BILL ANALYSIS SB 1456 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 1456 (Simitian) As Amended August 2, 2010 2/3 vote. Urgency SENATE VOTE :35-0 NATURAL RESOURCES 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Chesbro, Gilmore, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Conway, | | |Brownley, | |Bradford, | | |De Leon, Hill, Huffman, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, | | |Knight, Logue, Skinner | |Davis, | | | | |De Leon, Gatto, Hall, | | | | |Harkey, Miller, Nielsen, | | | | |Norby, Skinner, Solorio, | | | | |Torlakson, Torrico | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Clarifies the circumstances under which cumulative effects are not required to be examined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and makes several revisions to mediation and judicial review procedures. Specifically, this bill : 1)Amends CEQA as follows until January 1, 2016: a) Provides that a cumulative effect is not required to be examined in an EIR or other CEQA document if a lead agency finds that it has been adequately addressed in a prior document, unless the lead agency finds that the incremental effects of the project are cumulatively considerable according to specified criteria (this incorporates existing provisions of the CEQA Guidelines into the statute); b) Authorizes the Attorney General to request an expedited schedule for resolution of any CEQA lawsuit; c) Provides that a mediation proceeding conducted pursuant to the law governing mediation and resolution of land use disputes (Government Code Section 66030, et seq.) is intended to be conducted concurrently with any judicial SB 1456 Page 2 proceeding (consistent with a settlement meeting conducted pursuant to CEQA); d) Authorizes any person wishing to file a CEQA lawsuit to first request, within five business days, mediation with the lead agency and the real party in interest. Provides that the request is deemed denied if the lead agency does not respond within five business days. If mediation is conducted, provides that CEQA's statute of limitations shall be tolled until the mediation is completed; e) Authorizes a party to a CEQA lawsuit to request the court impose a penalty on any party making a "frivolous" claim, and authorizes the court to impose a penalty up to $10,000. Defines frivolous as "totally and completely without merit;" and, f) For an organization formed after the approval of a project to have standing to file a CEQA lawsuit, requires the organization to have had a member present the alleged grounds for noncompliance to the lead agency during the public comment period or public hearing on the project (in addition to the requirement in current law that a member of the organization simply has objected to the project). 2)Sunsets the above changes and reenacts existing law effective January 1, 2016. 3)Contains an urgency clause. EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA. 2)Authorizes a lead agency to use a tiered EIR (based on a prior EIR) for a project when the prior EIR has been prepared for a program, plan, policy or ordinance and the project is consistent. Provides that the tiered EIR is not required to examine effects that were examined at a sufficient level of detail in the prior EIR. SB 1456 Page 3 3)Authorizes judicial review of CEQA actions taken by public agencies, following the agency's decision to carry out or approve the project, subject to statutes of limitations ranging from 30 to 180 days: a) Challenges alleging improper determination that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, or alleging an EIR doesn't comply with CEQA, must be filed within 30 days of filing of the notice of approval; b) Challenges alleging improper determination that a project is exempt from CEQA must be filed within 35 days of filing of the notice of exemption, or 180 days if no notice has been filed and, c) Challenges alleging an agency has failed to determine whether a project has a significant effect on the environment must be filed within 180 days. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects of applicable projects undertaken or approved by public agencies. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the initial study shows that there would not be a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare a negative declaration. If the initial study shows that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR. An EIR must accurately describe the proposed project, identify and analyze each significant environmental impact expected to result from the proposed project, identify mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. Generally, CEQA actions taken by local public agencies can be challenged in Superior Court once the agency approves or determines to carry out the project. CEQA appeals are subject to unusually short statutes of limitations. Under current law, court challenges of CEQA decisions generally must be filed within 30-35 days, depending on the type of decision. In SB 1456 Page 4 addition, CEQA requires the courts to give CEQA cases preference over all other civil actions, so that the cases are quickly heard and determined. According to the author, this bill responds to the need for mediation to resolve CEQA disputes to avoid litigation while ensuring that mediation after an action is filed does not affect the timing of any judicial proceeding; establishing a process for an expedited schedule to resolve cases while allowing any party to request imposition of a penalty for frivolous litigation; ensuring more accountability for an organization challenging a project that is formed after project approval; and, establishing procedures for tiering environmental documents. Analysis Prepared by : Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0005910