Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Biodiversity Nature Based Solutions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wildlife Conservation Board plan for Prop 4 biodiversity funds raises questions about oversight, scope and timing
Summary
The Wildlife Conservation Board and state conservancies described plans for roughly $197 million in biodiversity spending next fiscal year and a multi‑year allocation to meet California’s nature‑based climate targets; lawmakers pressed for more reporting and legislative guidance.
The Wildlife Conservation Board and partner conservancies described how they would deploy a chunk of Proposition 4’s biodiversity funding and sketched targets tied to the state’s nature‑based climate goals and the 30 by 30 conservation objective.
"The administration's climate bond expenditure plan includes $197,000,000 for biodiversity and nature based solutions," Jennifer Norris, executive director of the Wildlife Conservation Board, told the subcommittee. She said WCB would use the funds to support land protection, habitat restoration, and projects that the board expects will help the state meet its "by 2030" nature‑conservation targets.
Why it matters: the subcommittee heard that WCB has allocated nearly $900 million in grants over the last two years and that Proposition 4 proposes a large single allocation to the board. Legislative staff and stakeholders urged the Legislature to require more detailed reporting on how the board will prioritize and sequence awards.
Board testimony and examples: Norris highlighted recent awards and partnerships, including a $2.3 million grant to the Tule River Tribe for an ancestral lands acquisition, a $12.5 million grant to Pacific Forest Trust for Trinity Headwaters protection and carbon purposes, and a $4 million grant to Big Sur Land Trust for restoration of Carr Lake in Salinas. She said nearly 60% of recently funded projects provided direct benefits to disadvantaged communities and that tribal partnerships are part of the board’s portfolio.
Allocation size and timing: Legislative Analyst Office and committee members noted that a single appropriation to the board under Proposition 4 — reported in committee testimony as $668 million for a multi‑year allocation — would be the largest single allocation in the bond. "The legislature may want to consider whether it would like the board to come back in subsequent years with more details about how it intends to distribute and prioritize the funding," LAO analyst Sonia Pedic said.
30 by 30 and expected impact: Natural Resources Agency staff told the subcommittee the state's 30 by 30 accounting stood at about 25.2% in the last published update and that new federal monument designations could raise that share. Agency staff cautioned that reaching 30% relies on a mix of federal, state and private conservation tools, not solely on bond funding.
Implementation capacity: WCB said it has a backlog of shovel‑ready projects that could be funded immediately and that the board issued a draft strategic plan on March 13 to guide spending over the next five years. Board staff said the draft plan will be finalized at an August board meeting and that they plan pre‑application steps so projects can be funded in a timely manner.
Legislative concerns and public comment: Committee members asked for reporting and milestones the board could provide to the Legislature to ensure transparency and legislative priorities are reflected. Several public commenters and conservation organizations urged robust first‑year funding for WCB and opposed using Prop 4 to backfill prior general‑fund obligations.
Speakers quoted in this article spoke during the biodiversity and nature‑based solutions chapter presentation and subsequent Q&A.
