On December 13, 2016, the Board of Supervisors authorized County participation in the development of a countywide Regional Conservation Investment Strategy (“RCIS”). The RCIS is a collaborative effort that also includes the Yolo Habitat Conservancy and two state agencies, the California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) and the California Natural Resources Agency (“CNRA”). The RCIS will also include a “Local Conservation Plan,” which is a Conservancy effort to provide a conservation planning framework for species not covered by the Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (“HCP/NCCP”) that has been in development for many years. The combined document is referred to at times herein as the “RCIS/LCP” and the draft is included herewith as Attachment A. (Note: Plan Tables and appendices are available upon request.)
Legal authority for an RCIS derives from 2016 legislation (Assembly Bill 2018) addressing regional conservation planning. Unlike other conservation planning tools such as HCPs and NCCPs, an RCIS does not authorize development projects or designate specific areas for conservation. Instead, it provides a non-regulatory assessment of conservation needs within a region (in this case, Yolo County). This assessment is included in an RCIS to achieve two primary purposes: (1) to provide a platform for “mitigation credit agreements” to streamline species mitigation; and (2) to create a framework for voluntary conservation efforts by private landowners (as well as assisting with related state grant funding decisions).
The draft RCIS/LCP attached to this Board letter reflects work over the past twelve months by the four participating agencies (Yolo Habitat Conservancy, County, DWR, and CNRA) with consulting support from ICF and input from various environmental non-profits and the Yolo Habitat Conservancy Advisory Committee. To complete the RCIS planning process, the participating agencies must submit a draft RCIS to CDFW for an initial review of completeness. The Yolo Habitat Conservancy Board and Yolo County Board of Supervisors will separately consider authorizing submission of the draft for completeness review.
At this point, the draft is complete in most respects but a two major issues remain unresolved:
Implementation sponsor. The participating agencies have not selected an implementation sponsor for the RCIS. The state agencies have little or no present interest in the role and most discussions to date have been directed at whether the Yolo Habitat Conservancy will consider accepting the role. This is the basis for a related debate (summarized below) on the role of the implementing sponsor, as well as financial support for that role. At its January 22, 2018 meeting, the Conservancy Board of Directors will consider whether the Conservancy should be identified as the anticipated implementation sponsor for the purpose of submission of the draft plan. Final selection of an implementation sponsor will occur prior to RCIS/LCP completion in mid-2018.
Role of the Implementation Sponsor and Related Funding. Under AB 2087, while an implementation sponsor is required, it has virtually no active obligations regarding RCIS implementation and its only defined role is to prepare an updated RCIS (if desired) at the end of the plan’s 10-year term. Conservancy staff believe public meetings and reports, among other things, are necessary to ensure accountability and transparency during implementation. They have prepared a draft list (see Attachment B) of anticipated implementation activities for further discussion prior to a final Conservancy Board decision on the implementation sponsor role. Notably, AB 2087 does not authorize an implementation sponsor to recover costs associated sponsor role from mitigation credit agreement proponents, grant recipients, or other beneficiaries of the completed RCIS.
Although not technically an unresolved issue, it is important to also note that AB 2087 does not provide for any local agency approvals of mitigation credit agreements (MCAs) recorded to implement an RCIS. This is not concerning to the extent that such agreements will merely facilitate mitigation for habitat and species impacts occurring within the County. However, to the extent MCAs could become a vehicle for out-of-county mitigation, it will be important to ensure that MCAs are covered by the County’s Habitat Mitigation Ordinance (which requires a use permit for most out-of-county mitigation efforts). Staff does not believe any changes to the Habitat Mitigation Ordinance are necessary to achieve this but will evaluate the issue (and any related issues involving potential out-of-county mitigation) carefully before making any recommendation to the Board on final approval of the RCIS/LCP.
Staff recommend authorizing submission of the draft to CDFW for completeness review while discussions continue with respect to the two outstanding issues mentioned above (as well as other minor issues not specifically mentioned). Once the draft document is submitted to CDFW, CDFW will have 30 days to review and determine if the document is complete (i.e. meets the requirements of an RCIS as described in AB 2087 and the RCIS Program Guidelines).
If CDFW determines the document is complete, the Draft RCIS/LCP will be released for public review and comment for a minimum of 30 days. The RCIS/LCP participating agencies will consider any public or agency comments received during this period when preparing the Final Yolo RCIS/LCP. Prior to submittal of the Final RCIS/LCP to CDFW, County staff will bring the Final Yolo RCIS/LCP to the Board for approval. A similar process will occur at the Yolo Habitat Conservancy, which will also consider whether RCIS/LCP is consistent with the Yolo HCP/NCCP. |