BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 633
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 633
AUTHOR: Pavley
AMENDED: April 11, 2013
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: May 1, 2013
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Joanne Roy
SUBJECT : CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT: GUIDELINES:
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
SUMMARY :
Existing law , under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA):
1) Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a proposed discretionary project to
prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration,
or environmental impact report (EIR) for this action, unless
the project is exempt from CEQA (CEQA includes various
statutory exemptions, as well as categorical exemptions in the
CEQA guidelines). (Public Resources Code �21000 et seq.).
Some categorical exemptions relating to special events,
include, for example:
a) Minor public or private alterations to land, water, or
vegetation, including, but not limited to: "temporary use of
land having negligible or no permanent effects on the
environment, including carnivals, sales of Christmas trees,
etc." (�15304(e)).
b) Construction or replacement of accessory structures,
including, but not limited to:
i) "Small parking lots." (�15311(b)).
ii) "Placement of seasonal or temporary use items
such as lifeguard towers, mobile food units, portable
restrooms, or similar items in generally the same
locations from time to time in publicly owned parks,
SB 633
Page 2
stadiums, or other facilities designed for public use."
(�15311(c)).
c) Normal operations of existing facilities for public
gatherings for which the facilities were designed,
including, but not limited to: racetracks, stadiums,
convention centers, auditoriums, amphitheaters,
planetariums, swimming pools, and amusement parks. (�15323).
2) Provides for the guidelines to list classes of projects that
have been determined not to have a significant effect on the
environment and are exempt from CEQA. (�21084).
3) Provides specific requirements to revising the guidelines for
infill projects. (�21094.5.5).
4) Prohibits a lead agency or responsible agency from requiring a
subsequent or supplemental EIR when an EIR has been prepared
for a project unless one or more specified events occurs,
including that new information becomes available that was not
known and could not have been known at the time the EIR was
certified as complete. (�21166).
This bill :
1) Authorizes the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to revise
the guidelines to add a categorical exemption for a class of
projects involving minor temporary uses of land and public
gatherings that do not have a significant effect on the
environment by July 1, 2015.
2) Requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to
certify and adopt proposed revisions authorized above by
January 1, 2016.
3) Specifically requires that new information that becomes
available was not known and could not have been known by the
lead agency or any responsible agency at the time the EIR was
certified as complete for one of the specified events listed to
prohibit a lead agency or responsible agency from requiring a
supplemental or subsequent EIR.
COMMENTS :
SB 633
Page 3
1) Purpose of Bill . According to the author, "Some local
governments and sponsors of local events such as nonprofit
groups, charities, schools, businesses, farmers' markets,
tourism boards, and others have become concerned that
litigation in 2010 may require many temporary local events
fully to comply with [CEQA]. This concern exists even though
several categorical exemptions within the CEQA Guidelines would
already seem to apply to these events, especially Section 15304
that exempts minor alterations to land or water including
'temporary use of land having negligible or not permanent
effects on the environment, including carnivals, sales of
Christmas trees, etc.' Thus, although the concern may be
exaggerated, it is one that the Legislature may help resolve."
"On an unrelated point, the bill also clarifies the need for
supplemental [EIRs]. Current law says that a supplemental EIR
has to be done when new information is available at the time
the [EIR] was certified. This bill would limit that to new
information known to the lead agency or a responsible agency."
2) Brief background on CEQA . CEQA provides a process for
evaluating the environmental effects of a project, and includes
statutory exemptions as well as categorical exemptions in the
CEQA guidelines. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an
initial study is prepared to determine whether a 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, then the lead
agency must prepare an EIR.
Generally, 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. Prior to approving any project that has
received an environmental review, an agency must make certain
findings. If mitigation measures are required or incorporated
into a project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.
SB 633
Page 4
If a mitigation measure would cause one or more significant
effects in addition to those that would be caused by the
proposed project, the effects of the mitigation measure must be
discussed but in less detail than the significant effects of
the proposed project.
3) Background on San Diego litigation . San Diego requires a Parks
Use Permit, which is intended to be a ministerial permit, for
certain public facility events. The city's Special Events
Permit for certain other organized activities is considered a
discretionary permit.
As noted above, CEQA applies to discretionary projects
(�21080(a)).
In 2011, a lawsuit was filed in the California Superior Court in
San Diego, Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation vs. City of
San Diego related to temporary special event and park use
permits issued by the City of San Diego and whether the permits
are subject to CEQA review. The Court held that a decision to
issue a Park Use Permit is not ministerial because the city's
ordinance gives the Parks and Recreation Department leeway in
determining whether to issue the permit due to such factors as
congestion or interference with vehicular or pedestrian
traffic.
San Diego has revised Park Use Permit and Special Events Permit
requirements so that the Park Use Permit is ministerial, and a
fireworks event is subject to the Park Use Permit and not
subject to the Special Events Permit.
Since the initial case, referred to as "CERF I," subsequent
lawsuits have been filed against the city by the same plaintiff
for the following: a) the practice of issuing Special Events
permits ("CERF II"); b) the first set of permit ordinance
amendments and the exception of fireworks displays from the
Special Events ordinance ("CERF III"); and c) the second set of
ordinance amendments relating to the Park Use Permit and
setting capacity thresholds for fireworks displays ("CERF IV").
Three of the cases (CERF I, III, and IV) are on appeal. In
addition, CERF and the City of San Diego are currently working
on settling their issues out of court.
SB 633
Page 5
4) Amendment needed . The Legislature traditionally does not
involve itself in matters with pending litigation. In order to
ensure that this bill does not affect any pending litigation,
this bill needs to be amended to clarify that the provisions of
this bill do not affect the resolution of an action or
proceeding filed before January 1, 2014, alleging a public
agency is undertaking, or has granted approval for, a temporary
use of land and public gathering.
5) Previous legislation . SB 973 (Vargas) (2012) allowed a lead
agency to grant a categorical exemption under CEQA for an
annual firework display subject to limitations. The bill also
authorized the Office of Planning and Research to evaluate
issues related to events that include fireworks displays to
assist local agencies to mitigate impacts and develop
ordinances. The bill failed passage (3-1) in the Assembly
Natural Resources Committee.
SB 206 (Harkey) (2012) exempted a municipal fireworks display
from the California Coastal Act and CEQA. The bill failed
passage (3-4) in Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
SOURCE : Author
SUPPORT : None on file
OPPOSITION : None on file