California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 279 — San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 514, Statutes of 2013.

  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 14, 2013. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · 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.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 6 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

Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority to raise and allocate resources for the restoration, enhancement, protection, and enjoyment of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the San Francisco Bay and along its shoreline. Existing law authorizes the authority to levy a benefit assessment, special tax, or property-related fee consistent with the California Constitution, as specified. Existing law requires the board of supervisors of each affected county, when the authority proposes a measure to levy a special tax for submission to the voters, to call a special election on the measure and place the measure on the ballot of the next regularly scheduled statewide election. This bill would specify that a measure proposed by the authority must be submitted to the voters of the authority in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code applicable to districts, as specified. This bill would require the authority to file with the board of supervisors of each affected county a resolution requesting consolidation. This bill would require the legal counsel for the authority to prepare, subject to review and revision by a specified county counsel, an impartial analysis of the measure. This bill would require the elections officials of those affected counties to mutually agree to use the same letter designation for the measure. This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to address the unique procedural and financial barriers faced by the authority in proposing a special tax measure for a large, multicounty jurisdiction in a special election. The bill would, in the first election at which the authority proposes a special tax, provide that the authority is required to reimburse each county in which the special tax measure appears on the ballot only for the incremental costs, as defined, that are incurred by the county elections official related to submitting the measure to the voters, and would repeal this provision on January 1, 2017. By imposing new duties or higher levels of service on local elections officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 514, Statutes of 2013.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 2134.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 74. Noes 1. Page 2832.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Ordered to third reading.

  8. Read third time and amended. (Page 2699.)

  9. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From consent calendar.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  12. From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (July 3).

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

  14. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 12).

  15. Referred to Com. on L. GOV.

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

  17. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 969.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  18. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  19. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and be amended.

  20. Set for hearing May 13.

  21. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  22. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  23. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on RLS. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 566.) (April 17).

  24. Set for hearing April 17.

  25. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.

  26. Re-referred to Coms. on GOV. & F. and RLS.

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

  28. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  29. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 17.

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

Sponsors

  • Hancock · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Hancock

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

Unfinished Business SB279 Hancock Concurrence

Passed 38 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 36000
Democratic 2001
Total 38001
% of votes cast 97%0%0%3%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Torres — Yea
Wright — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Correa — Yea
Evans — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
De León — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Block — Yea
Huff — Yea
Knight — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Yee — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Not Voting

Official roll call →

SB 279 Hancock Senate Third Reading By LEVINE

Passed 74 Yea · 1 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 67103
Democratic 4000
Republican 3000
Total 74103
% of votes cast 95%1%0%4%
How each member voted (78)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Not Voting
Ammiano — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brown — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Linder — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Perea — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Ting — Yea
Allen — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Garcia — Yea
Gray — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Fong — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Campos — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Holden — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Daly — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Levine — Yea
Logue — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Williams — Yea
Salas — Yea
Chau — Not Voting
Chesbro — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Conway — Yea
Donnelly — Nay
Nestande — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Fox — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass, to Consent Calendar.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 16000
Democratic 1000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bradford — Yea
Linder — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Weber — Yea
Campos — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Holden — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Pan — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Hall — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 33003
Democratic 3000
Total 36003
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wright — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Evans — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
De León — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huff — Yea
Beall — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Knight — Yea
Lara — Not Voting
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Price — Not Voting
Roth — Not Voting
Steinberg — Yea
Torres — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

elections 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 279 do?
Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority to raise and allocate resources for the restoration, enhancement, protection, and enjoyment of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the San Francisco Bay and along its shoreline. Existing law authorizes the authority to levy a benefit assessment, special tax, or property-related fee consistent with the California Constitution, as specified. Existing law requires the board of supervisors of each affected county, when the authority proposes a measure to levy a special tax for submission to the voters, to call a special election on the measure and place the measure on the ballot of the next regularly scheduled statewide election. This bill would specify that a measure proposed by the authority must be submitted to the voters of the authority in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code applicable to districts, as specified. This bill would require the authority to file with the board of supervisors of each affected county a resolution requesting consolidation. This bill would require the legal counsel for the authority to prepare, subject to review and revision by a specified county counsel, an impartial analysis of the measure. This bill would require the elections officials of those affected counties to mutually agree to use the same letter designation for the measure. This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to address the unique procedural and financial barriers faced by the authority in proposing a special tax measure for a large, multicounty jurisdiction in a special election. The bill would, in the first election at which the authority proposes a special tax, provide that the authority is required to reimburse each county in which the special tax measure appears on the ballot only for the incremental costs, as defined, that are incurred by the county elections official related to submitting the measure to the voters, and would repeal this provision on January 1, 2017. By imposing new duties or higher levels of service on local elections officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 279?
SB 279 is sponsored by Hancock.
What is the current status of SB 279?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 14, 2013. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 279?
Track SB 279 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 279

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 279

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →