BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 292
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 292 (Padilla)
As Amended September 2, 2011
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE : Vote not relevant
HIGHER EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS
(vote not relevant) (vote not relevant)
SUMMARY : Establishes expedited judicial review procedures and
requires implementation of specified traffic and air quality
mitigation measures under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) for the proposed downtown Los Angeles football
stadium and convention center project. Specifically, this bill :
1)Expedited judicial review:
a) Requires a petition challenging certification of the
environmental impact report (EIR), or the granting of any
initial project approvals, for the stadium project to be
filed with the Second District Court of Appeal within 30
days of the lead agency's notice of determination on the
EIR.
b) Requires the petitioner to file and serve the opening
brief within 40 days of filing the petition.
c) Requires the respondent and real party in interest to
file and serve the opposition brief within 25 days of the
filing of the opening brief.
d) Requires the petitioner to file and serve the reply
brief within 20 days of the filing of the last opposition
brief.
e) Provides that Rule 8.220 of the California Rules of
Court, which permits the court to grant an extension of
time to file briefs for good cause, does not apply.
Instead prohibits the court from granting any extension,
except upon showing of extraordinary good cause, and limits
any extension to minimum the court deems necessary.
f) Permits the court to appoint a special master to assist
with the case. If a special master is appointed, requires
SB 292
Page 2
the project applicant to pay all reasonable costs, up to
$150,000. Permits the court to request additional special
master costs in excess of $150,000 be paid by the
applicant.
g) Requires the court to hear and decide the case within 60
days of the filing of the last timely reply brief. If the
court fails to meet this deadline, the applicant may
withdraw, thereby terminating the case and the Court of
Appeal's jurisdiction and eliminating the applicant's duty
to comply with the traffic and air quality mitigation
measures described below.
h) If the applicant withdraws from the Court of Appeal, the
petitioner may file an identical petition in the Los
Angeles County Superior Court within 15 days. Requires the
court to hold a case management conference within 30 days.
i) Requires a petition to review the Court of Appeal's
decision to be filed with the Supreme Court within 15 days
of the decision, requires parties to file opposition briefs
15 days after that, and requires the Supreme Court to
decide the case within the earlier of 30 days of the
petition or 15 days of the opposition brief.
j) Requires all briefs and notices to be served
electronically.
2)Lead agency/EIR procedures:
a) Requires the project EIR to include a specified notice
that it is subject to the provisions of the section added
by this bill.
b) Requires the lead agency to conduct an informational
workshop within 10 days of release of the Draft EIR and
hold a public hearing within 10 days before close of the
public comment period.
c) Requires the lead agency and applicant to participate in
nonbinding mediation with any party who submitted comments
on the Draft EIR and requested mediation within five days
of the close of the public comment period, with the cost to
be paid by the applicant. Requires mediation to end within
35 days of the close of the public comment period.
SB 292
Page 3
d) Requires the lead agency to adopt any measures agreed
upon in mediation. Prohibits a commenter from raising an
issue addressed by that measure in a lawsuit.
e) Permits the lead agency to ignore written comments
submitted after the close of the public comment period,
with specified exceptions for materials addressing new
information released after the close of the public comment
period.
f) Makes operation of the bill contingent on completion of
the project EIR before June 1, 2013, by providing that the
section added by this bill shall be inoperative on June 1,
2013, and repealed on January 1, 2014, if the lead agency
files its notice of determination on the EIR after June 1,
2013.
g) Requires the lead agency to provide all EIR documents
and comments in an electronic format, certify the record
within five days of filing the notice of determination,
provide the record to a party upon written request, and
provide the record to the Court of Appeal within 10 days of
the filing of petition for review.
3)Mitigation requirements:
a) Declares the intent of the Legislature that the project
minimize traffic congestion and air quality impacts that
may result from private car trips to the stadium through
the existing requirements of CEQA, as supplemented by the
mitigation measures specified by this bill.
b) Requires the lead agency, as a condition of approval of
the project, to require the applicant to implement measures
to achieve "carbon neutrality" (zero net emissions of
greenhouse gases from private car trips) by the end of the
first season a National Football League (NFL) team has
played at the stadium. Requires the lead agency to place
highest priority on feasible emission reduction measures on
the stadium site and neighboring communities. Requires use
of offset credits only after feasible local measures have
been implemented.
c) Requires the applicant to implement specified measures
SB 292
Page 4
to ensure that the stadium achieves a "trip ratio" (cars
divided by spectators) that is no more than 90% of the trip
ratio at any other NFL stadium (i.e., 10% less car trips
than the best comparable stadium).
d) Requires the lead agency to adopt a protocol to
implement these measures, including criteria and guidelines
to determine trip ratio.
e) Requires the applicant to report to the lead agency
after the second, third, fourth and fifth NFL seasons,
regarding the results of trip reduction measures.
f) Requires the lead agency, following the fourth season
trip ratio report, to determine whether there is adequate
data to determine whether the 90% trip ratio has been
achieved. If data is not adequate, the lead agency shall
collect the data necessary to make the determination, with
reasonable costs paid by the applicant.
g) If, after the fifth season trip ratio report, the lead
agency determines that the trip ratio is no more than 90%
of trip ratio of the other NFL stadium with the lowest trip
ratio, the lead agency shall require the applicant to
implement additional feasible measures to achieve the 90%
target. Any trip reduction measure used at another NFL
stadium shall be presumed feasible. The feasibility of any
mitigation measure not used at another NFL stadium shall be
governed by the substantial evidence test. The applicant's
obligation to pay for transit improvements is limited to:
i) Temporary expansion of transit line capacity to
serve stadium events.
ii) Providing charter buses or similar services to serve
stadium events.
iii) Paying a fair share of a public fixed or light rail
station used by event spectators.
h) Requires the lead agency to determine whether to impose
additional mitigation measures within six months of the
fifth season report.
i) Requires the applicant to submit additional annual trip
SB 292
Page 5
ratio reports if the lead agency requires additional
mitigation measures, until the lead agency determines the
applicant has achieved the 90% target for two consecutive
seasons, or until the tenth season, whichever is earlier.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires, pursuant to CEQA, a lead agency with the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
discretionary project to evaluate the environmental effects of
its action and prepare a negative declaration, mitigated
negative declaration, or EIR. If an initial study shows that
the project may have a significant effect on the environment,
the lead agency must prepare an EIR. A lead agency must base
its determination of significant effects on substantial
evidence.
2)Authorizes judicial review of CEQA actions taken by public
agencies, following the agency's decision to carry out or
approve the project. Challenges alleging improper
determination that a project may have a significant effect on
the environment, or alleging an EIR does not comply with CEQA,
must be filed in the Superior Court within 30 days of filing
of the notice of approval.
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.
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 environmental review, an agency must make certain
SB 292
Page 6
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.
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.
This bill would establish special procedures and requirements
for the proposed Convention Center Modernization and Farmers
Field Project (football stadium) in downtown Los Angeles. The
expedited judicial review procedures contemplate the Court of
Appeal rendering a decision on any lawsuit challenging the City
of Los Angeles' approval of the stadium under CEQA within 175
days, reducing the existing judicial review timeline by 100 days
or more, while creating new burdens for the court and
petitioners to meet the compressed schedule. The mitigation
requirements would require the stadium to achieve "carbon
neutrality" for private car trips by the end of the first NFL
season and 10% less car trips than the best comparable stadium
over a 10-year period.
Analysis Prepared by : Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
FN: 0002709