California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 674 — California Environmental Quality Act: exemption: residential infill projects.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 549, Statutes of 2014.

Track this bill free

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

  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 22, 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

(1) The California Environmental Quality Act, commonly referred to as 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 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 exempts from these requirements residential infill projects meeting specified criteria, including, among other things, that a community-level environmental review was adopted or certified within 5 years of the date that the application for the project is deemed complete and the project promotes higher density infill housing. For the purposes of this exemption, CEQA defines "residential" to include a use consisting of residential units and primarily neighborhood-serving goods, services, or retail uses that do not exceed 15% of the total floor area of the project. This bill would instead exempt as "residential" a use consisting of residential units and primarily neighborhood-serving goods, services, or retail uses that do not exceed 25% of the total building square footage of the project. (2) Because this bill would require a lead agency to determine whether a project meets the above criteria to qualify for an exemption from CEQA, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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 549, Statutes of 2014.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3:30 p.m.

  4. In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 6017.) Ordered to the Senate.

  6. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  7. From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 6).

  8. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  9. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 16). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  10. Assembly Rule 56 (pending re-referral to L. Gov.) suspended. (Page 5488.)

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

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

  13. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 2637.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  14. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  15. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  16. Set for hearing January 21.

  17. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 2615.) (January 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  18. Set for hearing January 15.

  19. Re-referred to Com. on E.Q.

  20. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  21. Withdrawn from committee.

  22. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E., U., & C.

  23. Referred to Com. on E., U., & C.

  24. Read first time.

  25. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 25.

  26. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Corbett · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Corbett

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

SB 674 Corbett Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 78 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 71001
Republican 3000
Democratic 4000
Total 78001
% of votes cast 99%0%0%1%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Linder — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Pan — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Ting — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Daly — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Yea
Holden — Yea
Logue — Yea
Allen — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Gray — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brown — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Salas — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Garcia — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Fong — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Levine — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Perea — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Williams — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Fox — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Not Voting
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 15000
Republican 1000
Democratic 1000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Pan — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Linder — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Campos — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 33 Yea · 0 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 31005
Democratic 2001
Total 33006
% of votes cast 85%0%0%15%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Beall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Correa — Yea
Evans — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Wright — Not Voting
Wyland — Not Voting
Cannella — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Huff — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Knight — Yea
Leno — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Liu — Yea
Nielsen — Not Voting
Pavley — Not Voting
Roth — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Torres — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Walters — Yea
Fuller — Not Voting
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

housing 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 674 do?
(1) The California Environmental Quality Act, commonly referred to as 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 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 exempts from these requirements residential infill projects meeting specified criteria, including, among other things, that a community-level environmental review was adopted or certified within 5 years of the date that the application for the project is deemed complete and the project promotes higher density infill housing. For the purposes of this exemption, CEQA defines "residential" to include a use consisting of residential units and primarily neighborhood-serving goods, services, or retail uses that do not exceed 15% of the total floor area of the project. This bill would instead exempt as "residential" a use consisting of residential units and primarily neighborhood-serving goods, services, or retail uses that do not exceed 25% of the total building square footage of the project. (2) Because this bill would require a lead agency to determine whether a project meets the above criteria to qualify for an exemption from CEQA, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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 674?
SB 674 is sponsored by Corbett.
What is the current status of SB 674?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 22, 2013. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 674?
Track SB 674 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 674

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 674

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →