BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1456
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1456 (Simitian)
As Amended August 27, 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 |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NATURAL RESOURCES 9-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Chesbro, Gilmore, | | |
| |Brownley, | | |
| |De Leon, Hill, Huffman, | | |
| |Knight, Logue, Skinner | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
SB 1456
Page 2
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 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; 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 a section incorporating amendments made by AB 231
(Huber) to resolve a potential chaptering conflict.
4)Contains an urgency clause allowing this bill to become
effective upon enactment.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a
SB 1456
Page 3
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.
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 : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor state costs, if any. Potential state savings of
an unknown amount to the extent state agencies serving as lead
agencies accept requests for mediation as an alternative to
litigation, which typically is less costly than litigation.
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
SB 1456
Page 4
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 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 : Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
FN: 0006789