BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 515
Page 1
Date of Hearing: January 23, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 515 (Dickinson) - As Amended: January 6, 2014
Policy Committee: Natural
ResourcesVote:6-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill clarifies procedures that apply when a court orders a
public agency to take corrective action to comply with CEQA by
peremptory writ of mandate. Specifically, this bill:
1)Provides that when a court finds that an action of a public
agency is not in compliance with CEQA, the court, in issuing
its writ of mandate, shall specify what action is necessary to
bring the public agency into compliance.
2)Requires the writ to include the time by which the public
agency shall make an initial return of a writ.
3)Requires the agency's initial return of the writ to describe
all of the following:
a) The actions the public agency will take to comply.
b) A schedule for the actions that the agency will take.
c) The public comment period applicable to the agency's
revision of a noncompliant document, if the noncompliance
found by the court involves a document (i.e. the negative
declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or
environmental impact report.)
4)Specifies that nothing in this bill affects the authority of a
court to allow a public agency to proceed with those aspects
of the project that do not violate CEQA, so long as allowing
the public agency to proceed does not, in any manner,
prejudice complete and full compliance with CEQA.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 515
Page 2
Negligible, if any, reimbursable mandated local costs.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, CEQA litigation can often
take a long time to resolve. From the time an administrative
agency approves an EIR or Negative Declaration, to the time a
legal challenge has been resolved, two or more years may
elapse. This amount of time has significant financial impacts
and can undermine a project's viability.
The author states that the bill's modest changes provide
greater certainty and promote more efficient resolution of
CEQA legislation.
2)Background. CEQA provides a process for evaluating the
environmental effects of applicable projects approved or
undertaken by public agencies. For projects that are not
exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine if
the projects may have a significant impact on the environment.
If the initial study shows no significant impacts, a
negative declaration is issued. If the project may
significantly impact the environment, a full Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, including the
identification of environmental impacts and required
mitigation, compliance and reporting measures intended to
reduce the environmental impacts to the extent feasible. CEQA
also provides for public process and legal challenges.
3)CEQA Challenges. CEQA authorizes judicial review for actions
taken by public agencies, following the agency's decision to
carry out or approve the project. Challenges alleging an
improper determination that a project may have a significant
environmental impact, or alleging the EIR does not comply with
CEQA must be filed in the Superior Court within 30 days of the
filing of the notice of approval.
Upon finding that a public agency has failed to comply with
CEQA, a court may issue a peremptory writ of mandate
specifying what action by the agency is necessary to comply.
The court's order may include voiding the lead agency's
decision, suspending specific project activities, or requiring
the agency to take specific action to comply.
AB 515
Page 3
4)Related Legislation. SB 731 (Steinberg) proposes to enact the
CEQA Modernization Act making various clarifications and
revisions to CEQA including provisions substantially similar
to this bill. SB 731 is pending in the Assembly Local
Government Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916)
319-2081