Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill amends the 1913 Act governing the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and Lake Eleanor Basin to expand public recreational access, increase the annual rental payment by the City of San Francisco, and require National Park Service administration of recreation. It lists allowed activities (swimming, non-motorized watercraft, camping above ordinary high-water marks, picnicking, limited motor vehicle road access), adds wildfire mitigation and other improvements, and requires a one-year report analyzing historical access and revenue options, including possible pricing or fee adjustments.
Environmental protection versus broader recreational access allowances
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a substantive change to the Act of December 19, 1913 by expanding authorized recreational uses, altering the annual rental fee and its adjustment, prohibiting recoupment from wholesale customers, and assigning administration to the Secretary/NPS while requiring a one-year report to Congress.
This bill amends the 1913 Act governing the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and Lake Eleanor Basin to expand public recreational access, increase the annual rental payment by the City of San Francisco, and require National Park Service administration of recreation.
It lists allowed activities (swimming, non-motorized watercraft, camping above ordinary high-water marks, picnicking, limited motor vehicle road access), adds wildfire mitigation and other improvements, and requires a one-year report analyzing historical access and revenue options, including possible pricing or fee adjustments.
Narrow and administratively feasible but politically sensitive locally, with unclear fiscal impacts and stakeholder resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a substantive change to the Act of December 19, 1913 by expanding authorized recreational uses, altering the annual rental fee and its adjustment, prohibiting recoupment from wholesale customers, and assigning administration to the Secretary/NPS while requiring a one-year report to Congress.
Environmental protection versus broader recreational access allowances
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Environmental protection versus broader recreational access allowances
Generally favorable because it increases public access and strengthens a federal role in managing recreation.
Supports higher annual payment and CPI adjustment, but worries about environmental and water-quality impacts from some allowed activities and potential regressive cost shifts.
Cautiously supportive as a pragmatic balance between public access and dam safety.
Values the mandated report and fiscal analysis but seeks clearer operational safeguards and cost allocation rules before full endorsement.
Mixed to somewhat skeptical.
May welcome increased public access and higher payment from San Francisco, but wary of expanded federal control, unclear cost impacts, and any policy that could raise consumer utility prices.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and administratively feasible but politically sensitive locally, with unclear fiscal impacts and stakeholder resistance.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Environmental protection versus broader recreational access allowances
Narrow and administratively feasible but politically sensitive locally, with unclear fiscal impacts and stakeholder resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a substantive change to the Act of December 19, 1913 by expanding authorized recreational uses, altering the annual rental fee and its adjustment…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.