California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Enacted 1 D cosponsors

SB 226 — Environmental quality.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 469, Statutes of 2011.

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

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 09, 2011. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 80% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 5 sponsors

    1 primary, 4 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 10 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

(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA the installation of a solar energy system, including associated equipment, on the roof of an existing building or an existing parking lot meeting specified conditions. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project would be exempt under this provision, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) CEQA requires a lead agency to call a scoping meeting for a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance, and requires the lead agency to provide notice of at least one of those scoping meetings to specified entities, including a county or city that borders on a county or city within which the project is located, unless otherwise designated annually by agreement between the lead agency and county or city. Existing law requires, prior to action by a legislative body to adopt or substantially amend a general plan, the planning agency to refer the proposed action to a city or county within or abutting the area covered by the proposal. This bill would authorize this referral of a proposed action to adopt or substantially amend a general plan of a city or county to be conducted concurrently with the scoping meeting. The city or county would be authorized to submit specified comments at the scoping meeting. (3) CEQA authorizes the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt guidelines to include a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are exempted from the requirements of CEQA (categorical exemption) . This bill would provide that a project's greenhouse gas emissions are not, in and of themselves, deemed to cause the exemption to be inapplicable under specified conditions. This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research, on or before July 1, 2012, to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Natural Resources Agency, and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, on or before January 1, 2013, to certify and adopt guidelines for statewide standards for infill projects that would promote specified goals and priorities. (4) CEQA limits its application, in the case of the approval of a subdivision map or a project that is consistent with the zoning or community plan for which an EIR was certified, to effects upon the environment that are peculiar to the parcel on which the project is located and were not addressed as significant effects in the EIR or if new information shows the effects upon the environment will be more significant than described in the prior EIR. This bill would similarly limit the application of CEQA in the case of the approval of an infill project, as defined, that satisfies all applicable statewide standards established in the guidelines under (3) above if an EIR was certified for a planning level decision, as defined. Because this bill would require a lead agency to determine whether a project qualifies under this provision, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) Existing law authorizes a county and a city to agree upon a procedure for referral to, and comment by, the city or county concerning the other entity's proposals to adopt or amend all or part of a general or specific plan or zoning ordinance, as specified. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to this authorization. (6) Existing law vests the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission with the exclusive power to certify thermal powerplants. Under CEQA, the thermal powerplants certification process is a certified regulatory program and is therefore exempt from certain requirements under CEQA. The bill would provide that the thermal powerplants certification process would be applicable to owners of specified proposed solar thermal powerplants who are proposing to convert the facility from solar thermal technology to photovoltaic technology. (7) 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. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 469, Statutes of 2011.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 22. Noes 11. Page 2478.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 59. Noes 12. Page 3222.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Consent granted to take up without reference to file.

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (September 8).

  10. Joint Rule 62(a) file notice suspended. (Page 3036.)

  11. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  13. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.

  14. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  15. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (August 25).

  16. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on AGRI.

  17. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on AGRI. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (August 22). Re-referred to Com. on AGRI.

  18. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  19. Re-referred to Coms. on NAT. RES. and AGRI. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.

  20. Ordered to third reading.

  21. Read third time and amended. (Page 2348.)

  22. Ordered to third reading.

  23. From consent calendar.

  24. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  25. From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (July 6).

  26. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  27. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 13). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  28. Referred to Coms. on NAT. RES. and L. GOV.

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

  30. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 654.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  31. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  32. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to consent calendar.

  33. Set for hearing April 11.

  34. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 414.) (March 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  35. Set for hearing March 21.

  36. Referred to Com. on E.Q.

  37. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 12.

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

Sponsors

  • Perea · Cosponsor
  • Simitian · Primary
  • Solorio · Cosponsor
  • Vargas · Cosponsor
  • Susan Rubio · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 4 co-sponsors · 117 not signed on · 3 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Simitian

Co-sponsors (4)

Not signed on (117)

117 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 117 →

"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

Unfinished Supp 2

Passed 22 Yea · 11 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 211105
Republican 0001
Democratic 1001
Total 221107
% of votes cast 55%28%0%18%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Not Voting
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Evans — Yea
Cannella — Not Voting
Runner — Nay
Hancock — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Harman — Nay
Correa — Yea
Huff — Nay
Dutton — Nay
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Walters — Nay
Wolk — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Nay
Blakeslee — Not Voting
Hernandez — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Not Voting
Wright — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Emmerson — Nay
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
La Malfa — Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

SB 226 Simitian Senate Third Reading By FEUER

Passed 59 Yea · 12 Nay · 9 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 571109
Republican 1100
Democratic 1000
Total 591209
% of votes cast 74%15%0%11%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Gorell — Not Voting
Hall — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Butler — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Carter — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Allen — Yea
Knight — Yea
Ma — Yea
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cook — Yea
Davis — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Perea — Yea
Williams — Yea
Campos — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Fong — Not Voting
Halderman — Nay
Chesbro — Yea
Harkey — Nay
Donnelly — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Monning — Not Voting
Morrell — Not Voting
Nestande — Not Voting
Nielsen — Nay
Pan — Yea
Silva — Nay
Smyth — Not Voting
Solorio — Yea
Swanson — Nay
Torres — Yea
Wagner — Nay
Wieckowski — Yea
Achadjian — Nay
Alejo — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Huber — Yea
Logue — Nay
Mansoor — Nay
Norby — Nay
Skinner — Not Voting
Valadao — Nay
Eng — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Yamada — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 12 Yea · 0 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 11005
Democratic 1000
Total 12005
% of votes cast 71%0%0%29%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Campos — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Not Voting
Davis — Yea
Donnelly — Not Voting
Nielsen — Not Voting
Wagner — Not Voting
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Norby — Not Voting
Solorio — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 5 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5004
Total 5004
% of votes cast 56%0%0%44%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Galgiani — Yea
Mendoza — Not Voting
Olsen — Not Voting
Perea — Yea
Hill — Yea
Ma — Yea
Valadao — Not Voting
Yamada — Not Voting
Bill Berryhill — Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass, to Consent Calendar.

Passed 16 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 15001
Democratic 1000
Total 16001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Campos — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Davis — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Consent Calendar 2nd

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 33004
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 36004
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Wyland — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Runner — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wright — Yea
Yee — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Evans — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Leno — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Correa — Not Voting
Dutton — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Harman — Not Voting
Huff — Yea
Liu — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wolk — Not Voting
Emmerson — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Not Voting
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment energy
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 226 do?
(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA the installation of a solar energy system, including associated equipment, on the roof of an existing building or an existing parking lot meeting specified conditions. Because a lead agency would be required to determine whether a project would be exempt under this provision, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) CEQA requires a lead agency to call a scoping meeting for a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance, and requires the lead agency to provide notice of at least one of those scoping meetings to specified entities, including a county or city that borders on a county or city within which the project is located, unless otherwise designated annually by agreement between the lead agency and county or city. Existing law requires, prior to action by a legislative body to adopt or substantially amend a general plan, the planning agency to refer the proposed action to a city or county within or abutting the area covered by the proposal. This bill would authorize this referral of a proposed action to adopt or substantially amend a general plan of a city or county to be conducted concurrently with the scoping meeting. The city or county would be authorized to submit specified comments at the scoping meeting. (3) CEQA authorizes the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt guidelines to include a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are exempted from the requirements of CEQA (categorical exemption) . This bill would provide that a project's greenhouse gas emissions are not, in and of themselves, deemed to cause the exemption to be inapplicable under specified conditions. This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research, on or before July 1, 2012, to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Natural Resources Agency, and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, on or before January 1, 2013, to certify and adopt guidelines for statewide standards for infill projects that would promote specified goals and priorities. (4) CEQA limits its application, in the case of the approval of a subdivision map or a project that is consistent with the zoning or community plan for which an EIR was certified, to effects upon the environment that are peculiar to the parcel on which the project is located and were not addressed as significant effects in the EIR or if new information shows the effects upon the environment will be more significant than described in the prior EIR. This bill would similarly limit the application of CEQA in the case of the approval of an infill project, as defined, that satisfies all applicable statewide standards established in the guidelines under (3) above if an EIR was certified for a planning level decision, as defined. Because this bill would require a lead agency to determine whether a project qualifies under this provision, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) Existing law authorizes a county and a city to agree upon a procedure for referral to, and comment by, the city or county concerning the other entity's proposals to adopt or amend all or part of a general or specific plan or zoning ordinance, as specified. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to this authorization. (6) Existing law vests the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission with the exclusive power to certify thermal powerplants. Under CEQA, the thermal powerplants certification process is a certified regulatory program and is therefore exempt from certain requirements under CEQA. The bill would provide that the thermal powerplants certification process would be applicable to owners of specified proposed solar thermal powerplants who are proposing to convert the facility from solar thermal technology to photovoltaic technology. (7) 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 226?
SB 226 is sponsored by Perea, Simitian, Solorio, Vargas, and Rubio, Susan (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 226?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 09, 2011. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 226?
Track SB 226 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 226

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 226

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →