An act to add Section 1021.5 to the Fish and Game Code, and to add Section 30505 to the Public Resources Code, relating to coastal resources.
Summary
AB 2254 would direct the Department of Fish and Wildlife, in coordination with the California Coastal Commission, to identify monarch butterfly overwintering habitat sites in the coastal zone and existing local government habitat management plans or policies by January 1, 2028. By July 1, 2028, the two agencies would also have to develop and publish model policy guidance for protecting monarch overwintering habitat, including habitat restoration and enhancement, and could rely on existing local and conservation data sets in doing so.
After that guidance is finalized, the bill would require a local government that has a monarch overwintering habitat site within its coastal-zone jurisdiction to incorporate enforceable habitat protection policies into its next local coastal program amendment. Those policies would need to be consistent with the state guidance and could include enforceable habitat management plans, measurable outcomes, local coastal program updates, or ordinances. The bill also encourages eligible local governments to seek grants through the Monarch Butterfly and Pollinator Rescue Program if their local coastal programs include qualifying habitat protections.
Impact
The bill would add a new Fish and Game Code section and a new Public Resources Code section, expanding state involvement in coastal habitat planning and local coastal program amendments. It would create new duties for the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Coastal Commission to inventory habitat and issue model policies, and it would require affected coastal local governments to adopt enforceable monarch habitat protections when they next amend their local coastal programs. Because those requirements would impose new obligations on local governments, the bill is identified as creating a state-mandated local program and includes a reimbursement provision if the Commission on State Mandates finds reimbursable costs.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in committee, with two committee votes advancing it by comfortable margins: 10-3 and 10-2. The absence of recorded committee transcript discussion limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote pattern suggests broad agreement on the goal of monarch habitat protection and the use of coastal planning tools to achieve it. The bill’s movement to Appropriations indicates continued interest, while also reflecting attention to potential fiscal and implementation effects.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s mandate on local governments, especially coastal jurisdictions that would have to add enforceable monarch habitat protections to their local coastal programs at their next amendment. That requirement could raise concerns about local planning flexibility, administrative workload, and compliance costs, which is why the bill expressly addresses state-mandated local program reimbursement. A secondary issue is the bill’s reliance on state-issued model policies and coordination between the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Coastal Commission, which may prompt questions about how prescriptive the guidance will be and how it will interact with existing local land-use authority.
An act to amend Sections 51178 and 51181 of the Government Code, and to amend Sections 4202 and 4204 of the Public Resources Code, relating to land use.
An act to amend Sections 2301 and 2302 of, and to add Section 2303 to, the Fish and Game Code, to add and repeal Section 515 of the Food and Agricultural Code, to amend Sections 675, 676, and 676.
A RESOLUTION to urge the Tennessee Department of Transportation to establish habitat and no-mow areas on highway rights-of-way for the monarch butterfly.