Planning and zoning: community plans: review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 611 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 611.
You're tracking SB 611
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 611 — Planning and zoning: community plans: review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 228, Statutes of 2025.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced February 20, 2025. It awaits signature.
Next likely step: the executive signs it into law or issues a veto.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
ModerateHow often bills like it became law.
-
To Executive
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 7 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development and the development of any land outside its boundaries that, in the planning agency's judgment, bears relation to its planning, as provided. After the legislative body has adopted a general plan, that law also authorizes, or if so directed by the legislative body, requires, the planning agency to prepare specific plans for the systematic implementation of the general plan for all or part of the area covered by the general plan, as provided. 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 limits the review of a project under its provisions if the parcel is zoned or designated in a community plan to accommodate a particular density of development, an environmental impact report was certified for that zoning or planning action, and the project is consistent with the zoning or community plan, as specified. CEQA requires a court, if it finds that any determination, finding, or decision of a public agency has been made without compliance with CEQA, to enter an order that includes one or more specified mandates, including a mandate to void the determination, finding, or decision of the public agency. Previous law, until January 1, 2025, notwithstanding the above-described requirement for a court to enter an order under CEQA, prohibited a court in an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the acts or decisions of the local agency, including a charter city, in adopting an update to a community plan on the grounds of noncompliance with CEQA from, on the basis of that noncompliance, invalidating, reviewing, voiding, or setting aside the approval of a development project that meets certain requirements. Previous law specified that those provisions did not affect or alter the obligation for the approval of a development project that was consistent with an approved community plan update to comply with CEQA or, except as expressly provided, preclude or limit an action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the approval of a development project that was consistent with an approved community plan pursuant to specified law. Previous law provided that the repeal of those provisions does not affect any right or immunity granted by those provisions to a development project that meets specified requirements before January 1, 2025. This bill would reenact those provisions, with certain changes. The bill would specify that its provisions would apply to an update to a community plan adopted on or after January 1, 2025, and would apply to a development project for which an application has been filed with, and accepted as complete by, the local jurisdiction on or before January 1, 2036. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/01/25 - Chaptered Current pdf October 01, 2025
- Enrolled 09/02/25 - Enrolled pdf September 02, 2025
- Amended 07/14/25 - Amended Assembly pdf July 14, 2025
- Amended 06/09/25 - Amended Assembly pdf June 09, 2025
- Amended 04/07/25 - Amended Senate pdf April 07, 2025
- Amended 03/26/25 - Amended Senate pdf March 26, 2025
- Introduced 02/20/25 - Introduced pdf February 20, 2025
- SB611 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 228, Statutes of 2025.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.
-
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 2287.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 2592.) Ordered to the Senate.
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 1).
-
Coauthors revised.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and JUD.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 1241.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 0. Page 1027.) (May 6).
-
Set for hearing May 6.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 637.) (April 2).
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
Set for hearing April 2.
-
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and JUD.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Laura Richardson · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Richardson, Laura Democratic
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 28 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 37 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Arreguín, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Ashby, Angelique V. | Democratic | Yea |
| Becker, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Blakespear, Catherine S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Cabaldon, Christopher | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | Democratic | Yea |
| Cortese, Dave | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Gonzalez, Lena A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| McNerney, Jerry | Democratic | Yea |
| Menjivar, Caroline | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Pérez, Sasha Renée | Democratic | Yea |
| Reyes, Eloise Gómez | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Richardson, Laura | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Susan | Democratic | Yea |
| Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wahab, Aisha | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Alvarado-Gil, Marie | Republican | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Niello, Roger W. | Republican | Yea |
| Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie | Republican | Yea |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Valladares, Suzette Martinez | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 55 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Republican | 18 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Unaffiliated | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 74 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 94% | 0% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Ávila Farías | — | Yea |
| Addis, Dawn | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Ahrens, Patrick | Democratic | Yea |
| Alvarez, David | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bains, Jasmeet | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Bennett, Steve | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Caloza, Jessica | Democratic | Yea |
| Carrillo, Juan | Democratic | Yea |
| Connolly, Damon | Democratic | Yea |
| Elhawary, Sade | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Garcia, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| González, Mark | Democratic | Yea |
| Haney, Matt | Democratic | Yea |
| Harabedian, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Hart, Gregg | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Krell, Maggy | Democratic | Yea |
| Lee, Alex | Democratic | Yea |
| Lowenthal, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| McKinnor, Tina | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Yea |
| Ortega, Liz | Democratic | Yea |
| Pacheco, Blanca | Democratic | Yea |
| Papan, Diane | Democratic | Yea |
| Patel, Darshana R. | Democratic | Yea |
| Pellerin, Gail | Democratic | Yea |
| Petrie-Norris, Cottie | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Ransom, Rhodesia | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Rodriguez, Celeste | Democratic | Yea |
| Rodriguez, Michelle | Democratic | Yea |
| Rogers, Chris | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Schiavo, Pilar | Democratic | Yea |
| Schultz, Nick | Democratic | Yea |
| Sharp-Collins, LaShae | Democratic | Yea |
| Solache, Jr., José Luis | Democratic | Yea |
| Soria, Esmeralda | Democratic | Yea |
| Stefani, Catherine | Democratic | Yea |
| Valencia, Avelino | Democratic | Yea |
| Ward, Christopher M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Wilson, Lori D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Zbur, Rick Chavez | Democratic | Yea |
| Alanis, Juan | Republican | Yea |
| Castillo, Leticia | Republican | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Yea |
| Davies, Laurie | Republican | Yea |
| DeMaio, Carl | Republican | Yea |
| Dixon, Diane | Republican | Yea |
| Ellis, Stan | Republican | Yea |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Not Voting |
| Gonzalez, Jeff | Republican | Yea |
| Hadwick, Heather | Republican | Yea |
| Hoover, Josh | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Macedo, Alexandra | Republican | Yea |
| Patterson, Joe | Republican | Yea |
| Sanchez, Kate | Republican | Yea |
| Ta, Tri | Republican | Yea |
| Tangipa, David J. | Republican | Yea |
| Wallis, Greg | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (12)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Connolly, Damon | Democratic | Yea |
| Harabedian, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Pacheco, Blanca | Democratic | Yea |
| Papan, Diane | Democratic | Yea |
| Stefani, Catherine | Democratic | Yea |
| Zbur, Rick Chavez | Democratic | Yea |
| Dixon, Diane | Republican | Yea |
| Macedo, Alexandra | Republican | Yea |
| Sanchez, Kate | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (10)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Carrillo, Juan | Democratic | Yea |
| Haney, Matt | Democratic | Yea |
| Pacheco, Blanca | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Ransom, Rhodesia | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Stefani, Catherine | Democratic | Yea |
| Wilson, Lori D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Hoover, Josh | Republican | Yea |
| Ta, Tri | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 29 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 92% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (13)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Yea |
| Arreguín, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Ashby, Angelique V. | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wahab, Aisha | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Niello, Roger W. | Republican | Yea |
| Valladares, Suzette Martinez | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Arreguín, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Cabaldon, Christopher | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 611 do?
- The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development and the development of any land outside its boundaries that, in the planning agency's judgment, bears relation to its planning, as provided. After the legislative body has adopted a general plan, that law also authorizes, or if so directed by the legislative body, requires, the planning agency to prepare specific plans for the systematic implementation of the general plan for all or part of the area covered by the general plan, as provided. 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 limits the review of a project under its provisions if the parcel is zoned or designated in a community plan to accommodate a particular density of development, an environmental impact report was certified for that zoning or planning action, and the project is consistent with the zoning or community plan, as specified. CEQA requires a court, if it finds that any determination, finding, or decision of a public agency has been made without compliance with CEQA, to enter an order that includes one or more specified mandates, including a mandate to void the determination, finding, or decision of the public agency. Previous law, until January 1, 2025, notwithstanding the above-described requirement for a court to enter an order under CEQA, prohibited a court in an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the acts or decisions of the local agency, including a charter city, in adopting an update to a community plan on the grounds of noncompliance with CEQA from, on the basis of that noncompliance, invalidating, reviewing, voiding, or setting aside the approval of a development project that meets certain requirements. Previous law specified that those provisions did not affect or alter the obligation for the approval of a development project that was consistent with an approved community plan update to comply with CEQA or, except as expressly provided, preclude or limit an action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the approval of a development project that was consistent with an approved community plan pursuant to specified law. Previous law provided that the repeal of those provisions does not affect any right or immunity granted by those provisions to a development project that meets specified requirements before January 1, 2025. This bill would reenact those provisions, with certain changes. The bill would specify that its provisions would apply to an update to a community plan adopted on or after January 1, 2025, and would apply to a development project for which an application has been filed with, and accepted as complete by, the local jurisdiction on or before January 1, 2036. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
- Who sponsors SB 611?
- SB 611 is sponsored by Richardson, Laura (Democratic).
- What is the current status of SB 611?
- This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced February 20, 2025. It awaits signature.
- Where can I track SB 611?
- Track SB 611 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 611
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 611
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →