California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 457 — Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

Last action — From Assembly without further action.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law requires various state agencies to carry out programs, projects, and activities on behalf of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Johnston-Baker-Andal-Boatwright Delta Protection Act of 1992 creates the 23-member Delta Protection Commission and requires the commission to prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-term resource management plan for specified lands within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. That act establishes a primary zone where further development is barred and a secondary zone surrounding the Delta where development may proceed under certain conditions. This bill would revise and recast the provisions of the act to, among other things, reduce the number of members to 15 members, as specified. The bill would require the commission to conduct its meetings in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. The bill would require the commission to appoint at least one advisory committee consisting of representatives from specified entities to provide input regarding the diverse interests within the delta. The bill would require the commission to adopt, not later than July 1, 2011, a comprehensive resources management plan containing specified elements and would require the commission to update the plan every 5 years. The bill would require the Delta Stewardship Council, when developing a delta plan, to take into consideration recommendations made by the commission. The bill would require all general plans of cities and counties within the delta to be consistent with the resources management plan that would be created and adopted by the commission, and the delta plan created and adopted by the Delta Stewardship Council, and thereby impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would revise and recast the process by which local government is to submit proposed general plan amendments and land use elements to ensure that the general plan is consistent with the resource management plan. The bill would require the commission to submit to the Legislature, by January 1, 2012, recommendations on the potential expansion of the primary zone. The bill would require the commission to develop a regional economic development plan for the delta region that is consistent with the delta plan. This bill would establish the Delta Investment Fund within the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would be used by the commission for the purposes of enhancing delta communities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Assembly without further action.

  2. From committee without further action.

  3. Set, second hearing. Further hearing to be set.

  4. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.

  5. Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  6. To Coms. on W.,P. & W. and L. GOV.

  7. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  8. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 23. Noes 14. Page 1191.) To Assembly.

  9. Read second time. Amended. To third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 5. Page 1071.)

  11. (Suspense - for vote only.)

  12. Set for hearing May 28.

  13. Placed on APPR suspense file.

  14. Set for hearing May 18.

  15. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  16. From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 3. Noes 2. Page 703.)

  17. Set for hearing April 29.

  18. From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 7. Noes 3. Page 479.) Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  19. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

  20. Set for hearing April 14.

  21. To Coms. on N.R. & W. and L. GOV.

  22. From print. May be acted upon on or after March 28.

  23. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Wolk · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Wolk

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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Senate 3rd Reading SB457 Wolk

Passed 24 Yea · 14 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 221302
Democratic 2000
Republican 0100
Total 241402
% of votes cast 60%35%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Romero — Yea
Harman — Not Voting
Runner — Nay
Cogdill — Nay
Hollingsworth — Nay
Cox — Nay
Dutton — Nay
Benoit — Nay
Walters — Nay
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Aanestad — Nay
Alquist — Yea
Ashburn — Nay
Huff — Nay
Kehoe — Yea
Maldonado — Not Voting
Pavley — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wiggins — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Nay
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Nay
Florez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 7 Yea · 5 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7501
Total 7501
% of votes cast 54%38%0%8%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Wyland — Nay
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Runner — Nay
Corbett — Yea
Cox — Nay
Oropeza — Yea
Walters — Nay
Leno — Yea
Wolk — Not Voting
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Nay

Official roll call →

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 13000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Runner — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Leno — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment transportation
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 457 do?
Existing law requires various state agencies to carry out programs, projects, and activities on behalf of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Johnston-Baker-Andal-Boatwright Delta Protection Act of 1992 creates the 23-member Delta Protection Commission and requires the commission to prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-term resource management plan for specified lands within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. That act establishes a primary zone where further development is barred and a secondary zone surrounding the Delta where development may proceed under certain conditions. This bill would revise and recast the provisions of the act to, among other things, reduce the number of members to 15 members, as specified. The bill would require the commission to conduct its meetings in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. The bill would require the commission to appoint at least one advisory committee consisting of representatives from specified entities to provide input regarding the diverse interests within the delta. The bill would require the commission to adopt, not later than July 1, 2011, a comprehensive resources management plan containing specified elements and would require the commission to update the plan every 5 years. The bill would require the Delta Stewardship Council, when developing a delta plan, to take into consideration recommendations made by the commission. The bill would require all general plans of cities and counties within the delta to be consistent with the resources management plan that would be created and adopted by the commission, and the delta plan created and adopted by the Delta Stewardship Council, and thereby impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would revise and recast the process by which local government is to submit proposed general plan amendments and land use elements to ensure that the general plan is consistent with the resource management plan. The bill would require the commission to submit to the Legislature, by January 1, 2012, recommendations on the potential expansion of the primary zone. The bill would require the commission to develop a regional economic development plan for the delta region that is consistent with the delta plan. This bill would establish the Delta Investment Fund within the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would be used by the commission for the purposes of enhancing delta communities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Who sponsors SB 457?
SB 457 is sponsored by Wolk.
What is the current status of SB 457?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 457?
Track SB 457 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 457

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 457

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →