BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 469|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 469
Author: Vargas (D)
Amended: 5/10/11
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 6-3, 4/6/11
AYES: Wolk, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Liu
NOES: Huff, Fuller, La Malfa
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/2/11
AYES: Simitian, Hancock, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Pavley
NOES: Strickland, Blakeslee
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT : Land use: development project review:
superstores
SOURCE : California Labor Federation
Neighborhood Market Association
Small Business California
DIGEST : This bill requires cities and counties to cause
to be prepared an economic impact report before they
approve or disapprove the construction or conversion of
superstore retailers.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law :
CONTINUED
SB 469
Page
2
1. Under the California Constitution, authorizes a city or
county to "make and enforce within its limits all local,
police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations
not in conflict with general law."
2. Under Planning and Zoning Law, requires cities and
counties to adopt a general plan that includes seven
mandated elements (land use, circulation, housing,
conservation, open space, noise, safety), and creates
special requirements for housing elements. It also
requires cities and counties to adopt zoning ordinances
regulating, for example, the use of buildings,
structures, and land.
3. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility
for carrying out or approving a proposed discretionary
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated
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).
4. Under the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA), requires a lead
agency for a development project to approve or
disapprove a project within specified time periods (for
example, 180 days from the date the lead agency
certifies an EIR (except 90 days for a very low or low
income housing project under certain conditions), 60
days from the date of adopting a negative declaration or
determining that a project is exempt from CEQA).
This bill, under Planning and Zoning Law:
1. Requires a city or county, prior to approving or
disapproving a permit for the construction or conversion
of a superstore retailer to cause to be prepared an
economic impact report that must include, but not be
limited to, the following: (a) an assessment of the
shares of retail sales in the market area;( b) an
assessment of how construction and operation will affect
the supply and demand for retail space in the market
area; (c) an assessment of how the construction and
SB 469
Page
3
operation will affect employment in the market area; (d)
a projection of public service and public facility
costs; (e) a projection of public revenues; (f) an
assessment of the effect on retail operations, including
the potential for blight and business displacement; (g)
an assessment on the ability of the city or county to
implement the general plan; (h) an assessment on average
total vehicle miles traveled by retail customers; (i) an
assessment of the potential for long-term vacancy of the
property in the event the premises are vacated; (j) an
assessment of certain housing impacts; (k) an assessment
on destruction or demolition of parks, playgrounds,
child care facilities, or community centers; (l) an
assessment of other adverse or positive economic impacts
or blight; and (m) an assessment of available measures
to mitigate adverse impacts identified by the applicant.
2. Authorizes a city or county to prepare the economic
impact report, or contract with a private entity other
than the permit applicant or with another public agency
for preparation of the report.
3. Requires the applicant to pay the city or county for
economic impact report preparation costs.
4. Prohibits the above requirements from precluding a city
or county from conducting additional studies of proposed
superstore retailer effects.
5. Requires the city or county to provide the opportunity
for public comment at a meeting on the economic impact
report and its findings.
6. Defines "superstore" to be a business establishment
exceeding 90,000 square feet of gross floor area that
sells a wide range of consumer goods and devotes 10
percent of the sales floor area to the sale of items
that are exempt from the state Sales and Use Tax Law.
This definition excludes discount warehouses and
discount retail stores selling more than half of their
items in large quantities or bulk, and also requires
shoppers to pay a membership fee.
7. Provides legislative intent relating to superstore
SB 469
Page
4
retailer effects, and provides that the review and
regulation of superstore retailers is a matter of
statewide concern and therefore applies to charter
cities.
This bill also requires the lead agency to approve or
disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of
certification of an environmental impact report and
approval of an economic impact report, or within 60 days
from the date of adoption of a negative declaration and
approval of an economic impact report or the determination
by the lead agency that the project is exempt from CEQA and
approval of an economic impact report.
Background
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.
CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects. 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, 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 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.
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
SB 469
Page
5
must be discussed but in less detail than the significant
effects of the proposed project.
Under CEQA, economic and social changes from a project
cannot be treated as significant effects on the
environment. Where a physical change is caused by economic
or social effects of a project, the physical change may be
regarded as a significant effect in the same manner as any
other physical change resulting from the project.
Related Legislation
SB 1641 (Alarcon) of 2004 prohibited a city or county from
permitting a big box retailer based on a business impact
report that the project would have a significant negative
effect on the business community within that city or county
(a Senate Local Government Committee hearing on SB 1641 was
canceled at the author's request).
SB 1056 (Alarcon) of 2004 required a city or county to
prepare an economic impact report prior to approving or
disapproving a superstore retailer, and was vetoed by
Governor Schwarzenegger.
SB 1523 (Alarcon) of 2006 similarly required an economic
impact report to be prepared prior to a city's or county's
approval or disapproval of a superstore retailer, and was
again vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
AB 1581 (Torres) of 2010 exempts a project from CEQA until
2014 that consists of the alteration of a vacant retail
structure of not more than 120,000 square feet under
certain conditions, and died on the Senate inactive file.
SB 620 (Correa) of 2011 mirrors AB 1581, with a 2015 sunset
date, and an April 4, 2011, Senate Environmental Quality
Committee hearing on SB 620 was canceled at the author's
request.
AB 1185 (Torres) mirrors SB 620 and is with the Assembly
Natural Resources Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SB 469
Page
6
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/25/11)
California Labor Federation (co-source)
Neighborhood Market Association (co-source)
Small Business California (co-source)
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California School Employees Association
California Small Business Association
League of Conservation Voters of San Diego County
Northern California Independent Booksellers Association
Sierra Club California
Southern California Independent Booksellers Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of
California
United Domestic Workers of America
United Food and Commercial Workers
United Food and Commercial Workers - Western States
Conference
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/25/11)
Associated Builders and Contractors of California
BOMA, California and San Diego
Building Industry Association of Southern California
-Irvine and Riverside
CalChamber
California Advocates, Inc.
California Business Properties Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Contract Cities Association
California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
California Retailers Association
Cerritos Regional Chamber of Commerce
City of Bakersfield
City of Chino
City of Chino Hills
City of Lakewood
City of Palmdale
Commercial Real Estate Development Association
Contra Costa Taxpayers Association
County of San Bernardo
Hispanic 100
SB 469
Page
7
International Council of Shopping Centers
Kern County
Kern County Farm Bureau, Inc.
KernTax
Latin Business Association
League of California Cities
Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce
Mother Lode Taxpayers Association
NAIOP of California - Inland Empire Chapter, San Diego
Chapter, and
SoCal Chapter
Nisea Farmers League
North of the River Chamber of Commerce
Orange County Business Council
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
South Bay Association of Chambers of Commerce
Walmart
Western Electrical Contractors Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
this policy offers the public and local policymakers an
opportunity to learn about the potential impacts of a
superstore on other retail options in the area, as well
effects on housing, parks, traffic and jobs. The heart of
the concept stems from proactive recommendations by a
superstore company's (Wal-Mart) representative as a
compromise to an ordinance in Los Angeles between an
outright ban and no thoughtful oversight.
The author's office notes that the goal of this bill is to
create financial accountability and the transparency that
local communities need to make land use decisions about the
impact giant supercenters have on existing businesses,
jobs, public services and neighborhoods. Small and
neighborhood businesses are important financial elements to
every local economy and function as the backbone to these
economies. It's important to inform the public about the
consequence that these superstores pose on small and
neighborhood businesses before a superstore developer comes
into a community and potentially imposes a risk to the
local neighborhoods."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Per the Senate Governance and
Finance Committee analysis: according to the League of
SB 469
Page
8
California Cities in opposing this bill, "Cities are
neither pro nor anti-big box retail, but each of the
State's 481 diverse cities must maintain the ability to
make decisions which best fit their community. By singling
out a specific type of large retailer, SB 469 fundamentally
undermines local land use discretion and authority."
AGB:do 5/25/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****