SB 287 establishes the California Trails Conservancy Program inside the Natural Resources Agency to coordinate planning, partnerships, and funding for nature-based and human-powered trail networks across jurisdictions. The bill defines ‘‘priority projects’’ (new access in disadvantaged or under‑resourced areas, and projects that improve connectivity or ecotourism) and authorizes the agency to run grant programs and convene an ad hoc working group of stakeholders.
The measure builds a centralized vehicle for multijurisdictional trail planning, sets a statutory goal that no less than 35% of grant funds go to disadvantaged communities, and makes the program operative only upon legislative appropriation — while signaling intent to use specific ballot‑act funds and to pursue separate legislation creating a standalone California Trails Conservancy.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates the California Trails Conservancy Program within the Natural Resources Agency, authorizes grants (block or competitive) for trail projects, and permits the agency to form an ad hoc stakeholder working group. It requires at least 35% of grant proceeds to benefit disadvantaged communities and allows the Deputy Secretary for Access to administer the program.
Who It Affects
The Natural Resources Agency and its Deputy Secretary for Access, state conservancies and departments (Fish and Wildlife, Coastal Conservancy, Wildlife Conservation Board), local land managers and parks departments, trail user organizations, and communities with trail deficits — particularly disadvantaged communities targeted for funding.
Why It Matters
The bill centralizes coordination and funding policy for multijurisdictional trails, creates a legal lever to prioritize equity in trail investment, and signals a legislative pathway toward a dedicated state conservancy focused on trails and nonmotorized mobility.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 287 carves out a programmatic home for statewide trail coordination inside the Natural Resources Agency. Rather than creating a new independent conservancy immediately, it establishes the California Trails Conservancy Program to promote environmentally sound greenways, widen access to nature, and encourage partnerships across federal, state, local, tribal, nonprofit, and private actors.
The program’s statutory mission combines recreation, active transportation, and stewardship objectives.
The bill sets a working definition of ‘‘priority projects’’ as either (1) projects that open new public access in disadvantaged or under‑resourced communities with documented deficiencies, or (2) projects that increase connectivity between communities and natural areas and that may support ecotourism. For implementation the agency may run block grants or competitive grant rounds and is explicitly directed to allocate at least 35% of grant proceeds to projects benefiting disadvantaged communities.To guide design and buy‑in, the agency may form an ad hoc working group with representatives from traditional trail constituencies (hiking, equestrian, mountain biking), environmental justice advocates, land trusts, tribal communities, local parks officials, federal agencies (USFWS, Reclamation, NPS, USFS), and California‑based outdoor enterprises.
SB 287 also allows the agency to designate the Deputy Secretary for Access to administer the program, which concentrates operational authority within an existing line office rather than creating new statewide bureaucracy.One legal and budgetary constraint is explicit: the chapter becomes operative only if the Legislature appropriates funds for it. The bill also states legislative intent to allow allocation of monies from Section 94030 (voter‑approved bond or ballot‑act funds referenced in the text) and signals that subsequent legislation will create a standalone California Trails Conservancy.
That combination — a program waiting for appropriation with an eye toward future statutory elevation — structures how and when the program would actually deliver grants, convene partners, or secure easements and MOUs.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines two categories of ‘‘priority projects’’: (A) new public access projects in disadvantaged or under‑resourced communities with documented deficiencies, and (B) projects that increase connectivity to communities and nature and that may promote ecotourism.
When the agency administers program funds, it must allocate no less than 35% of grant proceeds to projects benefiting disadvantaged communities.
SB 287 authorizes the agency to use existing or new block grants or competitive grant programs as the vehicle for distributing funds to trail projects.
The Natural Resources Agency may assign the program to its Deputy Secretary for Access to administer, rather than creating a separate administrative entity.
The chapter becomes operative only after the Legislature appropriates money for it, and the bill expresses legislative intent to allow use of funds under Section 94030 and to pursue later legislation creating a standalone California Trails Conservancy.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Legislative findings framing the need for a statewide trails focus
This section collects the Legislature’s reasoning: trails connect people to nature, support recreation and active transportation, grew in popularity during the COVID‑19 pandemic, can drive local economies, and face emerging pressures (e‑bikes, user conflicts, unlawful trail construction). Practically, these findings justify centralized coordination and a funding vehicle by emphasizing both demand and environmental risks that the program is meant to manage.
Key definitions: disadvantaged communities and priority projects
The bill imports the statutory definition of ‘‘disadvantaged communities’’ from Section 90100(d) and defines ‘‘priority projects’’ as two discrete buckets: projects that provide new public access in underserved communities, and projects that enhance connectivity and possibly ecotourism. Those definitions determine statutory eligibility priorities and shape how the 35% allocation requirement will be targeted.
Creates the California Trails Conservancy Program and sets its mission
This subsection establishes the program in the Natural Resources Agency with purposes spanning trail expansion, equitable access, policy and funding promotion, and facilitating best practices and partnerships. By embedding the program within the agency and listing broad but actionable goals, the statute enables the agency to act across recreational, mobility, and conservation lines without prescribing narrow program rules.
Permits an ad hoc working group, Deputy Secretary administration, and grantmaking with a funding floor
The agency may convene an ad hoc working group composed of trail user groups, environmental justice advocates, land trusts, tribal representatives, federal agencies, and outdoor companies — a broad convening power meant to build technical and political consensus. To run the program, the agency may authorize its Deputy Secretary for Access to administer it, and it may deliver funding through block grants or competitive grants. Critically, the statute requires that at least 35% of grant proceeds go to projects benefitting disadvantaged communities, embedding equity as a funding floor rather than a discretionary preference.
Operative date, appropriation dependency, and pathway to a standalone conservancy
The chapter only becomes operative upon appropriation by the Legislature, creating a budgetary gate for the program to start. The bill states legislative intent to permit use of monies from Section 94030 and signals that the Legislature intends to introduce further legislation to establish a separate California Trails Conservancy. Those provisions mean the current measure is both a policy framework and a placeholder for future institutional development.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Disadvantaged and under‑resourced communities — the statute requires at least 35% of grant proceeds go to projects benefiting these communities, increasing the odds that urban neighborhoods and low‑income areas receive trail investments and new access.
- Local parks departments and regional land managers — the program creates a centralized grant and coordination source for multijurisdictional linkages, easements, and MOUs that local governments often cannot assemble alone.
- Trail user groups and outdoor enterprises — the ad hoc working group offer a seat at the table for hiking, equestrian, and mountain biking communities and for California‑based outdoor companies seeking to partner on stewardship and access projects.
- Rural and small‑town economies — connectivity and ecotourism projects targeted as priority projects can channel state funding into trail development that supports local businesses and visitor economies.
Who Bears the Cost
- Natural Resources Agency and state program staff — the agency must absorb program administration unless the Legislature provides dedicated appropriation and staff, creating potential workload and budgetary impacts.
- State and local taxpayers — because the chapter is operative only upon appropriation, funding will come from the state budget (or redirected bond funds like Section 94030), which competes with other priorities.
- Local land managers and private landowners — advancing multijurisdictional easements, MOUs, and shared‑use agreements may impose negotiation, maintenance, and liability burdens on small jurisdictions and private landholders.
- Existing grant programs and conservancies — centralizing trail funding and coordination could redirect funds and attention from other local or sector‑specific grant programs unless new revenue is provided.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between expanding equitable access and connectivity (which argues for widespread, rapid investment and a funding floor for disadvantaged communities) and protecting natural resources, managing user conflicts, and preserving program flexibility (which argues for cautious, prioritized deployment and technical constraints). The bill favors equitable deployment and centralized coordination, but doing so may constrain the agency’s ability to respond to site‑specific environmental risks and to fund larger, cross‑jurisdictional corridors without additional resources.
SB 287 blends aspirational policy goals with several contingent, practical constraints. First, the program’s operation depends on a future appropriation, which means the law creates duty and authority but not guaranteed resources; program design and timing will vary based on annual budgets and political choices.
Second, the 35% allocation floor for disadvantaged communities advances equity but reduces allocation flexibility; without additional funding, the floor could squeeze other high‑priority connectivity projects or force difficult tradeoffs between urban access and large rural corridor investments.
Governance and stakeholder inclusion are loosely framed: the ad hoc working group is broad by design, but the bill does not specify membership rules, decisionmaking authority, or conflict‑resolution mechanisms, leaving important procedural questions to agency rulemaking. The statute also elevates coordination and easement tools (MOUs, volunteer agreements, trail easements) without clarifying liability, long‑term maintenance obligations, or how to reconcile competing uses — for example, where e‑bikes create user conflicts with hikers or equestrians.
Finally, the bill signals intent to use funds from Section 94030 and to pursue subsequent legislation to create a standalone conservancy; those intentions raise questions about long‑term institutional structure and whether program scale will require a separate governance model and dedicated revenue streams.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.