Session:   

Bill

Home - Bills - Bill - Authors - Dates - Keywords - Tags - Locations

Measure SB 232
Authors Seyarto  
Coauthors: Choi   Niello   Ochoa Bogh   Valladares   Alanis   Lackey   Patterson  
Subject California Environmental Quality Act: guidelines: study.
Relating To relating to environmental quality.
Title An act to add and repeal Section 21083.15 of the Public Resources Code, relating to environmental quality.
Last Action Dt 2025-03-20
State Amended Senate
Status In Committee Process
Active? Y
Vote Required Majority
Appropriation No
Fiscal Committee Yes
Local Program No
Substantive Changes None
Urgency No
Tax Levy No
Leginfo Link Bill
Actions
2025-05-23     May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
2025-05-16     Set for hearing May 23.
2025-04-07     April 7 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-03-28     Set for hearing April 7.
2025-03-20     Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
2025-03-19     From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 421.) (March 19).
2025-03-03     Set for hearing March 19.
2025-02-27     March 5 hearing postponed by committee.
2025-02-25     Set for hearing March 5.
2025-02-05     Referred to Com. on E.Q.
2025-01-29     From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 28.
2025-01-28     Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Keywords
Tags
Versions
Amended Senate     2025-03-20
Introduced     2025-01-28
Last Version Text
<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<ns0:MeasureDoc xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:ns0="http://lc.ca.gov/legalservices/schemas/caml.1#" xmlns:ns3="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" version="1.0" xsi:schemaLocation="http://lc.ca.gov/legalservices/schemas/caml.1# xca.1.xsd">
	


	<ns0:Description>
		<ns0:Id>20250SB__023298AMD</ns0:Id>
		<ns0:VersionNum>98</ns0:VersionNum>
		<ns0:History>
			<ns0:Action>
				<ns0:ActionText>INTRODUCED</ns0:ActionText>
				<ns0:ActionDate>2025-01-28</ns0:ActionDate>
			</ns0:Action>
			<ns0:Action>
				<ns0:ActionText>AMENDED_SENATE</ns0:ActionText>
				<ns0:ActionDate>2025-03-20</ns0:ActionDate>
			</ns0:Action>
		</ns0:History>
		<ns0:LegislativeInfo>
			<ns0:SessionYear>2025</ns0:SessionYear>
			<ns0:SessionNum>0</ns0:SessionNum>
			<ns0:MeasureType>SB</ns0:MeasureType>
			<ns0:MeasureNum>232</ns0:MeasureNum>
			<ns0:MeasureState>AMD</ns0:MeasureState>
		</ns0:LegislativeInfo>
		<ns0:AuthorText authorType="LEAD_AUTHOR">Introduced by Senator Seyarto</ns0:AuthorText>
		<ns0:AuthorText authorType="COAUTHOR_ORIGINATING">(Coauthors: Senators Choi, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, and Valladares)</ns0:AuthorText>
		<ns0:AuthorText authorType="COAUTHOR_OPPOSITE">(Coauthors: Assembly Members Alanis, Lackey, and Patterson)</ns0:AuthorText>
		<ns0:Authors>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>LEAD_AUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Seyarto</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Choi</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Niello</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Ochoa Bogh</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>SENATE</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Valladares</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>ASSEMBLY</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Alanis</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>ASSEMBLY</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Lackey</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
			<ns0:Legislator>
				<ns0:Contribution>COAUTHOR</ns0:Contribution>
				<ns0:House>ASSEMBLY</ns0:House>
				<ns0:Name>Patterson</ns0:Name>
			</ns0:Legislator>
		</ns0:Authors>
		<ns0:Title> An act to add and repeal Section 21083.15 of the Public Resources Code, relating to environmental quality.</ns0:Title>
		<ns0:RelatingClause>environmental quality</ns0:RelatingClause>
		<ns0:GeneralSubject>
			<ns0:Subject>California Environmental Quality Act: guidelines: study.</ns0:Subject>
		</ns0:GeneralSubject>
		<ns0:DigestText>
			<html:p>The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment.</html:p>
			<html:p>CEQA requires the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, formerly named the Office of Planning and Research, to prepare and develop, and the
			 Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt, guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The CEQA guidelines require a lead agency, immediately after deciding that an environmental impact report is required for a project, to send a notice of preparation stating that an environmental impact report will be prepared to the office and each responsible and trustee agency, as specified.</html:p>
			<html:p>This bill would require the office to conduct a study to, among other things, evaluate how locked-in guidelines could impact regulatory certainty for future project proponents, lead agencies, and stakeholders and assess how locked-in guidelines could affect the speed and efficiency of the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA. The bill would define “locked-in guidelines” as CEQA guidelines, that are in effect at the time of the first issuance of the notice
			 of preparation for a project, that apply to the project throughout the course of the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA, regardless of changes in the guidelines that occur after the first issuance of the notice of preparation. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2027, the office to submit a report to the Governor and the Legislature on the study. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2028.</html:p>
		</ns0:DigestText>
		<ns0:DigestKey>
			<ns0:VoteRequired>MAJORITY</ns0:VoteRequired>
			<ns0:Appropriation>NO</ns0:Appropriation>
			<ns0:FiscalCommittee>YES</ns0:FiscalCommittee>
			<ns0:LocalProgram>NO</ns0:LocalProgram>
		</ns0:DigestKey>
		<ns0:MeasureIndicators>
			<ns0:ImmediateEffect>NO</ns0:ImmediateEffect>
			<ns0:ImmediateEffectFlags>
				<ns0:Urgency>NO</ns0:Urgency>
				<ns0:TaxLevy>NO</ns0:TaxLevy>
				<ns0:Election>NO</ns0:Election>
				<ns0:UsualCurrentExpenses>NO</ns0:UsualCurrentExpenses>
				<ns0:BudgetBill>NO</ns0:BudgetBill>
				<ns0:Prop25TrailerBill>NO</ns0:Prop25TrailerBill>
			</ns0:ImmediateEffectFlags>
		</ns0:MeasureIndicators>
	</ns0:Description>
	<ns0:Bill id="bill">
		<ns0:Preamble>The people of the State of California do enact as follows:</ns0:Preamble>
		<ns0:BillSection id="id_47F3728F-3ECE-4A2D-93B3-4A4769892D11">
			<ns0:Num>SECTION 1.</ns0:Num>
			<ns0:Content>
				<html:p>
					(a)
					<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
					The Legislature finds and declares that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) ensures that environmental impacts of proposed projects are considered before approvals are granted. However, the changing nature of the CEQA guidelines throughout the CEQA review process may lead to confusion, inefficiencies, and additional burdens for lead agencies and project proponents.
				</html:p>
				<html:p>
					(b)
					<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
					It is the intent of the Legislature to study the implications of “locking in” the regulatory framework at the time that the notice of preparation is first issued, ensuring
				that the regulatory requirements in effect at that time are applied to the project,
				regardless of subsequent regulatory changes.
				</html:p>
			</ns0:Content>
		</ns0:BillSection>
		<ns0:BillSection id="id_5BF89F57-C2B6-4BAE-82AD-90A8867302EC">
			<ns0:Num>SEC. 2.</ns0:Num>
			<ns0:ActionLine action="IS_ADDED" ns3:href="urn:caml:codes:PRC:caml#xpointer(%2Fcaml%3ALawDoc%2Fcaml%3ACode%2F%2Fcaml%3ALawSection%5Bcaml%3ANum%3D'21083.15'%5D)" ns3:label="fractionType: LAW_SECTION" ns3:type="locator">
				Section 21083.15 is added to the 
				<ns0:DocName>Public Resources Code</ns0:DocName>
				, to read:
			</ns0:ActionLine>
			<ns0:Fragment>
				<ns0:LawSection id="id_52AB2411-5FCF-48CB-A971-FAE3FD875D79">
					<ns0:Num>21083.15.</ns0:Num>
					<ns0:LawSectionVersion id="id_2206439E-7FD6-42D7-862D-63F9D2DD680C">
						<ns0:Content>
							<html:p>
								(a)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(1)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								“Locked-in guidelines” means guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 21083, that are in effect at the time of the first issuance of the notice of preparation for a project, that apply to the project throughout the course of the environmental review process pursuant to this division, regardless of any changes in the guidelines that occur after the first issuance of the notice of preparation.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(2)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								“Office” means the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(b)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								The office
						shall conduct a study that accomplishes all of the following:
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(1)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								Evaluates how locked-in guidelines could impact regulatory certainty for future project proponents, lead agencies, and stakeholders, including the financial implications of complying with changes in guidelines that occur up to five years after the first issuance of the notice of preparation.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(2)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								Assesses how locked-in guidelines could affect the speed and efficiency of the environmental review process pursuant to this division and consider whether locked-in guidelines could reduce delays associated with changes in guidelines
						during project reviews.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(3)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								Examines how locked-in guidelines could impact the quality and thoroughness of environmental reviews and determine whether locked-in guidelines would ensure consistent application of environmental protections or create unintended environmental risks.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(4)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								Identifies best practices for balancing the need for regulatory consistency with the flexibility to adapt to new and evolving environmental challenges and propose any legislative or regulatory changes needed to improve the environmental review process pursuant to this division.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(c)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								On or before January 1, 2027, the office shall submit a report to the Governor and the Legislature, in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government
						Code, on the study conducted pursuant to subdivision (b). The report shall include findings, recommendations, and proposed actions to improve the environmental review process pursuant to this division with respect to locked-in guidelines.
							</html:p>
							<html:p>
								(d)
								<html:span class="EnSpace"/>
								This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2028, and as of that date is repealed.
							</html:p>
						</ns0:Content>
					</ns0:LawSectionVersion>
				</ns0:LawSection>
			</ns0:Fragment>
		</ns0:BillSection>
	</ns0:Bill>
</ns0:MeasureDoc>
Last Version Text Digest The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA requires the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, formerly named the Office of Planning and Research, to prepare and develop, and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt, guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. The CEQA guidelines require a lead agency, immediately after deciding that an environmental impact report is required for a project, to send a notice of preparation stating that an environmental impact report will be prepared to the office and each responsible and trustee agency, as specified. This bill would require the office to conduct a study to, among other things, evaluate how locked-in guidelines could impact regulatory certainty for future project proponents, lead agencies, and stakeholders and assess how locked-in guidelines could affect the speed and efficiency of the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA. The bill would define “locked-in guidelines” as CEQA guidelines, that are in effect at the time of the first issuance of the notice of preparation for a project, that apply to the project throughout the course of the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA, regardless of changes in the guidelines that occur after the first issuance of the notice of preparation. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2027, the office to submit a report to the Governor and the Legislature on the study. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2028.