO
GETTING THESE PUBLIC DOLLARS OUT
THE DOOR FOR PROJECTS THAT
REMOVE CARBON EMISSIONS. AGAIN,
IF I COULD JUST LEAVE YOU WITH
ONE THING DELAYS DEADLY FOR
PROJECTS AND CLIMATE STARTUPS.
WHAT I'VE TOLD YOU HERE TODAY IS
THAT EVEN THOUGH WE'VE BUILT
HERE, WE FACE CHALLENGES IN
PERMITTING THAT PERMITTING
REFORM CAN SOLVE. TO SUM IT UP,
WE NEED CHEAP, CLEAN, ENERGY
EFFICIENT, PREDICTABLE
PERMITTING AND ENSURING THAT
PUBLIC DOLLARS ARE ABLE TO MOVE
ON A FINANCEABLE TIMELINE TO GET
THESE PROJECTS ACTUALLY STOOD
UP. I OFFER THESE REMARKS NOT TO
SIDESTEP THE COMMUNITY PROCESS.
TO BE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, HEIRLOOM
STRONGLY SUPPORTS THESE MODELS
OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE THAT ARE
WE'RE PUTTING INTO PRACTICE,
TIED TO OUR FIRST FACILITY. WE
CAN MOVE AT THE SPEED OF TRUST.
WE CAN DO RIGHT BY THE CLIMATE.
WE CAN DO RIGHT BY COMMUNITIES.
HEIRLOOM IS DOING BOTH.
CALIFORNIA CAN DO BOTH. IF
THERE'S A STATE THAT CAN DO
THIS, IT'S DEFINITELY US. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. HELLO AND THANKS
FOR HOSTING US HERE TODAY AND
FOR SPENDING YOUR TIME TO BE
HERE. SO MY NAME IS JOSIAH HUNT.
I AM THE CEO OF PACIFIC BIOCHAR
BENEFIT CORPORATION OR BENEFIT
CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA
BENEFIT CORPORATION. IT'S A
LEGAL TAX THING THAT WAS FOUNDED
IN SONOMA, WHICH ODDLY ENOUGH,
JARED HUFFMAN IS LARGELY
RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THAT
DESIGNATION, THAT TAX
DESIGNATION. WE DON'T GET ANY
BENEFITS, ANY TAX BENEFITS, BUT
WE ACTUALLY JUST BURDEN
OURSELVES WITH EXTRA WORK SO WE
CAN CALL OURSELVES A BENEFIT
CORPORATION. ANYWAYS, THAT WAS
NON SEQUITUR. I JUST LIKE
TALKING ON A MICROPHONE. JULIA
PUT SO MANY GREAT WORDS AND
CONCEPTS OUT THERE. I WOULD JUST
LIKE TO BOTTLE THAT UP AND JUST
CARRY THAT AROUND WITH ME. AND
WHAT I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN ABOUT
MY PROCESS IS ALSO VERY
APPLICABLE TO THE NEXT PERSON
HERE. WE, WE, WE HAVE A LOT OF
PARALLELS IN WHAT WE DO. AND
I'LL LET HIM EXPLAIN THE
DIFFERENCES. SO OUR COMPANY,
PACIFIC BIOCHAR, WE PRODUCE
BIOCHAR. WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS
IN CALIFORNIA SINCE 2016.
BIOCHAR IS AN INTERESTING
PRODUCT. IT IS A HORRIBLE NAME.
THE NAME DESCRIBES A PROCESS AND
ALSO A MATERIAL. AND THAT'S A
PROBLEM THAT'S HARD. WE HAVEN'T
GOTTEN OVER IT, BUT THAT'S JUST
I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT
THERE. SO IF THERE'S CONFUSION,
YOU'RE YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
IT'S YOU'RE NOT ALONE IN THAT.
THE MATERIAL IS A CHARCOAL
ESSENTIALLY. AND THE PROCESS IS
TO TAKE WASTE ORGANIC MATTER AND
TRANSFORM IT INTO CHARCOAL AND
BURY THE CHARCOAL IN FARMLANDS.
THAT ACHIEVES A FEW KEY THINGS.
IT ACHIEVES LONG TERM SOIL
FERTILITY IMPROVEMENT. THE
CHARCOAL IS A STABLE FORM OF
ORGANIC MATTER THAT IMPROVES
WATER USE EFFICIENCY. IT
IMPROVES NUTRIENT USE EFFICIENCY
AND CROP YIELD. WITH THE SAME
AMOUNT OF INPUT, YOU GET MORE
OUTPUT. IT'S REALLY GOOD AND IT
LASTS FOR HUNDREDS TO THOUSANDS
OF YEARS. SO THE IMPACT OF
IMPROVING OUR FARMLAND IS A GIFT
THAT WE GIVE TO GENERATIONS TO
COME. WHEN DOING THAT, YOU'RE
TAKING CARBON THAT YOU KNOW WAS
TRANSFORMED WITH A LITTLE BIT OF
SUNLIGHT. IT PLANTS TAKE CARBON
FROM THE ATMOSPHERE, BUILD THEIR
BODIES WITH IT. WE TAKE THOSE
PLANT BODIES AND TRANSFORM IT
INTO CHARCOAL IN AN ENERGY
POSITIVE PROCESS. BASICALLY,
WE'RE COMBUSTING IT, BUT ONLY
PART WAY, RIGHT? SO YOU STILL
GET ENERGY OUT OF THE PROCESS,
JUST NOT AS MUCH AS IF YOU BURNT
IT ALL THE WAY TO ASH. BUT THEN
YOU GET THIS CHARCOAL PRODUCT,
GO BURY IT IN THE SOIL. AND THAT
WHOLE THING IN A NUTSHELL, IS
NOT ONLY A WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENERGY GENERATION AND A FARMLAND
IMPROVEMENT. BUT IN A NUTSHELL,
IT'S A IT'S A CLIMATE CHANGE
MITIGATION TOOL. AND THAT'S THE
WHOLE THING. THAT'S WHY WE HAD
TO COME UP WITH A NEW WORD. AND
THE WORD IS BIOCHAR. IT'S KIND
OF A HORRIBLE WORD, BUT THAT'S
IT. THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO COME UP
WITH THIS NEW WORD ON THE SPOT.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT MY COMPANY
DOES. IT WASN'T UNTIL 2020 THAT
WE COULD GET A CARBON REMOVAL
CREDIT FOR WHAT WE WERE DOING.
AND THAT HAS PROFOUNDLY CHANGED
OUR TRAJECTORY. WE ARE A VERY
SMALL COMPANY STILL, BUT WE ARE
PATHETICALLY SMALL THEN, AND WE
HAVE GROWN SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE.
TO PUT SOME PERSPECTIVE ON THAT
IN 2023, PACIFIC BIOCHAR
DELIVERED THE LARGEST SUPPLY OF
CARBON REMOVAL CREDITS FOR ANY
COMPANY ON THE PLANET. I'M SORRY
FOR A VERY SPECIFIC TYPE DURABLE
CARBON REMOVAL. NOT THE NATURE
BASED CARBON REMOVAL OF
FORESTRY, WHICH IS VERY VALUABLE
IN THE IN THE SPECIFIC DURABLE
CARBON REMOVAL THAT WHICH LASTS
SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER THAN 100
YEARS WITH NO RISK OF REVERSAL.
IN IN A WORLD OF DURABLE CARBON
REMOVAL, WE DELIVERED THE
LARGEST SUPPLY ON PLANET EARTH
OF ANY SINGLE COMPANY OF ANY
SINGLE TECHNOLOGY TYPE. AND THAT
WAS RIGHT HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
AND WE WERE FOLLOWING THESE GUYS
WHO DID THAT IN 2021, I BELIEVE,
WHO HELD THAT TITLE IN 2021. SO
CALIFORNIA IS IT. IT'S A HARD
PLACE TO PERMIT, BUT IT'S ON THE
MAP. AND WHY MY COMPANY IS HERE
IS BECAUSE OF THIS WONDERFUL
PHENOMENON WHERE YOU HAVE, WELL,
IT'S NOT REALLY WONDERFUL. IT'S
QUITE TRAGIC. BUT AS AN
OPPORTUNITY, IT IS WONDERFUL.
THERE'S THIS TRAGIC,
CATASTROPHIC LEVEL OF FOREST
HEALTH RIGHT NOW WHICH GENERATES
MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF EXCESS
BIOMASS. WELL, THAT'S A PROBLEM.
BUT IT'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY
BECAUSE WE CAN HELP TAKE THAT
BIOMASS, TRANSFORM IT INTO
CHARCOAL. AND THEN LIKE THE YUBA
WATERSHED, IT'S A PERFECT
EXAMPLE. YOU CAN TAKE THE
BIOMASS FROM THE HEADLANDS, TURN
IT INTO CHARCOAL AND SPREAD IT
IN THE FARMLANDS, IN THE
ALLUVIAL PLAINS BELOW, HELPING
WITH WATER CONSERVATION AND WITH
FOREST HELP UP IN THE UP IN THE
HEADLANDS AND WITH WATER
CONSERVATION IN THE FARMLANDS
AND SEQUESTER CARBON WHILE DOING
THAT AND AN ENERGY POSITIVE WAY.
PRETTY COOL. I'M REALLY
FASCINATED WITH IT. ANYWAYS,
WHAT MAKES BUSINESS HARD FOR US
IS WHAT YOU GUYS HEAR ABOUT. SO
WHAT PERMIT REFORMS? WHAT CAN WE
DO? JULIA TOUCHED ON SOME REALLY
GREAT STUFF. I WOULD HIGHLIGHT
EVERYTHING SHE SAID. THE
INTERCONNECTION DELAYS. YES, TO
REALLY, REALLY BIG PROBLEM. IN
ADDITION TO WHAT SHE WAS SAYING,
THERE IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
AND PARTICULARLY THIS ACTUALLY,
I SORRY, I FORGOT TO MENTION
THIS PART. OUR METHOD OF
PRODUCTION IS THAT WE MODIFY
EXISTING FACILITIES. WE DON'T
BUILD BRAND NEW ONES. WE FOUND
THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY WORK WITH
EXISTING BIOMASS POWER PLANTS
AND MODIFY THEM FOR BIOCHAR
PRODUCTION. THAT WAS A KEY PART.
I SHOULD HAVE SAID EARLIER, WE
MODIFY EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE
TO PRODUCE THIS BIOCHAR AND
THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. FOR THE
NEXT PART, I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN
THE TESTING PROCESS CHANGE. IF
ANY ONE OF THESE BIOMASS POWER
PLANTS WANTS TO CHANGE A PROCESS
TO IMPROVE THEIR EMISSIONS, TO
IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF THEIR
FACILITY, THEY HAVE TO GO
THROUGH A TESTING PROCESS CHANGE
WHICH CAN TAKE 18 MONTHS. THEY
HAVE TO GO TO THEIR LOCAL AIR
DISTRICT, AND THEN IT'S JUST
THIS HUGE PAIN IN THE BUTT
PROCESS. AND JULIA, WITH THE CDA
CAN REALLY HELP YOU GUYS ADDRESS
THAT MORE. I'M ONLY SAYING THIS
WITH NOT AS MUCH ELOQUENCE AS
SHE CAN, BUT THAT'S A REALLY BIG
PROBLEM. YEAH. NO, THAT'S A
THAT'S A REALLY BIG PROBLEM. AND
WE HAVE A LOT OF PROJECTS WHERE
WE CAN TAKE THESE BIOMASS
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SLIGHTLY
MODIFY THEIR, THEIR OPERATING
PARAMETERS IN A WAY THAT DOES
NOT REDUCE THEIR ENERGY OUTPUT.
AND IT DOES NOT INCREASE THEIR
EMISSIONS IN ANY WAY. WHAT IT
DOES IS IT INCREASES THEIR
ABILITY TO HANDLE THE EXCESS
FUEL LOAD THAT WE HAVE AND
GENERATE THIS CARBON NEGATIVE
PRODUCT, WHICH CAN IMPROVE OUR
FARMLAND. AND IT TAKES ALMOST NO
CAPEX. IT'S REALLY, REALLY EASY
AND WE CAN DO THIS. WE'VE GOT
LARGE COMPANIES WILLING TO PAY
FOR THE CARBON CREDIT REMOVALS
THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN GET.
AND ONE OF THE BIG STOPS IS
BEING ABLE TO PERMIT WITH THESE
FACILITIES. AND THE FACILITIES
ARE REALLY SCARED TO DO ANYTHING
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING
RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO
GO THROUGH THIS TESTING PROCESS
CHANGE, EVEN IF THEY'RE TRYING
TO DO SOMETHING GOOD, AND EVEN
IF IT'S ONLY AS SMALL AS LESS
THAN 24 HOURS, IF THEY WANT TO
DO A SIX HOUR PROCESS CHANGE
WHERE THEY JUST INTENTIONALLY
TRY TO DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE
THEIR EMISSIONS, THEY HAVE TO GO
THROUGH A VERY LENGTHY,
CUMBERSOME PROCESS THAT'S HARD
TO MAKE IT OUT THE OTHER SIDE
OF. SO THAT'S A SPECIFIC ONE.
TESTING PROCESS CHANGE AND THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE AIR DISTRICT.
ANOTHER ONE IS WITH THE
EXTENSION OF THE BIOMASS
PROGRAM. THE BIOMASS PROGRAM IS
A FANTASTIC PROGRAM, BUT IT'S
HEAVILY UNDERSUBSCRIBED. WHY IS
IT SO UNDERSUBSCRIBED? I DON'T
KNOW ALL THE DETAILS, BUT I
THINK IT SHOULD BE EXTENDED.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO COME TO AN END
NEXT YEAR AND IT'S HEAVILY
OVERSUBSCRIBED, AND I THINK WE
SHOULD OPEN THAT UP AND SAY,
HEY, IF THIS WAS SO HARD TO GET
IN WITHIN THIS TIMELINE AND
WITHIN THE THRESHOLDS THAT WE'VE
ASKED YOU TO FIT IN, MAYBE WE
NEED TO REVIEW WHETHER THE
PROGRAM WAS ACTUALLY PRAGMATIC
AND EASY TO ACHIEVE. ONE EXAMPLE
OF HOW IT COULD BE CHANGED IS
THAT IT COSTS ROUGHLY 35
MILLION, AND THIS IS ESTIMATES,
BUT IT COSTS ROUGHLY 35 MILLION
TO DEVELOP A FIVE MEGAWATT POWER
PLANT. AND THAT'S THE CAP. THE
CAP FOR THE BIOMASS IS FIVE
MEGAWATT. IT COSTS ROUGHLY 35
MILLION. IT COSTS ABOUT 45
MILLION TO BUILD A 15 MEGAWATT
POWER PLANT. SO THAT'S THAT'S
KIND OF ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS
IT FORCES YOU INTO THIS HIGHLY
INEFFICIENT COST TO ENERGY
RATIO. THAT WOULD BE ONE
SUGGESTION, BUT I WOULD JUST
SAY, HEY, REACH OUT TO JULIA AND
OTHERS IN THE INDUSTRY TO FIGURE
OUT HOW COULD THE BIOMASS
PROGRAM WORK BETTER, EXTEND IT
SO THAT YOU CAN GIVE IT SOME
TIME AND IMPROVE IT. THAT WOULD
BE A REALLY, REALLY USEFUL ONE
WITH THE BIOMASS OR WITH THE
BIOCHAR UTILIZATION. IT SOUNDS
GREAT, RIGHT? WE CAN PUT THIS
BIOCHAR IN OUR SOILS, IMPROVE
OUR SOIL ORGANIC MATTER FOR
GENERATIONS TO COME. WOW.
FANTASTIC. THERE ARE ACTUALLY
SUPPORT PROGRAMS WITHIN
CALIFORNIA AND WITHIN THE
FEDERAL TO HELP THIS. BUT THEY
DON'T WORK. THEY DON'T WORK FAST
ENOUGH AND THEY DON'T WORK
EFFICIENTLY AND THEY DON'T WORK
FOR MOST PEOPLE SPECIFICALLY,
THOSE PROGRAMS ARE THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD
AND AGRICULTURE HEALTHY SOILS
PROGRAM. BIOCHAR HAS BEEN
ADOPTED UNDER AS A
DEMONSTRATION. IT'S ACCEPTABLE
FOR DEMONSTRATION GRANTS, BUT
NOT YET ACCEPTABLE FOR INCENTIVE
PROGRAM. SO THEY CAN'T RELEASE
FUNDING TO HELP FARMERS PAY FOR
BIOCHAR APPLICATIONS. AND THE
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM IS SO
RESTRICTIVE ONLY 1 OR 2 GRANTS
HAVE EVER BEEN AWARDED FOR
BIOCHAR WITH THAT. SO IF THE
USDA NRCS I'M SORRY IF THE IF
THE IF THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT
OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE HEALTHY
SOILS PROGRAM IS TO ACCEPT
BIOCHAR AS A NEW MANAGEMENT
PRACTICE, THAT WOULD BE A REALLY
BIG DEAL, A NEW MANAGEMENT
PRACTICE ACCEPTABLE FOR IN FOR
THE INCENTIVE PROGRAM. I WORKED
WITH UC DAVIS AND SUBMIT A
PROPOSAL BACK IN 2020, AND THERE
WAS ADDITIONAL PROPOSALS
SUBMITTED JUST THIS LAST
QUARTER. SO THEY HAVE A LOT OF
INFORMATION. AND AS A PARALLEL
TO WHY I THINK THIS IS
REASONABLE, THAT IT SHOULD BE
ACCEPTED IS THAT IT'S ALREADY
BEEN ADOPTED AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL. SO AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL,
THE NATIONAL RESOURCE
CONSERVATION SERVICE HAS
ACCEPTED A CONSERVATION PRACTICE
STANDARD FOR BIOCHAR
APPLICATIONS TO FARMLAND. IT'S
UNDER THE SOIL CARBON AMENDMENT
CODE THREE, THREE, SIX. AND THAT
ALLOWS FEDERAL MONEY THROUGH THE
EQIP, THROUGH THE FARM BILL,
THROUGH THE EQIP FUNDING TO BE
USED FOR COMPOST AND BIOCHAR
APPLICATIONS. THIS IS A REALLY
BIG DEAL BECAUSE CALIFORNIA HAS
PASSED 1383 FOR WASTE
MANAGEMENT, AND WE HAVE WAY MORE
COMPOST THAN WE CAN MANAGE.
COMPOST YARDS ARE HAVING A
REALLY, REALLY HARD TIME. AND
YOU HAVE A PROGRAM, TWO PROGRAMS
THAT CAN HELP WITH THIS. THE
HEALTHY SOILS PROGRAM AND THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD
AND AGRICULTURE. I'M SORRY, THE
NRCS CODE 336. THOSE ARE
PARALLEL PROGRAMS. AND KAREN
ROSS, THE SECRETARY OF AG,
ACTUALLY SIGNED LAST YEAR, I
BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, THE YEAR
BEFORE, MAYBE MORE OF AN
UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE GOING
TO TRY AND WORK IN PARALLEL AND
STREAMLINE SO THAT THOSE TWO
PARALLEL PROGRAMS CAN BE HIGHLY
EFFICIENT. SHE COULD PROBABLY
USE SOME HELP, MORE SUPPORT. AND
TO THE NUMBERS ON THIS THAT THE
HEALTHY SOILS PROGRAM IS PAID
FOR OUT OF THE CAP AND TRADE
PROGRAM, WHICH BRINGS IN ABOUT
$4 BILLION PER YEAR, THE AMOUNT
OF MONEY THAT IS SPENT ON THE
HEALTHY SOILS PROGRAM IS LESS
THAN 100 MILLION. SO ONE OUT OF
EVERY $40,000 FROM THAT CAP AND
TRADE GOES TO HEALTHY SOILS
PROGRAM. AND BEING AS HOW SOILS
ARE, HOW WE FEED OURSELVES, AND
A GREAT PLACE TO PUT CARBON AND
A GREAT WAY TO HELP WITH WATER
INFILTRATION AND WATER
PRESERVATION. IT SEEMS LIKE THAT
COULD BE A LEGISLATIVE LIFT TO
REALLY HELP ACHIEVE GOOD THINGS
WITH BIOCHAR AND COMPOST. THE
LAST THING ON THE LIST, OR I
GUESS IT'S KIND OF A TWO PART
THING, IS THAT CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD SHOULD
IMMEDIATELY BEGIN THEIR REVIEW
PROCESS TO ADOPT A METHODOLOGY
FOR BIOCHAR TO BE A CARBON
REMOVAL PROCESS, CLIMATE ACTION
RESERVE, WHICH IS KIND OF A
COLLABORATIVE AGENCY, BUT
SEPARATE CLIMATE ACTION RESERVE,
JUST THIS YEAR PUBLISHED A BRAND
NEW PROTOCOL FOR BIOCHAR, A
METHODOLOGY FOR CARBON
ACCOUNTING FOR BIOCHAR. AS THE
US AND CANADA BIOCHAR PROTOCOL.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT IF
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
COULD IMMEDIATELY BEGIN A REVIEW
OF THAT, BECAUSE SB 308, I DON'T
KNOW WHY IT DIDN'T PASS. I KNOW
IT'S PROBABLY NOT PERFECT. IT'S
REALLY INTERESTING. I THINK I
WOULD LIKE TO LEARN. WHY DIDN'T
IT PASS? WHAT COULD WE DO TO
MAKE IT BETTER? BUT IF AND WHEN
IT DOES PASSES, WHAT
METHODOLOGIES DO WE HAVE FOR
CARBON REMOVAL? BIOCHAR MAKES A
LOT OF SENSE IN CALIFORNIA. WHAT
WHAT HEIRLOOM WAS WORKING ON
MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. BUT WHAT
METHODOLOGIES WILL CALIFORNIA
AIR RESOURCES BOARD ACCEPT SO
THAT THE CARBON REMOVAL
TECHNOLOGIES CAN ACTUALLY ENGAGE
IN THAT CARBON REMOVAL MARKET
DEVELOPMENT ACT? SO SORRY, THAT
WAS A LAUNDRY LIST. I PROBABLY
WENT OVER TIME. GREAT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. I GUESS
I'M THE LAST THING STANDING
BETWEEN US AND GETTING DONE.
WELL, I'M HARRIS COHEN, I'M THE
HEAD OF SALES AT CHARM
INDUSTRIAL. WE'RE HEADQUARTERED
HERE IN SAN FRANCISCO, ABOUT A
COUPLE MILES IN THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE CITY. WE ALSO HAVE
OPERATIONS IN COLORADO AND
KANSAS. YOU ALL HAVE A HANDOUT
IN FRONT OF YOU. BUT I TOOK THE
LIBERTY OF BRINGING ALONG ALSO
SOME PICTURES AS WELL FROM A
RECENT DEPLOYMENT. SO IF YOU
DON'T MIND PASSING THOSE DOWN TO
THE LEGISLATORS, THAT WOULD BE
LOVELY. SO IF YOU HAVE JUST
THREE TAKEAWAYS FOR WHAT I'M
ABOUT TO SAY, HERE THEY ARE.
CHARM CAN PLAY A KEY ROLE IN
SUPPORTING WILDFIRE FUEL LOAD
REDUCTION, SAFELY CLOSING
ORPHANED OIL WELLS AND
SUPPORTING CALIFORNIA'S SCOPING
PLAN BY REMOVING CARBON FROM THE
ATMOSPHERE TO PUT SOME FINER
NUMBERS ON IT AND AS CASPER
POINTED OUT, WE HAVE THIS 100
MILLION TON GAP BY 2045. THERE
ARE ABOUT 29 MILLION TONS PER
YEAR OF EXCESS FORESTRY RESIDUES
CREATED EVERY YEAR IN CALIFORNIA
AND VIA CHÁVEZ PROCESS, WE CAN
SAFELY AND PERMANENTLY SEQUESTER
ABOUT ONE METRIC TON OF CARBON
DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT PER TON OF
BIOMASS THAT IS INEDIBLE IN
EXCESS. SO THAT WOULD BE UP TO
30% OF THE PROBLEM, IF YOU WILL,
OR 30% TO THE GOAL OF THE CARBON
REMOVALS IN CALIFORNIA. NOW, ON
THE PERMITTING SIDE, IT'S OF
COURSE, CRITICAL THAT CALIFORNIA
CONTINUE TO CREATE A PERMITTING
ENVIRONMENT WHERE INNOVATIVE
COMPANIES CAN SCALE RESPONSIBLY.
AND I REALLY AM HONORED TO BE ON
THIS AT THIS HEARING WITH SOME
OF THE LEADING LIGHTS IN THAT,
IN THAT VEIN, THE TWO PLACES
THAT WE HAVE SOME PERMITTING
SUGGESTIONS ARE IN AIR QUALITY,
AS WELL AS ORPHANED OIL WELLS
AND I'LL GET TO THEM IN A
MOMENT. SO THE WAY THAT WE WORK
IS WE PERFORM CARBON REMOVAL,
AND WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO
DECARBONIZE HEAVY INDUSTRIES. SO
OUR CARBON REMOVAL PROCESS
INVOLVES HARVESTING WASTE,
BIOMASS LIKE AG AND FORESTRY
RESIDUES AND CONVERTING THEM
INTO A CARBON RICH BIO OIL. YOU
SEE SOME PICTURES THERE THROUGH
A METHOD CALLED FAST PYROLYSIS.
THE BIO OIL CAN BE PERMANENTLY
SEQUESTERED DEEP UNDERGROUND, OR
IT CAN ACTUALLY BE GASIFIED AND
USED TO REDUCE IRON ORE INTO
METALLIC IRON. TURNS OUT, IRON
IS ABOUT 6% OF GLOBAL EMISSIONS,
AND IT'S A MANUFACTURING PROCESS
THAT WE HAVE LARGELY ABANDONED
HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. AND
SO WE OUR BIO CAN BE USED AS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO FOSSIL FUELS IN
THIS RESPECT, CHARM CURRENTLY
SELLS CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVALS ON
THE VOLUNTARY MARKET. SO THAT'S
HOW WE GET THE REVENUE TO
OPERATE. AND OUR CUSTOMERS
INCLUDE LARGE, LARGE
CORPORATIONS LIKE GOOGLE, META,
JPMORGAN CHASE AND OTHERS. NOW
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SOCIAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL CO-BENEFITS
ALONGSIDE OUR CARBON REMOVALS.
WE ESTIMATE THAT WE CAN CREATE
ABOUT $430 MILLION IN GROSS
STATE PRODUCT AND OVER 4000 JOBS
IN CALIFORNIA ALONE BY 2040. AS
OUR SCALE UP INCREASES, OUR
APPROACH DELIVERS REALLY
CRITICALLY NEEDED AIR QUALITY,
WILDFIRE RESILIENCE, AND
ECONOMIC BENEFITS IN PARTS OF
CALIFORNIA THAT NEED THEM THE
MOST, ESPECIALLY THE SIERRAS AND
THE CENTRAL VALLEY. I'LL NOTE
THAT THE CENTRAL VALLEY AND THE
ESPECIALLY THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY, HAS BURN RESTRICTIONS
GOING IN PLACE JAN ONE OF 2025,
RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL RESIDUES
THAT RATCHET UP OVER THE COMING
YEARS. INVESTING IN CDR
TECHNOLOGIES CAN STIMULATE
ECONOMIC GROWTH BY CATALYZING
INNOVATION, GREEN JOBS, AND OF
COURSE, ATTRACTING INVESTMENT.
NOW, SOME OF THE PICTURES THAT
YOU HAVE THERE ARE FROM A RECENT
DEPLOYMENT AND PARTNERSHIP THAT
WE DID WITH THE NATIONAL FOREST
FOUNDATION AND THE US FOREST
SERVICE TO PROCESS MERCHANTABLE
WASTE BIOMASS INTO BIO OIL. WE
ONLY DID ABOUT 60 TONS OF THIS
MATERIAL AS A WAY TO DEMONSTRATE
THE UTILITY OF A MOBILE
PYROLYSIS DEPLOYMENT TO THIS
AREA. WHY IS MOBILE IMPORTANT?
IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE TO MOVE
BIOMASS MORE THAN A FEW DOZEN
MILES TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE
UTILIZED. SO WE ARE PURSUING A
MOBILE FIRST STRATEGY WHERE WE
CAN TAKE THESE FAST PYROLYSIS
MACHINES TO AS CLOSE TO THE
BIOMASS AS POSSIBLE TO REDUCE
THAT ECONOMIC BURDEN OF MOVING
THE BIOMASS AND TURN IT INTO A
BIO OIL. THIS DENSIFIES THE
CARBON IN THAT FROM THAT
STARTING BIOMASS BY ABOUT FIVE
X. SO IT TREMENDOUSLY IMPROVES
THE ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF
TREATING MORE AND MORE FORESTRY
ACREAGE WITH THIS SOLUTION.
ADDITIONALLY, ONE OF THE
ALTERNATIVE USES, IF BIOMASS
CAN'T MAKE IT TO A BIOENERGY
PLANT OR IT CAN'T BE USED IN
TIMBER, THE BIOMASS IS USUALLY
PILE BURNED OR LEFT TO ROT, AND
THIS OBVIOUSLY INCREASES THE
BURDEN OF CALIFORNIA'S NATURAL
LANDS ON OUR CARBON EMISSIONS.
BUT ALSO IT REALLY HAS DRAMATIC
HEALTH HAZARDS FOR LOCAL
COMMUNITIES. SO OUR ABILITY TO
CONVERT THAT BIOMASS INTO A BIO
OIL DRAMATICALLY REDUCES THOSE
SMOKE HAZARDS. AND ALSO IN SOME
CASES, CAN IMPROVE AIR QUALITY
DEPENDING ON WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
NOW I'LL FLIP OVER TO THE OIL
WELLS. PART OF THIS. SO RIGHT
NOW WE ARE CURRENTLY
SEQUESTERING THE BIO OIL IN IN
KANSAS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO START OUR
OPERATIONS IN A FAST MANNER.
NOW, CALIFORNIA HAS MORE THAN
5300 ORPHANED OIL WELLS THAT I
BELIEVE ARE THE STATE'S
RESPONSIBILITY. AND PROPUBLICA
PUBLISHED SOMETHING THAT
ESTIMATED IT COSTS ALMOST
$200,000 PER WELL TO SAFELY
CLOSE. SO THIS IS ALMOST $1
BILLION COST THAT COULD BE BORNE
BY BY CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS. AND
I THINK THEY ESTIMATED THE
REQUIRED CLASS TO CLOSE THE
POTENTIAL WELLS THAT ARE SOON TO
BE FULLY ORPHANED IS UP TO ABOUT
$20 BILLION. SO WHEN CHARM USES
ITS BIO OIL TO SEQUESTER CARBON
AND DELIVER OUR REMOVALS ON
BEHALF OF CUSTOMERS IN THE
PROCESS, WE CAN SAFELY CLOSE
THOSE ORPHANED OIL WELLS AND
REMOVE THEM FROM THE PUBLIC
ROLLS, IF YOU WILL. IN ORDER TO,
YOU KNOW, HAVE A BENEFIT TO THE
COMMUNITY WHILE ALSO REMOVING
CARBON FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. SO
THE TWO PERMITTING POINTS, FIRST
AND FOREMOST, SB 905 HAS
PROVISIONS DIRECTING CARB TO
DEVELOP AN EXPEDITED AND UNIFORM
PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS FOR
CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL. AND WE
THINK THAT THE EXPEDITION
IMPLEMENTATION EXPEDITIOUS
IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS WOULD BE
VERY, VERY HELPFUL FOR US AND
OTHER COMPANIES TRYING TO
OPERATE IN THE STATE. SOME OTHER
THINGS TO KEEP AN EYE ON IS WE
ANTICIPATE THE NEED FOR ROBUST
AIR QUALITY, PERMITTING WHEN WE
BEGIN OPERATING A BROADER FLEET
OF MOBILE POWER LASERS. SO A
STREAMLINED PROCESS WITH MORE
CONSISTENCY ACROSS THE
PERMITTING AGENCIES AND AIR
DISTRICTS WILL BE SUPER
IMPORTANT. AND LASTLY, CHARM
OBVIOUSLY CAN REPURPOSE THESE
ORPHANED OR IDLE WELLS FOR BIO
OIL SEQUESTRATION AND THEN
SAFELY PLUG AND ABANDON THEM AS
I MENTIONED, AND A STREAMLINED
PROCESS FOR TRANSFERRING
OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF THESE
ASSETS FROM STATE RESPONSIBILITY
TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD
GREATLY INCREASE OUR CHANCE TO
DELIVER FOR THESE COMMUNITIES
WHERE THESE WELLS ARE CURRENTLY
EXISTING. SO WITH THAT, I'LL END.
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO TAKE THE
LIBERTY OF ASKING THE FIRST
QUESTION JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON
WHAT YOU SAID. SO HAVE YOU
STARTED TO PUT THE LIQUID IN
THE, I GUESS, ABANDONED OIL
WELLS OR NO LONGER FUNCTIONING
WELLS? HAS THAT PROCESS STARTED
OR ARE YOU GUYS ARE EXPLORING
THAT? YEAH, WE HAVE NOT STARTED
THAT PROCESS IN CALIFORNIA.
YEAH, WE HAVE DONE A VARIETY OF
DIFFERENT TESTING TO DEMONSTRATE
IT'S SAFE. IT'S VIABLE, AND THAT
IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE A
REALLY SERIOUS SOLUTION. SO WE
HAVEN'T STARTED YET IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT HAVE YOU STARTED
TO ATTEMPT THE PERMITTING
PROCESS ON IT YET OR NOT YET?
NOT YET. OKAY. AND ARE YOU
CURRENTLY IN OTHER IN OTHER WAYS
PUTTING THE LIQUID DOWN ON THE
GROUND IN CALIFORNIA, OR IS IT
JUST TOO HARD FROM A PERMITTING
PERSPECTIVE? YEAH, WE FOUND THAT
THERE ARE. SO WE ARE
SEQUESTERING BIO OIL IN KANSAS
RIGHT NOW, AND THAT LOCATION HAS
A LONGER HISTORY WITH OIL AND
GAS. AND THEREFORE WE FOUND IT
MORE EXPEDITIOUS TO BEGIN
OPERATIONS THERE. OKAY. MY
COLLEAGUES, MR. WARD. YEAH,
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION
FOR THIS LEAVEN FROM YOUR
PRESENTATION HERE. I WAS KIND OF
CURIOUS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF
GOING FROM INITIALLY THE BAR
CHART REPRESENTING ONE OF THE
COUNTIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,
KIND OF SEEING WHAT OUR AREAS OF
WHAT I COULD TAKE BACK HOME AND
WHAT I COULD BE, YOU KNOW,
PROMOTING FOR OUR PROPORTIONAL
WORK DOWN THERE DOESN'T
PROPORTIONALLY LINE UP. MAYBE
WITH A TABLE, BECAUSE IT SEEMS
LIKE, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE
POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY HERE IS
STILL THROUGH FOREST SAWMILL
SHRUB, CHAPARRAL RESIDUE. IF
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TOTAL
REDUCTIONS THAT WE COULD BE ABLE
TO SEE. SO I VERY MUCH WANT TO
SUPPORT THOSE EFFORTS TOO. BUT
ON MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, I MEAN,
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE
LOOKING INTO AS A WARD ISSUE OF
WATER RECLAMATION. AND THEN
YOU'VE GOT YOUR YOUR RESIDUAL
AND YOUR LEFTOVER AND IS THERE A
MARKET OR IS THERE A POTENTIAL,
I GUESS A MARKET BASED SOLUTION
FOR THIS MATERIAL THAT, THAT
THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING CREATIVE
TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT INTO A
PIPELINE FOR ANY OF THE
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE OUT THERE
RIGHT NOW FOR SEQUESTRATION,
THAT'S A REALLY, REALLY
IMPORTANT QUESTION. SO JUST TO
PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, AND I
DON'T KNOW IF MY SLIDES WERE IF
YOU RECEIVED A PRINT OUT OF
THEM, BUT THERE'S A CHART AND IT
USES A LOT OF DATA FROM LAWRENCE
LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABS REPORT
ABOUT HOW MUCH ORGANIC WASTE IS
TECHNICALLY AVAILABLE IN
CALIFORNIA, HOW MUCH ENERGY
COULD THAT CREATE, AND IF JUST
THE TECHNICALLY AVAILABLE
ORGANIC WASTE IN CALIFORNIA THAT
WE GENERATE EACH AND EVERY YEAR
IS WE COULD CREATE AN AMOUNT OF
ENERGY EQUIVALENT TO 4 BILLION
GALLONS OF GASOLINE. SO FOREST
WASTE IS THE BIGGEST CHUNK. BUT
MUNICIPAL WASTE, THE ORGANIC
WASTE THAT BY LAW HAS TO BE
DIVERTED FROM LANDFILLS IS A
HUGE AMOUNT AS WELL. AND WE KNOW
FROM NASA'S JET PROPULSION LAB
THAT LANDFILLS ARE ALSO LEAKING
AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF BIOGAS. SO
THERE'S EVEN GREATER POTENTIAL
THAN IN THE CHART THAT I HANDED
OUT BECAUSE I HAVEN'T UPDATED IT
WITH THE NASA DATA. SO TO ANSWER
YOUR QUESTION, THERE ARE SEVERAL
MARKETS RIGHT NOW. THE LOW
CARBON FUEL STANDARD, THE
BIOMASS PROGRAM THAT JOSIAH
MENTIONED FOR SMALL SCALE
BIOELECTRICITY PROJECTS. THERE'S
A PIPELINE BIOMETHANE
PROCUREMENT PROGRAM AT THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION.
NONE OF THEM WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF THE LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARD.
THE OTHER ONES ARE NOT WORKING
VERY WELL. AND WE ARE AFRAID
THAT THE PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION IS GOING TO FAIL TO
EXTEND THE BIOMASS PROGRAM, EVEN
THOUGH IT'S REQUIRED BY
LEGISLATION THAT THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE PASSED AND THE
LEGISLATION DID NOT HAVE AN END
DATE. SO THIS THIS MIGHT BE
SOMETHING MAJORITY LEADER
AGUIAR-CURRY AND SEVERAL
LEGISLATORS SENT A LETTER TO THE
PUC EARLIER THIS YEAR. WE'RE
GOING TO RECIRCULATE THAT. WE'D
LOVE TO GET MORE SUPPORT TO
EXTEND THAT PROGRAM. I AGREE
WITH JOSIAH. IT NEEDS SOME
CHANGES. AND THE PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION OWNS STAFF
SAID IT NEEDS SOME CHANGES TO
WORK BETTER, BUT WE STILL NEED
IT BECAUSE THE THING WITH
ORGANIC WASTE, IT'S EVERYWHERE.
IT'S ALL DIFFERENT KINDS. AND
WE'RE GOING TO NEED A WHOLE LOT
OF SOLUTIONS. WE ALL WORK
TOGETHER AND SUPPORT EACH OTHER
BECAUSE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE
ONE SIZE FITS ALL DEPENDING ON
WHERE YOU ARE, WHAT KIND OF
WASTE, WHAT YOU MOST NEED IN
THAT AREA. THE PIPELINE
BIOMETHANE PROCUREMENT PROGRAM
ISN'T WORKING AT ALL FOR A
VARIETY OF REASONS. THE LOW
CARBON FUEL STANDARD THE AIR
BOARD IS PUSHING BIOMETHANE OUT
OF THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR AS
IT MOVES TOWARDS ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES. THE AIR BOARD,
RECOGNIZING A FORMAL RESOLUTION
THAT IT NEEDS TO FIND NEW
MARKETS FOR RENEWABLE GAS. BUT A
YEAR AND A HALF HAS GONE BY AND
IT HASN'T EVEN BEGUN THAT
PROCESS. LET ME TURN THAT TO
MAYBE ONE OF THE COMPANIES OR
ALL OF THE COMPANIES HERE,
BECAUSE DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS VERY
GOOD INNOVATION ON WAYS TO BE
ABLE TO SORT OF TAKE MATERIAL
AND BE, YOU KNOW, HAVE A LOT OF
CO-BENEFITS WITH THE WORK THAT
YOU DO. YOU KNOW, WITH A LOT OF
THE STATE INCENTIVES, A LOT OF
PUBLIC DOLLARS GOING INTO SOME
OF THE SEED INVESTMENTS TO GET
THINGS UP AND RUNNING. DO YOU
SEE THIS SOME TIME IN THE NEAR
FUTURE? MARKETS OPENING UP
OPPORTUNITIES FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR
PRIVATE CAPITAL OR INVESTMENT TO
BE ABLE TO COME IN AND AMPLIFY
MAYBE SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS THAT
YOU'RE SEEING? YES. AND THERE IS.
BUT VOLATILITY SCARES AWAY
CAPITAL. AND SO VOLATILITY AND
PERMIT DELAYS ARE A GREAT WAY TO
SCARE AWAY CAPITAL. SO THOSE ARE
THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE
SOLVED ON PERMITTING. AND BACK
TO THE TOPIC OF THIS OF THIS
COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, FOR SOME OF
THE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, SORT OF
INITIAL FACILITIES AND THE WORK
THAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW,
WOULD YOU SEE, YOU KNOW, A
POTENTIAL DIRECTION OR AN AREA
OF POLICY RESEARCH BEING
SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO
HELP EXPEDITE, LIKE FACILITIES?
IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU ARE,
LET'S TAKE THE DIRECT AIR
CAPTURE THAT WE SEE IN TRACY
HERE. RIGHT. YOU'VE DONE IT ONCE
YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO SHOW SORT OF
WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE HERE AND ALL
THE REMEDIATION THAT NEEDS TO GO
ON SITE, YOU KNOW, CAN WE
REPLICATE THAT PERMIT, YOU KNOW,
A LOT MORE FASTER IF, YOU KNOW,
THERE WAS THE ABILITY FOR YOU TO
MAYBE SCALE THAT UP TENFOLD OR
100 FOLD, EVEN THAT WE COULD
JUST TAKE THAT ONE PERMIT AND
THEN APPLY IT TO OTHER
LOCATIONS. YEAH. SO FROM A PURE
TECHNOLOGY STANDPOINT, IF YOU
WALK INTO THE FACILITY, YOU'LL
SEE IMMEDIATELY THE HOW COPY
PASTABLE MAYBE ISN'T THAT NOT A
WORD, BUT HOW EASILY REPLICABLE
IT IS TO JUST DO THIS AT A
LARGER SCALE. IT'S TOWERS OF
TRAYS HOLDING LIMESTONE RIGHT
EXPOSED TO THE ATMOSPHERE. YOU
CAN SCALE IT UP, GO HIGHER, GO A
LITTLE BIGGER, AND DO MANY MORE
THOUSANDS. BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO
GO BACK TO SQUARE ONE, BUT YOU
WOULD CLIMB EVERY SINGLE
LOCATION THAT YOU WANT TO BE
ABLE TO DO A FACILITY. THAT'S
RIGHT. THE BENEFIT, THE REASON
WE WERE ABLE TO BUILD THAT TRACY
FACILITY SO QUICKLY IS BECAUSE
THE SITE WE HAD SELECTED ALREADY
HAD DONE THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT, SO WE WEREN'T
DELAYED BY ADDITIONAL CEQA
REVIEW, AND WE WERE ABLE TO
STAND IT UP AND EXECUTE AND
DELIVER THIS FIRST OF A KIND
FACILITY. WE'RE GOING TO BE MORE
EFFICIENT AT BUILDING LARGER
FACILITIES THANKS TO THAT
EXPERIENCE. BUT I THINK THAT
FRAMEWORK FOR THE PERMITTING
CHALLENGES AS WE FACE THEM,
ASIDE FROM THE LOCAL ISSUES, I
JUST WANT TO FRAME THAT AS WELL,
BECAUSE IN ADDITION, EVEN THOUGH
WE SKIRTED THE ADDITIONAL SEQUEL
REQUIREMENTS, WE STILL HAD A LOT
OF LOCAL PERMITTING CHALLENGES
THAT WE HAD TO WORK WITH GÓMEZ
TO OVERCOME. WE ALSO HAD TO GET
INTERCONNECTED WITH PG AND E,
AND THEY WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN
HELPING THAT HAPPEN ON A
REASONABLE TIMELINE. SO EVEN
THOUGH WE HAD THE EXPEDITED CEQA
REQUIREMENT, WHICH I THINK IS
ESSENTIAL FOR THESE KINDS OF
CLIMATE TECHNOLOGIES TO SCALE, I
JUST WANT TO NAME THOSE
ADDITIONAL DYNAMICS AS WELL AS
AS WORTHY OF BEING ADDRESSED AS
BEFORE. THANK YOU. YEAH, I KNOW
YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY INDUSTRY
HEARING ABOUT INTERCONNECTION.
YEAH. JUST WANT TO UNDERSCORE IT
IS THAT IMPORTANT? YEAH. OTHER
QUESTIONS. MISS PETRIE-NORRIS OF
COURSE HAS A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
AS THE CHAIR CAN ATTEST, I'M A
BIG FAN OF CARBON CAPTURE.
THERE'S JUST SO MUCH EXCITING
POTENTIAL. AS MANY OF YOU SAID,
NOT JUST FOR CALIFORNIA TO BE
THE BIRTHPLACE FOR THE, YOU
KNOW, THE BIG BREAKTHROUGHS THAT
ARE GOING TO ENABLE US TO TACKLE
THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND EXPORT
THOSE INNOVATIONS. BUT ALSO YOU
KNOW, THE NEXT GREAT FRONTIER
FOR US TO CREATE, YOU KNOW,
ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY
FOR THE STATE. SO A NUMBER OF US
ACTUALLY, I THINK, WENT AND SAW
CHARM ABOUT 18 MONTHS AGO. I
DON'T THINK YOU GUYS WERE
TALKING ABOUT OIL WELLS THEN
THOUGH. WERE YOU? IS THAT NEW?
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE
IT'S ALWAYS OKAY. ALL RIGHT
OKAY. SO BUT I DO HAVE A
QUESTION ABOUT SEQUESTRATION AND
THE CHALLENGE WITH, I GUESS THAT
LAST BIT OF CSS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, I THINK IT MIGHT BE
USEFUL IF WE COULD GET THE QUICK
UPDATE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON
THE STATE OF PLAY IN CALIFORNIA.
WAS IT TWO YEARS AGO THAT WE
PASSED LEGISLATION TO KIND OF
TAKE THE FIRST STEP TO ENABLE
SEQUESTRATION TO HAPPEN HERE IN
THE STATE? BUT WE'RE REALLY KIND
OF ON HOLD RIGHT NOW WAITING FOR
FEDERAL GUIDELINES. AND
REGULATIONS TO GET APPROVED.
HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT'S
HAPPENING THERE. IS THERE ANY
KIND OF BREAK OF THAT LOGJAM IN
SIGHT AND WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN
IN ORDER FOR US TO CONTINUE TO
MOVE FORWARD? YEAH, WELL, THIS
IS A WELL-ARCHITECTED PANEL
BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT ANSWERS FOR THIS,
WHICH WILL HELP YOU SEE THE
WHOLE THE WHOLE FIELD. SO THE
TYPE OF SO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY HAS THIS
UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL
PROGRAM. RIGHT. AND THERE ARE
DIFFERENT CLASSES OF CARBON
SEQUESTRATION WELLS. THE CLASS
OF WELL THAT WE MOSTLY WORK IN
IS CALLED CLASS FIVE. AND IT FOR
US IT INVOLVES CONVERTING A
FORMER OIL WELL OR FORMER OIL
WELL DISPOSAL WELL INTO A WELL
FOR BIO OIL SEQUESTRATION. AND
THAT CONVERSION PROCESS, WE
PICKED IT PRETTY INTENTIONALLY.
FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE A LIQUID
AND NOT A GAS THAT NEEDS TO BE
SEQUESTERED. AND ALSO THERE ARE
ALREADY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
THESE WELLS ALREADY PERMITTED IN
THE UNITED STATES, AND THERE ARE
ROUGHLY A MILLION EITHER
ORPHANED OR LOW PRODUCING OIL
WELLS THAT COULD BE CONVERTED
FOR THIS SEQUESTRATION. SO THIS
IS LIKE A BUSINESS CHOICE. WE
MADE, AND WE HOPE THAT THAT IT
HAS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SET OF
REQUIREMENTS TO KEEP, YOU KNOW,
THAT THOSE OPERATIONS SAFE AND
ROBUST AND BENEFICIAL FOR THE
COMMUNITY. THEN CLASS SIX WELLS,
WHICH ARE MOSTLY USED FOR CARBON
CAPTURE AND STORAGE OR DIRECT
AIR CAPTURE. SO, YOU KNOW, OUR
CHOICE TO EXPAND AND WORK ON
CONVERTING MORE WELLS TO CLASS
FIVE. WE ARE WE ARE KIND OF LIKE
BUILDING THE CAPACITY TO START
APPROACHING THAT ISSUE IN
CALIFORNIA. BUT WE HAVEN'T
FORMALLY STARTED THAT PROCESS.
WE DO HOPE, THOUGH, THAT IT
DELIVERS IT KIND OF MAXIMIZES
THE AMOUNT OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS
WE CAN DELIVER, BECAUSE WE'RE
WORKING ON WELLBORES THAT ARE
ALREADY DRILLED IN COMMUNITIES
THAT MIGHT BE IN NEED OF SAFELY
RETIRING THEM. YEAH, HARRIS
TOUCHED ON THIS RIGHT NOW. I
MENTIONED WE'RE MINERALIZING THE
CO2 THAT WE CAPTURE INTO
CONCRETE. SO IT GOES FROM A GAS
TO THE ATMOSPHERE, SOLID PART OF
THE CONCRETE PRODUCT THAT'S A
DURABLE STORE OF CO2. IT'LL STAY
OUT OF THE ATMOSPHERE FOR
CENTURIES. THERE'S SIMPLY NOT
ENOUGH CONCRETE IN THE WORLD BY
2050. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A
LOT OF CONCRETE IN THE WORLD BY
2050, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO ACCOUNT
FOR THE VOLUMES OF CARBON
DIOXIDE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
NEEDING TO REMOVE FROM THE
ATMOSPHERE. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE
USING CLASS FIVE WELLS. WE'RE
ALSO PERMITTED THROUGH THE EPA,
AS YOU MENTIONED, CLASS SIX
WELLS, WHICH ARE SUITABLE FOR
CO2 SEQUESTRATION. YOU KNOW,
MILE, MILE OR MORE UNDERNEATH
THE EARTH'S SURFACE. THESE ARE
SALINE RESERVOIRS. THEY'VE GOT A
CAPSTONE. SOME OF THESE ARE
ONLINE IN THE UNITED STATES NOW,
STATES LIKE LOUISIANA, WHERE WE
HAVE ANNOUNCED TWO NEW
FACILITIES, HAVE ACTUALLY
SECURED PRIMACY FROM THE FROM
THE EPA TO DESIGNATE AND PERMIT
THESE WELLS AT THE STATE LEVEL
IN LINE WITH THE EPA'S STANDARDS,
WHICH IS HELPING MOVE THAT
STORAGE FRAMEWORK ALONG IN THOSE
STATES AS THEY'RE LOOKING TO
ATTRACT PROJECTS LIKE THIS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
APPLICATIONS IN CALIFORNIA
SITTING WITH THE EPA, BUT AGAIN,
THAT IS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
AND THAT'S THAT'S A THAT'S A
TIMELINE OUTSIDE OF THIS ROOM.
AND OUR AND THEN OUR, OUR
STORAGE DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. WE'RE JUST
STORING IT IN THE SOIL. AND
SINCE CHARCOAL IS UNNATURALLY
EXISTING PHENOMENON THAT ALREADY
EXISTS IN OUR SOILS DOESN'T HAVE
SPECIAL PERMITS, BUT WE DO HAVE
PROBLEMS WITH LABELING AND
STANDARDS. CALIFORNIA'S
DEFINITION OF BIOCHAR DOES NOT
ALIGN WITH THE FEDERAL
DEFINITION OF BIOCHAR. BOTH OF
THEM ARE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT THAT IS, AND THAT THAT
DOES CREATE FRICTION IN OUR
ABILITY TO EASILY PUT THE
MATERIAL INTO THE GROUND. BUT WE
DON'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY GO
THROUGH THE WHOLE PERMITTING
THING. SO AGAIN, WITH THE
ALIGNMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTHY SOILS PROGRAM, I DON'T
KNOW IF THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK
ALIGNMENT WITH THE HEALTHY SOILS
PROGRAM AND THE NRCS CODE 336,
PART OF THAT ALIGNMENT WOULD BE
ALIGNMENT IN THE DEFINITION OF
BIOCHAR AND THE STANDARDS
ASSOCIATED, SO THAT WE CAN MORE
FLUIDLY GET THE MATERIAL OUT TO
FARMLAND EFFICIENTLY. THANK YOU.
OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. SORRY.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM MY
COLLEAGUES? OKAY. WELL THANK YOU
ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION TODAY. WE REALLY
APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. WE WILL NOW
PIVOT TO PUBLIC COMMENT. I THINK
WE ARE SETTING UP A MIKE. MIKE,
MIKE MIKE IS COMING HERE. IT
COMES RIGHT HERE. WE'LL GIVE
FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE IF THEY
WISH TO SHARE ANY COMMENTS. ONE
MINUTE OR LESS FOR PUBLIC
COMMENTS. THEY'D LIKE TO
REGISTER ON THE RECORD WITH THE
SELECT COMMITTEE. AND I SHOULD
ALSO SAY IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN
MORE IN-DEPTH CONVERSATIONS, MY
OFFICE AND OUR PARTNERS AT THE
BAY AREA COUNCIL ARE DOING
PRETTY IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS WHERE
WE ARE HAPPY TO SOLICIT INPUT OF
PEOPLE THAT AGREE OR DISAGREE.
PEOPLE OF ALL PARTIES AND
PERSUASIONS WHO WANT TO HAVE AN
OPINION ON PERMITTING REFORM. WE
WELCOME THOSE DIVERSE POINTS OF
VIEW INTO THAT PROCESS. IN
ADDITION TO THIS, THERE'S OTHER
AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES. BUT PLEASE,
ONE MINUTE OR LESS FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, TAKE IT AWAY. HELLO
EVERYONE. I'M ERICA LOVEJOY WITH
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION, A
STATEWIDE NONPROFIT THAT WORKS
TO SOLVE SOME OF THE TOUGHEST
CHALLENGES AROUND OUR LAND, AIR
AND WATER. WE'VE BEEN DEEPLY
INVOLVED IN THE SPACE AROUND
WORKING ON EFFICIENT PERMITTING
FOR HABITAT RESTORATION AND
NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS, AND
RELATED CLIMATE ADAPTATION TYPE
PRACTICES. WE WORK VERY CLOSELY
WITH BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE
AGENCIES, AND RESTORATION
PROJECT PROPONENTS TO DEVELOP
EFFICIENT PERMITTING TOOLS.
WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A NUMBER
OF TOOLS. YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF
PROGRAMMATIC PERMITS WITH THE US
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
SERVICE, THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD, AND
MANY OTHERS, AND THE ONE THING I
REALLY WANT TO LET YOU KNOW
ABOUT TODAY IS THE FACT THAT WE
HAVE JUST RELEASED A REPORT,
ACCELERATING RESTORATION IN THE
SACRAMENTO VALLEY AND BEYOND,
AND IT TALKS ABOUT NEXT STEPS
FOR CUTTING GREEN TAPE IN
SACRAMENTO VALLEY. BUT REALLY
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA, THE FOCUS
AREA WAS THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY.
WE INITIALLY WE INTERVIEWED MORE
THAN 39 DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS.
MORE THAN 80 INDIVIDUALS. AND WE
TALK IN DEPTH ABOUT WHAT'S
WORKING WELL WITH THE PERMITTING
PROCESS. AND WHERE DO WE NEED TO
CONTINUE TO DO MORE WORK TO MOVE
THE NEEDLE ON EFFICIENT
PERMITTING. NOW, A LOT OF THE
EXAMPLES IN THIS REPORT COULD BE
APPLIED TO MANY OF THE THINGS
THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY,
BUT MOST CERTAINLY FOR THE
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION,
NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS TYPE
PROJECTS. I PROVIDED THE LINK TO
THE REPORT TO YOUR COMMITTEE
STAFF AND I'D BE DELIGHTED TO
TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT MORE
ANYTIME SOON. THE STAFF HAS MY
INFORMATION. PERFECT. WELL,
THANK YOU FOR THAT AND THANK YOU
FOR THE REPORT. WE'LL DEFINITELY
TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND WE'LL
FOLLOW UP. SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO HI
CHAIR MEMBERS CATHERINE CHARLES
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE HOUSING
ACTION COALITION, I WANT TO
START OFF BY QUICKLY THANKING
YOU GUYS FOR CONVENING THIS. I
KNOW IT WAS A BIG UNDERTAKING,
ESPECIALLY AFTER A LONG SESSION.
SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. I JUST
WANT TO QUICKLY HIGHLIGHT TWO
ITEMS. WE WANT TO REEMPHASIZE
FOR THE RECORD, THE FIRST IS THE
SUGGESTION FOR GETTING AGENCIES,
INCLUDING CITIES, DISTRICTS AND
COMPANIES TO WORK TOGETHER MORE
SEAMLESSLY WOULD BE INCREDIBLY
HELPFUL. AND THE SECOND
IMPORTANTLY, WE DO WANT TO ECHO
MISS LEVINE'S CRITIQUES OF
UTILITY AGENCIES IN THAT THEIR
INEFFICACY NOT ONLY AFFECTS
CALIFORNIA REACHING OUR CLIMATE
GOALS, BUT ALSO, OF COURSE, OUR
HOUSING GOALS. AND WE BELIEVE
THE SUGGESTION OF HARDER
TIMELINES FOR THESE AGENCIES
WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF
HELPING US GET BACK ON TRACK IN
BOTH SPACES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AFTERNOON.
Ã WARNER CHABOT, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF SAN FRANCISCO
ESTUARY INSTITUTE. WE'RE A 30
YEAR OLD, 85 STAFF ORGANIZATION
THAT'S A NONPROFIT ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, AND
WE SERVE AS A CONSULTING SERVICE
TO RESOURCE AGENCIES AND
RESOURCE MANAGERS FROM THE LOCAL
TO FEDERAL LEVEL ON ISSUES IN
SAN FRANCISCO BAY. YOUR FIRST
PANEL, I CONGRATULATE YOU ON
TAKING THIS ON. IT'S PROBABLY,
UNFORTUNATELY, A TEN YEAR EFFORT
THAT IS GOING TO YOU'RE GOING TO
UNDERTAKE. BUT I WANT TO MAKE A
SUGGESTION, BABY. FIRST STEP,
YOUR FIRST HEARING, YOUR FIRST
PANEL WAS A GROUP OF PEOPLE
DEALING WITH SEA LEVEL RISE AND
REPRESENTING THE BAY RESTORATION
AUTHORITY, WHICH IS AN ENTITY
COMPRISED OF THE NINE COUNTIES
AND REPRESENTATIVES TRYING TO
DEAL WITH HOW TO EXPEDITE
WETLANDS RESTORATION. I WOULD
SUGGEST THAT THAT THE
RESTORATION AUTHORITY STAFF ARE
ISSUING A REPORT TO THE
RESTORATION AUTHORITY MANAGERS
THIS FRIDAY. SOMETIME IN THE
NEXT MONTH. I WOULD ENCOURAGE
YOUR CONSULTANT TO TRY TO MEET
WITH OR SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH
THE RESTORATION AUTHORITY AND
THEIR STAFF TO SAY, HOW COULD
YOU TAKE THE RESTORATION
AUTHORITY AS A CASE STUDY AND
OFFER LEGISLATION THAT MIGHT
IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF AN EXISTING
ORGANIZATION THAT IS
MULTI-AGENCY, REPRESENTS NINE
COUNTIES, AND IS SPECIFICALLY
FOCUSED ON MAKING SEA LEVEL RISE
PROGRAM, PERMITTING MORE
EFFICIENT. SO IF YOU DID
SOMETHING IN THE 2025
LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT DID
NOTHING BUT FOCUS ON IMPROVING
THE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY
OF THE ONE CASE STUDY ENTITY
THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR SEVEN
YEARS, SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON
MULTI-AGENCY COLLABORATION ON
SEA LEVEL RISE, YOU WOULD MAKE A
GREAT FIRST BABY STEP IN WHAT'S
GOING TO BE, UNFORTUNATELY, A
TEN YEAR VENTURE. THAT MAY BE
THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE THAT WE
FACE IN CALIFORNIA OF HOW TO
TAKE FIVE DECADES OF PILING UP
LEGISLATION AND TRYING TO
STREAMLINE IT. SO JUST ONE
SPECIFIC SUGGESTION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. I'M MEGAN CLEVELAND
WITH THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. WE
ARE A GLOBAL CONSERVATION
ORGANIZATION, SCIENCE BASED
ORGANIZATION. AND WE HAVE OVER
DECADES OF EXPERIENCE WORKING ON
HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECTS AND
SCIENCE IN CALIFORNIA. I JUST
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION IS IT WILL PLAY AN
INCREDIBLE ROLE IN REACHING OUR
CLIMATE GOALS, OUR BIODIVERSITY
GOALS, AND OUR OUTDOOR ACCESS
GOALS. AND EFFICIENT PERMITTING
IS CRITICAL TO MOVING THOSE
PROJECTS FORWARD AS OTHERS HAVE
SAID, THEIR ADMINISTRATION AND
LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN LEADING
SOME EFFORTS, INCLUDING THE
GREEN TAPE CUTTING GREEN TAPE
INITIATIVE. BUT THE PANELISTS
HAVE HIGHLIGHTED MORE WORK IS
NEEDED. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF
COMMENTS, BUT JUST TO KEEP
THINGS SHORT, WE JUST WANTED TO
SHARE TWO SPECIFIC ONES FOR THIS
HEARING. THE FIRST IS WE
ENCOURAGE THE SELECT COMMITTEE
TO ENSURE THAT MARINE ECOSYSTEMS
SUCH AS KELP FORESTS, NATIVE
OYSTER BEDS AND EELGRASS REMAIN
CENTRAL TO CLIMATE SOLUTIONS AND
THAT YOU WORK TO PUT FORWARD
SOME SOLUTIONS TO IMPROVE
PERMITTING FOR THOSE TYPES OF
PROJECTS. AND THEN WE'D ALSO
ENCOURAGE THE COMMITTEE TO
EXPLORE PERMITTING APPROACHES
THAT FOCUS ON RESTORATION OF
ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS, TO
FACILITATE LARGE SCALE
RESTORATION PROJECTS IN BOTH
COASTAL AND WETLANDS ECOSYSTEMS.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HOLDING
THIS HEARING. WE REALLY
APPRECIATE IT, AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND
YOUR STAFF. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK. GOOD
AFTERNOON. I GUESS KIND OF
APPROACHING ON THE EVENING,
ABRAHAM MENDOZA HERE WITH THE
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. ALIGN MY
COMMENTS WITH OUR COLLEAGUES
WITH TNC. BUT ALSO IN ADDITION
TO THAT AS WELL. YOU KNOW, WE'RE
GOING BACK TO THE FIRST PANEL
HERE WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT
SEA LEVEL RISE, SOMETHING THAT
WE'VE NOTICED AND WANT TO FLAG
FOR THE COMMITTEE IS ALONG THE
CENTRAL COAST, IN AREAS WHERE
YOU HAVE CRITICALLY OVERDRAFTED
GROUNDWATER BASINS, THE THREAT
OF SEA LEVEL RISE AND SALTWATER
INTRUSION IS FURTHER COMPOUNDED.
AND SO IN THAT AREA, WE
PERSONALLY WORRY A LOT ABOUT THE
IMPACTS THAT CAN COME FROM
LEGACY CONTAMINANTS SEEPING BACK
INTO GROUNDWATER AQUIFERS. AND
SO AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
PERMITTING REFORM, EXPEDITING
THESE THINGS, LOOKING AT SEA
LEVEL RISE, WE REALLY WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HAVING
THESE CONVERSATIONS
HOLISTICALLY. SO WE KNOW THIS IS
A DAUNTING TASK, AND WE WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR
TIME. ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, AS
WELL AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
PERMITTING REFORM, IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE STATE
IS STILL DEALING WITH A BACKLOG
OF DRY WELLS. THERE'S ACTUALLY
25 WELLS IN THE LAST 30 DAYS AT
THE STATE LEVEL THAT HAVE GONE
DRY. AND SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING
AT THINGS LIKE FLOOD, WATER
RECHARGE AND GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE AND HAVING THESE
CONVERSATIONS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT THERE IS STILL
ADDITIONAL WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE
DONE TO PROTECT COMMUNITY
MEMBERS. IN ADDITION TO
EXPEDITING THINGS LIKE PROVIDING
FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT
THESE COMMUNITIES DEPEND ON. AND
THAT'S SOMETHING WE REALLY WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMITTEE
PAYS ATTENTION TO AS WE HAVE
THESE CONVERSATIONS, THESE
CONVERSATIONS. THANK YOU. SO
MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HI.
I'M SORRY, MJ KUSHNER ALSO WITH
COMMUNITY WATER CENTER. SO FIRST
I JUST WANT TO THANK THE MEMBERS
AND THE PANELISTS FOR THEIR
DISCUSSION AND THEIR WORK ON
BALANCING EQUITY AND EFFICIENCY
IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS. IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT. AND ALSO JUST
TO TOUCH BACK ON WHAT WAS
DISCUSSED IN THE SECOND PANEL,
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT PRIORITY IN
CALIFORNIA'S WATER STORAGE PLAN
GOING FORWARD. AND OF COURSE,
FARMERS HAVE BEEN ENCOURAGED TO
APPLY FOR THESE PERMITS TO
DIVERT SEASONAL FLOOD WATERS TO
DO RECHARGE ON THEIR LAND. AND
ONE SUCH EXAMPLE WAS IN MARIPOSA
CREEK IN MERCED COUNTY, WHERE A
FIVE YEAR TEMPORARY RECHARGE
PERMIT WAS GRANTED, AND THIS WAS
THE FIRST OF THESE EXPEDITED
RECHARGE PERMITS TO BE GRANTED
SO FAR. AND OF COURSE, THIS
QUICK ACTION IS VERY VALUABLE.
BUT ALSO CARRIES THE NEGATIVE
SIDE EFFECT OF SOMETIMES BEING
THE PRODUCT OF DIMINISHED
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. SO IN THE
CASE OF MARIPOSA CREEK, MOST OF
THE LAND IN THE AREA THAT IS
BEING USED FOR RECHARGE IS DAIRY
LAND. AND THIS CREATES A
SIGNIFICANT, UNAVOIDABLE RISK OF
NITRATES LEACHING INTO THE
GROUNDWATER SUPPLY, WHICH IS
USED FOR DOMESTIC WELLS AND
AFFECTS DRINKING WATER. SO, AS
ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT
PROVIDES DIRECT AID AND
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR GROUND
ZERO AND THE WATER CRISIS, WE
SEE THAT WITH EVERY DRY WELL,
THE NEED FOR RECHARGE JUST
GROWS. BUT IT'S ALSO REALLY
IMPORTANT NOT TO BE HASTY WITH
THE PERMITTING SO THAT THERE
AREN'T MORE EXPENSIVE
CONSEQUENCES IN THE LONG RUN. SO
WE JUST CALL ON THE LEGISLATURE
TO ENSURE THAT PLANNING BE DONE
AT A SCALE TO IDENTIFY WHERE
RECHARGE PROJECTS CAN BE
LOCATED, BUT THAT IT ALSO
ACCOUNTS FOR THE HYDROLOGICAL
FUTURE AND PEOPLE SAFETY'S. AND
JUST THIS NEW NORMAL OF WEATHER
WHIPLASH. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
FOR ALLOWING US TO PROVIDE
COMMENTS. MY NAME IS JONATHAN
PRUITT WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE.
AND WHILE CEJA DOES SUPPORT A
JUST TRANSITION FROM EXTRACTIVE
FOSSIL FUEL BASED ENERGY SYSTEM,
WE MUST NOT CONTINUE THE STATE'S
LONG HISTORIC LEGACY OF HARM AND
ABUSE AGAINST EJ COMMUNITIES.
OUR COMMUNITIES DESERVE THAT
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE
CLEAN ENERGY RESOURCES, AND ALSO
DESERVE TO BE A VOICE IN THAT
PROCESS THAT WILL IMPACT THEIR
HEALTH AND THE OPPORTUNITIES NOW
PERMITTING REFORM. IN THE PAST,
WE'VE SEEN IT REALLY PRIORITIZES
SPEED OVER SAFETY. AND SO WE
REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS
SWITCHED. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
IT DOESN'T CREATE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES THAT ADD NEW NEW
HARMS TO ALREADY ALREADY
OVEREXPOSED FRONTLINE
COMMUNITIES. CLEAN ENERGY SHOULD
TRULY BE CLEAN ENERGY AND BRING
CRITICAL EMISSIONS AND HEALTH
BENEFITS TO COMMUNITIES.
INDUSTRY PUSHED PROJECTS LIKE
CARBON CAPTURE AND HYDROGEN DO
NOT GUARANTEE ANY OF THOSE
THINGS. HYDROGEN PROJECTS, IF
NOT CAREFULLY ASSESSED UNDER
SEQUA, PRESENTS MULTIFACETED
RISKS AND CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.
SUCH THINGS LIKE COMPROMISED
ENERGY EFFICIENCY, ESCALATED
RELIANCE ON GAS FIRED
GENERATION, EXACERBATED HEALTH
HAZARDS WITHIN THE NATIVE
TERRITORIES AND MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES, AND INTENSIFIED
DEPENDANCE ON FOSSIL FUEL
EXTRACTION. LASTLY, BIOMASS
FACILITIES ARE REALLY
CONCENTRATED IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY COMMUNITIES THAT WE
SERVE, AND THEY ARE MORE CLIMATE
POLLUTING AT THE SMOKESTACK THAN
THEY ARE AT THE COAL THAN THEY
ARE IN COALS. SO INDUSTRIES
CLAIM IT WILL REMOVE CO2 FROM
THE ATMOSPHERE AND BE CARBON
NEGATIVE AND INDUSTRIES CAN KEEP
BURNING FOSSIL FUELS AND RAMP UP
BIOMASS BURNING, WHICH IS
ANOTHER INDUSTRY DELAY TACTIC.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS. THANK YOU. GOOD
EVENING. MY NAME IS GRECIA
OROZCO. I'M WITH THE CENTER ON
RACE, POVERTY, ENVIRONMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ORGANIZATION IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY. I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS MOST
OF MY COMMENTS FOR THE THIRD
PANEL REGARDING THE FALL
SOLUTION. TECHNOLOGIES THAT HAVE
BEEN DISCUSSED TODAY.
TECHNOLOGIES LIKE CARBON CAPTURE
SEQUESTRATION SHOULD NOT BE
EXPEDITED AND MUST RECEIVE FULL
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND
PERMITTING. THESE ARE VERY NEW
PROJECTS, AND THE MAJORITY OF
THEM ARE BEING PROPOSED IN THE
CENTRAL VALLEY NEAR LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. THE
POTENTIAL FOR LEAKS OF CARBON
DIOXIDE IS NOT A DISTANT
SPECULATION. WE HAVE SEEN IT
BEFORE IN SATARTIA, MISSISSIPPI,
WHERE TONS OF PEOPLE WERE
HOSPITALIZED DUE TO A LACK OF
OVERSIGHT, A LACK OF REGULATION.
ADDITIONALLY, THESE TECHNOLOGIES
ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REMOVING
SO MUCH CARBON DIOXIDE AS THEY
SAY THAT THEY ARE. AS WE SEE IN
MANY PROJECTS THAT WE SEE IN
ICELAND TODAY. ADDITIONALLY,
BIOENERGY, AS WAS MENTIONED
BEFORE, ARE MAJORITY
CONCENTRATED IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. THEY'RE NOT RENEWABLE.
THEY EXACERBATE POLLUTION,
INCREASING CARBON DIOXIDE,
METHANE AND NOX DUE TO INCREASED
FERTILIZER USES. AND THESE
PROJECTS USE TONS OF ENERGY,
TONS OF WATER, AND THAT MUST BE
CONSIDERED IN THE PROCESS. THIS
COMMITTEE HAS EXPRESSED SO MUCH
INTEREST IN CLIMATE RESILIENCE,
YET IDEAS POSE HERE IN THIS LAST
PANEL REALLY WORK TO EXTEND THE
LIFE OF FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRIES,
WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT
EXACERBATE THE SEA LEVEL RISE
AND THE CLIMATE CHANGE THAT WE
SEE TODAY. IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT
THESE TECHNOLOGIES DO NOT
RECEIVE EXPEDITED REVIEW OR
STREAMLINING. AND ADDITIONALLY,
IT WOULD BE VERY NICE FOR FUTURE
WORKSHOPS AND PANELS TO HAVE
OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS, AS THIS HAS
BEEN AN ECHO CHAMBER OF JUST ONE
VIEWPOINT, PLEASE CONSIDER OUR
COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. I APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING. HI. THANK
YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME
IS ASHA SHARMA. I'M WITH
LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY. WE'RE ALSO
BASED IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
AND EASTERN COACHELLA VALLEY. WE
AGREE WE NEED TO BUILD CLIMATE
RESILIENCE, BUT WE THINK
SOLUTIONS CANNOT COME AT THE
EXPENSE OF COMMUNITY HEALTH.
AGAIN, MANY ISSUES DISCUSSED
TODAY DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT
PEOPLE LIVING IN INLAND
CALIFORNIA. UNFORTUNATELY,
TODAY'S HEARING WAS INACCESSIBLE
TO THE RESIDENTS THAT WE WORK
WITH. WE THINK IT'S CRITICAL
THAT THEIR VOICES ARE CENTERED
AND THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THESE
DISCUSSIONS, AT LEAST VIRTUALLY,
AND HEARINGS ON THESE TOPICS,
REFORMS TO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
PROCESSES THAT UNDERCUT THEIR
PARTICIPATION IN AGENCY ARE
HARMFUL TO BOTH COMMUNITY HEALTH
AND THE ENVIRONMENT. WE URGE THE
CHAIR AND MEMBERS TO EXPAND
INVESTMENTS INSTEAD IN
AFFORDABLE, RENEWABLE ENERGY
RATHER THAN DANGEROUS, EXPENSIVE
TECHNOLOGIES LIKE BIOENERGY AND
BIOMASS CONVERSION ASSOCIATED
WITH TOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS, WHICH
OUR COMMUNITIES HAVE EXPERIENCED
FIRSTHAND, OR CARBON CAPTURE AND
STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES THAT HAVE
BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH
ASPHYXIATION RISK FOR
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES IN THE
GULF COAST STATES, BIOENERGY AND
CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES DO
NOT BUILD CLIMATE RESILIENCE. IN
FACT, THEY THREATEN AND
CONTAMINATE AIR AND WATER
QUALITY, WHICH ARE ALREADY
ANTICIPATED TO WORSEN DUE TO THE
CLIMATE CRISIS. ADDITIONALLY,
PREPARING FOR DROUGHT IS OF
UTMOST IMPORTANCE, BUT MUST BE
DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION'S
WORKING DEFINITION OF MEANINGFUL
BENEFIT TO DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES, WHICH ENSURES
MEANINGFUL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
WHILE MAXIMIZING BENEFITS WHILE
AVOIDING HARM. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. THANK
YOU. I THINK OUR LAST COMMENTER
OF THE DAY. HELLO AND THANK YOU
FOR THE ABILITY TO COMMENT TODAY.
MY NAME IS LAUREN GALLAGHER. I'M
HERE ON BEHALF OF COMMUNITIES
FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT. CAN
YOU HEAR ME IF I TALK? OKAY,
JUMPED IT UP. OR YOU CAN EVEN
MAYBE PULL THE MIC OUT OF THE
SAND IF YOU WANT TO. THANK YOU.
THERE WE GO. WE ORGANIZE AN
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES IN RICHMOND, EAST
OAKLAND, WILMINGTON AND
SOUTHEAST L.A. THESE ARE
COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
HISTORICALLY HARMED BY THE
FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY. WE FOUND
IT INCREDIBLY CONCERNING TODAY
THAT THEIR VOICES WERE NOT
INCLUDED IN THIS CONVERSATION.
AND I ECHO SEIYA LCG AND COR
COMMENTS ABOUT THE GRAVE
CONCERNS THAT THESE COMMUNITIES
FACE RELATING TO BIOFUELS,
BIOMASS, AND CCS. SO I REQUEST
THAT IN THE FUTURE COMMUNITY BE
INVOLVED IN THESE CONVERSATIONS
AND THAT WE LOOK MORE CRITICALLY
AT WHO IS HERE TO SPEAK IN FRONT
OF EVERYBODY. THANK YOU, I
APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. AND
I WANT TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE AND
APPRECIATE THE DIFFERENT POINTS
OF VIEW THAT WERE RAISED IN
PUBLIC COMMENT AND WOULD
STRONGLY ENCOURAGE AND WELCOME
EVERYONE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
INTERVIEW PROCESS THAT WE'RE
CONDUCTING RIGHT NOW. I THINK
YOUR POINTS OF VIEW ARE
CRITICAL, AND I JUST WANT TO
APPRECIATE THAT AND ASK THAT YOU
DO. IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY, CAN
TALK TO STEVE HERE ON MY STAFF
TO GET YOU GUYS PLUGGED IN. SO
WE'RE HEARING YOUR COMMENTS LOUD
AND CLEAR. SO APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. WITH THAT, DID MY
COLLEAGUES WANT TO OFFER ANY
CLOSING COMMENTS? JUST VERY
BRIEFLY ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER WICKS FOR
CONVENING US TODAY. I THINK THAT
WE ALL RECOGNIZE THE CHALLENGES
THAT WE FACE AT TO CONNECT THE
DOTS BETWEEN WHAT WE TALK ABOUT
AS OUR STATEWIDE PRIORITIES,
WHETHER IT BE HOUSING ACTION ON
CLIMATE, ACTION ON CLIMATE
RESILIENCE. WE TALK A BIG GAME,
BUT WE DON'T ACTUALLY ACHIEVE
THOSE GOALS BY TALKING ABOUT
THEM. WE ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS BY
BUILDING PROJECTS AND GETTING
THINGS DONE FOR OUR COMMUNITIES.
AND SO I THINK THIS IS SUCH AN
URGENT AND IMPORTANT ISSUE, IS
ONE OF THE COMMENTERS SAID, I
THINK WE RECOGNIZE THIS IS BUT
THE FIRST STEP ON WHAT PERHAPS
IS A VERY LONG JOURNEY. BUT
GRATEFUL FOR THIS HEARING AND
LOOK FORWARD TO THE HEARINGS
THAT ARE TO COME OVER THE COURSE
OF THE FALL. THANK YOU. AND I'LL
JUST I KNOW WE'RE READY TO GO,
EVERYONE. THANKS FOR EVERYONE
WHO PARTICIPATED TODAY, BOTH IN
PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL AS HERE
ON THE PANELS, AS WELL AS THOSE
WATCHING AT HOME. APPRECIATE
YOUR ATTENDANCE AND EVERYONE WHO
STUCK IT OUT HERE IN THE
AUDIENCE FOR THE DURATION. AS
MENTIONED, WE'RE DOING TWO MORE
HEARINGS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
IN NOVEMBER. WE'LL DEFINITELY
MAKE SURE YOU ALL KNOW THAT. AND
THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF A
LONGER JOURNEY AROUND FIGURING
OUT THE POLICY FRAMEWORK THAT WE
THINK WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
CALIFORNIA MAINTAINS ITS
COMMITMENT TO REACHING OUR
CLIMATE CHANGE GOALS, SUPPORTING
OUR WORKING CLASS FAMILIES,
ENSURING WE'RE DOING SO IN A WAY
THAT'S EQUITABLE BOTH ON
HOUSING, CLIMATE CHANGE, CLIMATE
RESILIENCY, ETC. SO I DEFINITELY
DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS. NONE
OF US DO. BUT WITH A LOT OF
COLLABORATION AND CONVERSATION,
DIVERSE POINTS OF VIEW, I THINK
WE CAN GET THERE. SO