California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 973 — Environmental quality: California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: limited duration events.

Last action — Set, second hearing. Failed passage in committee. Reconsideration granted.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

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

This bill died with 2011-2012 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

(1) 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 (EIR) 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 Planning and Research to prepare and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt guidelines for the implementation of CEQA and requires the guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and exempts those classes of projects from the requirements of CEQA (categorical exemption) . This bill would authorize a lead agency to grant, on an annual basis, one categorical exemption per specified site for a fireworks display held annually on a public site or large venue. Because a lead agency would be prohibited from granting more than one specified categorical exemption per site for a fireworks display, this bill would increase the level of services provided by a local agency and thereby impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the office to identify potential environmental issues related to fireworks displays and to develop guidelines to assist local agencies regarding fireworks displays. (2) 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Set, second hearing. Failed passage in committee. Reconsideration granted.

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

  3. Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

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

  5. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 1. Page 3646.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  6. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  7. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3589.) (May 24).

  8. Set for hearing May 24.

  9. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  10. Set for hearing May 21.

  11. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3261.) (April 23).

  13. Set for hearing April 23.

  14. Referred to Com. on E.Q.

  15. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 19.

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

Sponsors

  • Garrick · Cosponsor
  • Vargas · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Vargas

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Garrick

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"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

3rd Reading

Passed 37 Yea · 1 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34102
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 37102
% of votes cast 93%3%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Nay
Wyland — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Huff — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Leno — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Liu — Yea
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wright — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Dutton — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Harman — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Correa — Yea
Evans — Not Voting
DeSaulnier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Dutton — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Dutton — Yea
Walters — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment
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 973 do?
(1) 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 (EIR) 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 Planning and Research to prepare and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt guidelines for the implementation of CEQA and requires the guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and exempts those classes of projects from the requirements of CEQA (categorical exemption) . This bill would authorize a lead agency to grant, on an annual basis, one categorical exemption per specified site for a fireworks display held annually on a public site or large venue. Because a lead agency would be prohibited from granting more than one specified categorical exemption per site for a fireworks display, this bill would increase the level of services provided by a local agency and thereby impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the office to identify potential environmental issues related to fireworks displays and to develop guidelines to assist local agencies regarding fireworks displays. (2) 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 973?
SB 973 is sponsored by Garrick and Vargas.
What is the current status of SB 973?
This bill died with 2011-2012 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 973?
Track SB 973 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 973

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 973

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →